1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Is Haswell the Last Interchangeable Intel Client Processor?

Discussion in 'News' started by btarunr, Nov 26, 2012.

  1. PGHammer New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    5 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Planned? Hardly.

    Planned? Hardly.

    However, as much as we despise the business markets, Intel is a publicly-traded company (I own stock in Intel, in fact), and needs to satisfy those investors. Multicore is ubiquitous - and is everywhere (those selfsame ARM CPUs are quad-core); however, those ARM CPUs are, in fact, reduced-instruction-set (RISC), as opposed to complex-instruction-set (CISC), therefore they aren't as complex to manufacture. ARM Holdings itself has no fabs - they are basically a licensing and development company. Intel, however, is vertically integrated and has fab capacity out the wazoo; that is what they have been leveraging to drive AMD to the point of destruction as a going concern. ARM isn't vulnerable because they have concentrated entirely where their design is strongest (and where any CISC design - including Intel's - is weakest - low-power and ultra-low power; even we have to admit, Atom, which is based on Core/CISC, is not exactly efficient in terms of power compared to ARM). ARM (and RISC) is not coming head-on at CISC, but coming from underneath. The lack of complexity, and the cost of manufacture, is playing right into the strengths of ARM; throw in the poor economy, and the needs (or lack thereof) of the computing masses, and it is a Very Bad Harbinger for the future of CISC, and Intel in particular.
     
  2. xenocide

    xenocide

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2011
    Messages:
    2,149 (1.64/day)
    Thanks Received:
    463
    Location:
    Burlington, VT
    There is only 1 Atom CPU that is intended to compete with ARM offerings--Medfield and its successors. And it is actually just as good as ARM CPU's when it comes to power consumption, and it's an x86-based CISC CPU, that offered comperable performance. That was Intel's first attempt, imagine how good the newer versions will be once Intel really starts working at it...
     
  3. NeoXF

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2012
    Messages:
    615 (0.80/day)
    Thanks Received:
    80
    LOLWUT...

    BTW, why is Intel talked up so much in this context as if AMD doesn't even exist. I suspect even if this is the case, there's still AMD to capitalize in this segment. But all in all, seriously, WTF. Might as well rename every x86 PC to Apple iSomething.
     
  4. Mussels

    Mussels Moderprator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2004
    Messages:
    42,381 (11.54/day)
    Thanks Received:
    9,683
    you mean like i3/i5/i7?
     
    Shihabyooo and james888 say thanks.
  5. Shihabyooo

    Shihabyooo

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    566 (0.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    110
    Location:
    A sad excuse of a country called Sudan.
    Err, AFAIK, Broadwell is Haswell's planned successor as a die Shrink, same as Ivy Bridge was to Sandy. And I think the Article did mention that.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Tick-Tock#Roadmap


    Hence the "higher powered Atoms" part. And I did mention Celerons along, didn't I?
    In case I'm poorly translating my thoughts, what I'm saying is that Intel might add in another segment between the low power entry level Atoms and the low end Celerons and Pentiums.

    :rolleyes:
     
  6. de.das.dude

    de.das.dude Pro Indian Modder

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2010
    Messages:
    7,814 (4.90/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,077
    AMD! AMD!

    in AMD we trust.


    (they seem to be the only ones who listen to what the consumers want)
     
  7. Vlada011

    Vlada011

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2012
    Messages:
    335 (0.44/day)
    Thanks Received:
    34
    Location:
    Belgrade, Serbia
    Now chance to cross on AMD. No way.
    I only hope Extreme will stay like now and than upgrade later but on Extreme.
    If you buy platform for 1000$ and use that 5 years for gaming that is OK.
    Intel i7 CPU can hold one or two graphic 4-5 years.
    i7-860 is OK and today and next year.

    Bad situation is if you buy motherboard together with CPU(example in future) and you get wonderfull overclocker, amazing, one in 1.000 samples...
    but little things on motherboard die and you need to change everything and next CPU is crap...
    If they decide to leave overclocking...
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2012
  8. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,792 (3.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,349
    Like performance?
     
  9. PGHammer New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 9, 2011
    Messages:
    5 (0.00/day)
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Pretty Much

    AMD's APU marketplace is almost a subniche - it fits in that small (and getting smaller) space between tablets/slates powered by ARM and full-fledged portables (Ultrabooks) - powered largely by i5 (not i3). All too often, if the full power of Sandy Bridge/Ivy isn't needed, but portability is, consumers will buy a tablet or slate running Android or WindowsRT (price issue - not even AMD APUs can compete here based on price) - otherwise, the APU is too underpowered, even compared to i3, let alone i5.
     
  10. cdawall where the hell are my stars

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2006
    Messages:
    20,683 (6.86/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,984
    Location:
    some AF base
    Last time I checked AMD delivered a CPU that does awesome in multitasking for roughly half the price. (FX8350 vs 3770K) Are they the fastest single core on the market NOPE, but that being said who cares? For what I do it's faster than a Phenom II in the single core market and faster than Intel's offerings in multitasking. Sounds like a good performance/value CPU to me.

    The A8/A10 compete just fine with the i3 series that they are priced against. If you are going to compare them to the i5 may as well compare them to the i7 not even in the same class.
     
    Last edited: Nov 30, 2012
  11. Frick

    Frick Fishfaced Nincompoop

    Joined:
    Feb 27, 2006
    Messages:
    10,792 (3.41/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,349
    Yeah I know it was mostly to pull DDD's strings. He's such an AMD fanboy.
     
  12. bmaverick

    bmaverick

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2010
    Messages:
    283 (0.17/day)
    Thanks Received:
    47
    Location:
    Honky Tonk Nashville, TN
    Slot-1 & Slot-A days will come back as Slot-2 and Slot-B

    Slot-1 & Slot-A days will come back as Slot-2 and Slot-B

    So what if BGA is here to stay. CPU's can still be placed on CPU PCBs and then mounted onto the Motherboard. That's how Apple did it for years.

    Wait ... Maybe Apple is pushing Intel to go this route. :nutkick:
     
  13. SaltyFish

    SaltyFish

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2012
    Messages:
    339 (0.39/day)
    Thanks Received:
    87
    There's a lot to read into about this.

    The System-on-a-Chip (SoC) concept is spreading. In the early days of computers, we had specialized discrete cards (sound cards, video cards, etc.) because CPUs weren't powerful enough to do everything expected of a general-purpose machine. CPUs these days are so powerful that things are being dumped onto the CPU. There was a time when discrete sound cards were a necessity for gaming because sound processing ate up a significant amount of CPU cycles. Nowadays, on-board sound is standard because the load is practically trivial for modern CPUs. Graphics follows something similar as well. Of course, the progressive concentration means less choices. Remember the days when motherboards could use both AMD and Intel CPUs? Or when the CPU, GPU, and chipset markets weren't duopolies? They'll likely still have expansion slots for things like TV tuners, RAID cards, and other less general stuff... at least until all that gets slapped onto the CPU as well.

    The big question is whether Skylake will follow the Haswell model or the Broadwell model. "Ticks" bring smaller improvements than "tocks" and is mostly just power reduction due to die shrinking. Soldering the die-shrink generation isn't that bad unless you're a chronic upgrader (e.g. going from Sandy to Ivy). But either way, there's always the enthusiast market being absorbed into the server market. With DDR4 RAM debuting on the server variants of Haswell (mainstream doesn't get it until two years later with Skylake), maybe it's time to consider picking up a Haswell Xeon processor or two and brandish the 20+ MB cache e-peen?
     
  14. johnspack

    johnspack

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2007
    Messages:
    4,380 (1.70/day)
    Thanks Received:
    864
    Location:
    Nelson B.C. Canada
    Bah, sb-e will prob be my last upgrade. Judging by my family's history of cancer, both father and mother, and grandmother. Honestly, I'd rather be dead before I see cpus soldered to mobos again. Only the worst proprietary prebuilt makers ever did that before. I've thrown out many. God help us all.
     
  15. TRWOV

    TRWOV

    Joined:
    Aug 11, 2011
    Messages:
    3,562 (3.04/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,129
    Location:
    Mexico
    I think that this wouldn't present a problem for 90% of users if done right but first intel needs to reduce its product portfolio to 10 or so CPUs (2 per segment). As most of the chipset would be inside the CPU by then, a single SB could be used for every board. And ship everything unlocked. Leave the workstation/server platform open for enthusiasts.
     
    Crunching for Team TPU

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page