Monday, May 5th 2014

Intel Core "Skylake" CPUs Accompanied by 100-series Chipset

Intel answered the burning question some of us had about what the desktop chipset that succeeds the 9-series will be named. For now, Intel is referring to it as "100-series," on early internal roadmap documents scored by VR-Zone. Much like the current 9-series, 100-series will consist of a single PCH silicon, from which several variants will be carved out by toggling features.

There will be four primary kinds of "Skylake" packages, SLK-S, which will be socketed LGA; SLK-U, which will likely be compact, ultra-low power BGA, for Ultrabooks; SLK-Y, which will probably be mainstream BGA for compact desktops and all-in-ones; and SLK-H, which will likely be mainstream BGA for conventional notebooks. This generation of CPUs and PCHs, will also be accompanied by four kinds of wireless network controllers, depending on the target form-factor, "Snowfield Peak" Wi-Fi + Bluetooth, "Douglas Peak" WiGig + Bluetooth, "Pine Peak" WiGig, and XMM726x 4G LTE controllers; and "Jacksonville" GbE wired Ethernet controller. Thunderbolt standard will undergo an evolution with the company's "Alpine Ridge" controller.
Source: VR-Zone
Add your own comment

28 Comments on Intel Core "Skylake" CPUs Accompanied by 100-series Chipset

#26
fortiori
I was wondering whether you would walk back your arguments and apologize or double down on your smug know-it-all bitching that was just proven to be incorrect. I am not surprised that you doubled down.
AquinusAdditionally, DMI does not use PCI-E. It's similar, yes, but two different signaling technologies nonetheless. DMI has 20Gbit to work with which is actually closer to 2500-2800MB/s in any one direction which is almost 1GB/s off from what you stated. DMI is also 20Gbit BI-DIRECTIONAL, where USB and SATA are not bi-directional and they're describing total bandwidth in any given direction so the max theoretical bandwidth of DMI 2.0 as a whole would be double that 5000-5600MB/s.
AquinusI intervened and took it seriously because you're talking about stuff without having accurate knowledge of how it works and spreading such false information only makes the problem worse. Also to top it all off, despite evidence to the contrary you remain ignorant of what's right in front of you. Numbers don't lie, something is happening and it's not DMI-related.
Posted on Reply
#27
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
fortioriI was wondering whether you would walk back your arguments and apologize or double down on your smug know-it-all bitching that was just proven to be incorrect. I am not surprised that you doubled down.
That's all true for the theoretical max. Do the math and it holds. If you can't even prove what I say is wrong and all you can say is that I'm wrong it just goes to show how sad and pathetic your argument is.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Apr 23rd, 2024 07:34 EDT change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts