Tuesday, May 28th 2019

Intel "Ice Lake-Y" MCM Pictured Up Close

Here are some of the first pictures of the 10th generation Core "Ice Lake-Y" multi-chip module, designed for ultra low-power platforms, such as notebooks and 2-in-1 convertibles. These chips have a TDP target as low as 8W to 15W, are built in a BGA (ball-grid array) MCM (multi-chip module) to minimize Z-height and conserve mainboard PCB real-estate, respectively. The larger dies of the two of course is the 10 nm "Ice Lake" SoC with 4 "Sunny Cove" CPU cores, and a Gen11 GT2 iGPU. The smaller die is the PCH (platform controller hub), or chipset. The RVP (reference validation platform) is a motherboard that lets you test every possible connectivity option of the platform, by manually switching around PCIe lanes, SATA links, GPIO, LVDS, and TMDS lanes via jumpers. Intel usually hands these out to OEMs, system integrators, and system software developers. We also spotted the "Ice Lake" 4-core wafer.
Add your own comment

43 Comments on Intel "Ice Lake-Y" MCM Pictured Up Close

#1
lynx29
15 watts and it still boosts to 4.1 ghz... honestly could be a game changer in high end gaming laptops, tiny heatsink on cpu, will allow for full fledged rtx 2080's non-max q design, because all the cooling can be diverted to the gpu.
Posted on Reply
#2
R0H1T
They haven't actually disclosed which models boost to 4.1 Ghz, because they've listed 3 TDP numbers 9/15/28W which could be significant.
Also 8665u already boosts to 4.8Ghz so this is a slight downgrade for single core boost.
Posted on Reply
#3
Crackong
lynx29, post: 4056191, member: 153071"
15 watts and it still boosts to 4.1 ghz... honestly could be a game changer in high end gaming laptops, tiny heatsink on cpu, will allow for full fledged rtx 2080's non-max q design, because all the cooling can be diverted to the gpu.
May I ask where did they show the "Boost to 4.1GHz" variant is a 15W part?
From Intel's PPT there is a 28W part, I have to assume the "Up to 4.1GHz" goes to the 28W part.
Posted on Reply
#4
Manu_PT
R0H1T, post: 4056193, member: 131092"
They haven't actually disclosed which models boost to 4.1 Ghz, because they've listed 3 TDP numbers 9/15/28W which could be significant.
Also 8665u already boosts to 4.8Ghz so this is a slight downgrade for single core boost.
You obviously missing the 18% IPC increase part, but Im not surprised tbh.

Plus the ram got a boost from 2400 to 3733/3200 wich alone will provide way more performance. We all making jokes about Intel in the last days, but these mobile chips are really really and I mean really interesting. Low power with thunderbolt 3 and great performance for gamers on a go, light video editing etc.
Posted on Reply
#5
FordGT90Concept
"I go fast!1!11!1!"
And what's the nominal clock? 2.4 GHz? Boost is mostly marketing fluff...especially in low power environments where power and/or heat will forbid it 99% of the time. They fact they're unwilling to reveal the nominal clock speed is quite telling...they're embarrassed by it.
Posted on Reply
#6
Xzibit
Manu_PT, post: 4056200, member: 168799"
You obviously missing the 18% IPC increase part, but Im not surprised tbh.

Plus the ram got a boost from 2400 to 3733/3200 wich alone will provide way more performance. We all making jokes about Intel in the last days, but these mobile chips are really really and I mean really interesting. Low power with thunderbolt 3 and great performance for gamers on a go, light video editing etc.
Ram is DDR4 2400 to LPDDR4 3733. All Intels ICL units as per disclaimer "Assumptions" and "Preproduction" system are noted as LP with a TBD on clocks.

FordGT90Concept, post: 4056202, member: 60463"
And what's the nominal clock? 2.4 GHz? Boost is mostly marketing fluff...especially in low power environments where power and/or heat will forbid it 99% of the time. They fact they're unwilling to reveal the nominal clock speed is quite telling...they're embarrassed by it.
Intel didn't disclose it cause they don't know yet

Intel
Intel preproduction system, ICL-U, PL1 15w, 4C/8T, Turbo TBD
Posted on Reply
#7
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
R0H1T, post: 4056193, member: 131092"
They haven't actually disclosed which models boost to 4.1 Ghz, because they've listed 3 TDP numbers 9/15/28W which could be significant.
Also 8665u already boosts to 4.8Ghz so this is a slight downgrade for single core boost.
ICL-U are 25W. ICL-Y are capped at 15W.
Posted on Reply
#8
Vayra86
FordGT90Concept, post: 4056202, member: 60463"
And what's the nominal clock? 2.4 GHz? Boost is mostly marketing fluff...especially in low power environments where power and/or heat will forbid it 99% of the time. They fact they're unwilling to reveal the nominal clock speed is quite telling...they're embarrassed by it.
This. People who think laptops are all of a sudden going to be gaming monsters because the CPU can be lower power are going to have a hard time with this...

Its just a small step forward nothing more. And... its a quad core. Not exactly the optimal core count in 2019.
Posted on Reply
#9
Upgrayedd
They prob trashed that wafer right?
Posted on Reply
#10
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
Upgrayedd, post: 4056242, member: 148293"
They prob trashed that wafer right?
Yes, every uncut wafer that ever made it out of a cleanroom or an argon-filled container is trashed.
Posted on Reply
#11
Midland Dog
lynx29, post: 4056191, member: 153071"
15 watts and it still boosts to 4.1 ghz... honestly could be a game changer in high end gaming laptops, tiny heatsink on cpu, will allow for full fledged rtx 2080's non-max q design, because all the cooling can be diverted to the gpu.
14nm++ is doing 4.8ghz in that bracket just saying, id sacrafice a bit of cpu perf in that segment for igp perf
Posted on Reply
#12
Imsochobo
Midland Dog, post: 4056290, member: 168254"
14nm++ is doing 4.8ghz in that bracket just saying, id sacrafice a bit of cpu perf in that segment for igp perf
In laptops I believe these new ones are a step forward.
I've used these T480's from Lenovo, 15W chips with MX150 gpu, and my god they are slow, our users are complaining and once you have a chrome window open, ms teams, outlook, and join a meeting they are loading all threads and you have a lovely 2 ghz frequency so I'd gladly give up 400 mhz boost from 4ghz(i5-8550u) to 3.6 and gain the ipc + some frequency at all core load.

Desktop and server: intel is skrewed!
Posted on Reply
#13
lynx29
Midland Dog, post: 4056290, member: 168254"
14nm++ is doing 4.8ghz in that bracket just saying, id sacrafice a bit of cpu perf in that segment for igp perf
at 15 watts its doing 4.8ghz? i find that hard to believe. did you even read my post? >.> it had nothing to do with igp
Posted on Reply
#15
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
FordGT90Concept, post: 4056202, member: 60463"
And what's the nominal clock? 2.4 GHz? Boost is mostly marketing fluff...especially in low power environments where power and/or heat will forbid it 99% of the time. They fact they're unwilling to reveal the nominal clock speed is quite telling...they're embarrassed by it.
This. I have a 8550u in my HP Spectre for work and I can tell you that this is probably the most accurate statement I've seen in this thread so far. Let me tell you something about this CPU, which really isn't a bad CPU, but when it boosts up to 4Ghz is what you should be aware of. I typically don't see 4Ghz on this CPU unless the CPU temperature is on the lower side. 3.8Ghz is normal with no more than one core loaded. If I load two cores, it's closer to 3Ghz. With all 4 cores loaded, it's more like 2.0-2.3Ghz and that's with the upper-bound of the configurable TDP of 25 watts.

With that said, it's not a bad CPU. It actually performs quite well for my use case (with writing software, some of which is multi-threaded.) It's just that it almost never runs at full boost. However, if you can keep the CPU cooled, it will do 3.0-3.6 on all 4 cores for very short durations, but once a steady state temperature is reach, you'll be seeing <=2.3Ghz again.

I'll give Intel this, boost on this laptop is quite frugal. If it has an opportunity to clock up because of less multi-core load or lower temperatures, it will take advantage of it rather quickly. To put this in perspective, a piece of software I work on will run tests on both my tower and this laptop in about the same amount of time and it's not I/O bound and is primarily single-threaded.
Posted on Reply
#16
lynx29
Vayra86, post: 4056237, member: 152404"
This. People who think laptops are all of a sudden going to be gaming monsters because the CPU can be lower power are going to have a hard time with this...

Its just a small step forward nothing more. And... its a quad core. Not exactly the optimal core count in 2019.
to be fair, there are loads of great indie games these days that run 60 fps at 1080p on current intel graphics. i had a blast in grad school last 5 months playing: stardew valley, slay the spire, dead cells, night in the woods, hollow knight, owlboy, and my recent favorite Wizard of Legend has reminded me why I loved gaming. ^^ I had a long period of not being impressed by AAA gimmicks, but indie games have reborn my love for gaming.

@Manu_PT thanks for helping me the 4.1 ghz answer. i went to sleep right after he replied to me asking the question lol
Posted on Reply
#17
Rahnak
Manu_PT, post: 4056200, member: 168799"
You obviously missing the 18% IPC increase part, but Im not surprised tbh.
That's a big number, for sure, but it's very deceiving as it's vs Skylake and without the security patches. Marketing doing marketing things. Amd threw a 15%, Intel needed a bigger number.
Posted on Reply
#18
Tomorrow
Manu_PT, post: 4056200, member: 168799"
You obviously missing the 18% IPC increase part, but Im not surprised tbh.

Plus the ram got a boost from 2400 to 3733/3200 wich alone will provide way more performance. We all making jokes about Intel in the last days, but these mobile chips are really really and I mean really interesting. Low power with thunderbolt 3 and great performance for gamers on a go, light video editing etc.
18% for which we only have Intel's word. In which workload against what model was this 18% achieved?
Also minus god knows how much percent IPC loss due to security mitigations.

2400 to 3200 RAM does not help much. Especially on CPU limited scenarios. Helps more on the iGPU side.
Posted on Reply
#19
lynx29
Tomorrow, post: 4056329, member: 136792"
18% for which we only have Intel's word. In which workload against what model was this 18% achieved?
Also minus god knows how much percent IPC loss due to security mitigations.

2400 to 3200 RAM does not help much. Especially on CPU limited scenarios. Helps more on the iGPU side.
there is no point in speculating. same reason AMD showed Navi 10% gain over 2070 at strange brigade which everyone knows is an AMD favored game. yet 95% of all games favor Nvidia... so... yeah... somethings tells me Navi only matches 2070 or loses to 2070 in vast majority of games.

just wait for benches.
Posted on Reply
#20
Tomorrow
lynx29, post: 4056330, member: 153071"
there is no point in speculating. same reason AMD showed Navi 10% gain over 2070 at strange brigade which everyone knows is an AMD favored game. yet 95% of all games favor Nvidia... so... yeah... somethings tells me Navi only matches 2070 or loses to 2070 in vast majority of games.

just wait for benches.
Yeah that was BS comparison by AMD. They are still far behind Nvidia. What we need is a 2080 Ti competitor not a lowly "matching 2070 in best case" card.
Navi gives me 0 reason to upgrade from GTX 1080.
Posted on Reply
#21
lynx29
Tomorrow, post: 4056335, member: 136792"
Yeah that was BS comparison by AMD. They are still far behind Nvidia. What we need is a 2080 Ti competitor not a lowly "matching 2070 in best case" card.
Navi gives me 0 reason to upgrade from GTX 1080.
the fact they only showed one game was shady as crap lol.
Posted on Reply
#22
HwGeek
Intel already has i7-8569U [4.70 GHz boost] with Iris Plus Graphics 655[921.6 GFLOPS ] with same 28W TDP, so how much better the 10nm part looks like now[at least from 14nm++ down to 10nm]?
https://www.notebookcheck.net/Intel-Iris-Plus-Graphics-655-GPU-Benchmarks-and-Specs.316632.0.html

Edit:
Dell XPS 13 7390 Ice Lake Core i7-1065 G7 vs i7-8665U Geekbench
https://browser.geekbench.com/v4/cpu/compare/13233129?baseline=13303489

IMO AMD's Zen2.0 with 7nm shrink looks better improvement.
Posted on Reply
#23
Darmok N Jalad
Vayra86, post: 4056237, member: 152404"
This. People who think laptops are all of a sudden going to be gaming monsters because the CPU can be lower power are going to have a hard time with this...

Its just a small step forward nothing more. And... its a quad core. Not exactly the optimal core count in 2019.
Hard to say. Doesn’t the A12X in the iPad have the same power as a launch XboxOne? I know that’s not ultra quality or anything, but certainly a more than livable situation for many gamers.
Posted on Reply
#24
Vya Domus
Darmok N Jalad, post: 4056381, member: 170588"
Hard to say. Doesn’t the A12X in the iPad have the same power as a launch XboxOne?
Compared to an APU from 6 years ago ? That's not exactly ground breaking.
Posted on Reply
#25
B-Real
lynx29, post: 4056191, member: 153071"
15 watts and it still boosts to 4.1 ghz... honestly could be a game changer in high end gaming laptops, tiny heatsink on cpu, will allow for full fledged rtx 2080's non-max q design, because all the cooling can be diverted to the gpu.
15W and 4,1 GHz boost? :D Game changer in high end gaming laptops? :D Yet it heats to 100 degrees or can't boost to their given speed as there is only 15W TDP.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment