[Ashraf] 10nm "Lakefield" SoC with Intel big + little cores

[IntelUser2000]

If the windows tablets where still a thing and miniaturization was key because of the lack of internal space maybe...

I'm pretty sure we'll see Tablets with it. Current Intel chips are too large and too power hungry and that's why vast majority are for 13-inch devices. This will allow 10-inch or under.

I'll be annoyed if they make an efficient chip just to use it in dual screen and folding devices which increase display power use significantly and cost $2000.

 

[NTMBK]

I think this product will be an flop.

I fail to understand how this product will be better than one of the current intel high performance four core cpus.

If the windows tablets where still a thing and miniaturization was key because of the lack of internal space maybe...
Because no way one high performance cpu core paired with four slow ones will be better than what intel already provide.

I wonder if android devices with intel are still around?

Intel and Microsoft are pushing a new generation of hybrid PCs, with folding screens. Lakefield will definitely target those.

It will also be useful for super thin fanless laptops, like the Macbook.

 

[NTMBK]

.
I'll be annoyed if they make an efficient chip just to use it in dual screen and folding devices which increase display power use significantly and cost $2000.

This efficient chip uses super fancy packaging tech, as well as a 10nm process that is struggling to get chips out the door. It's going to be too expensive to put in cheap devices.

 

[IntelUser2000]

This efficient chip uses super fancy packaging tech, as well as a 10nm process that is struggling to get chips out the door. It's going to be too expensive to put in cheap devices.

I get that. They are aiming for the premium devices sure. However the Lenovo Thinkpad X1 Fold starts at $2499. It's high cost is due to the immature folding screen ecosystem. All the foldables are super expensive.

If they make a super portable convertible or a tablet they can get it in the $1000 range. That's far easier to swallow.

The 10nm issue exists but to say that'll add to the price is a bit off. Icelake is no more expensive than Cometlake systems.

 

[RetroZombie]

It's going to be too expensive to put in cheap devices.

Not to mention with cheap devices performance judging by the specs.
If somehow it ends getting some traction the arm guys will appear.

 

[Roland00Address]

I think this product will be an flop.

I fail to understand how this product will be better than one of the current intel high performance four core cpus.

If the windows tablets where still a thing and miniaturization was key because of the lack of internal space maybe...
Because no way one high performance cpu core paired with four slow ones will be better than what intel already provide.

I wonder if android devices with intel are still around?

Maybe if Intel sells it at a decent price and not an obscene price. If it is an obscene price why not go with the 4 big core chip? Miniaturization and reduced bill of materials (which Intel captures more of) is the whole goal of this chip to my understanding.

Do we have total die size even though this is a hybrid thing with multiple chips and thus you can't really compare die sizes for the goal is to put everything besides the SOC on the stack chip and reduce cost / size in that way?

 

[IntelUser2000]

@Roland00Address

60-70mm2 at most. Even this I believe is high. Though, it can't be much smaller, as Gen 11 GPU itself is 40-43mm2.

The cost adder is Foveros. The high cost is not only due to the difficulty but low volume nature of it. It won't be drastic, but it is an adder.

But, since its a Core chip they'll aim for higher end anyway. $1K high, not $2K high. The latter is due to the immature foldable ecosystem.

 

[Roland00Address]

@Roland00Address

60-70mm2 at most. Even this I believe is high. Though, it can't be much smaller, as Gen 11 GPU itself is 40-43mm2.

The cost adder is Foveros. The high cost is not only due to the difficulty but low volume nature of it. It won't be drastic, but it is an adder.

But, since its a Core chip they'll aim for higher end anyway. $1K high, not $2K high. The latter is due to the immature foldable ecosystem.

And that is just too high of price. With the exception of apple the amount of computers being sold at the 1k+ price is small part of the market, if they could get this in devices in the $650 to $850 price range then everything changes from a demand perspective.

[Yes I know the high cost is the foldable thing, but people will not be spending 50% to 100% more for a foldable computer in large quantities.]

 

[IntelUser2000]

[Yes I know the high cost is the foldable thing, but people will not be spending 50% to 100% more for a foldable computer in large quantities.]

I'm not a big fan of the foldable screens either. And I wonder how it'll really hold up over the long run. It's a physics limitation.

Even beyond durability, I'm not even a big fan of dual screens like the Surface Neo or the Duo.

The traditional ultra portable laptops like the Galaxy Book S is much better. (Actually talking about that device, the ARM version is coming in March)

But I'd really like a convertible(not a detachable) that's 1.8-2.2lbs. The cooling requirements of the regular Core chips seems to limit the minimum weight to 2.5lbs without sacrificing battery too much.

An 1.8lbs, 10-inch convertible with great pen support is going to be my dream device.

I don't even mind Windows 10 X either. They finally wised up and made a decent UI for tablets and even Windows usage. 10 X also has optimizations regarding battery life and taking advantage of the two very different cores.

Intel Core processor with Hybrid technology seems to be the name.

 

[Roland00Address]

IntelUser2000 we are speaking the same language for my preferences are similar. Light and portable for a laptop or tablet. Real desktop at home with a quad core + ht or better that is fast. [Yes I know 12 to 32 thread machines for desktops are now the norm at the medium to high end.]

But I think we are a smaller market than most people. [Yes this makes me sad but I understand why we are a small market for such a device.]

 

[jpiniero]

Lakefield is really a proof of concept of Foveros that Intel decided to productize because Microsoft wanted it. I expect Intel to put some small cores on the big boy products eventually, if only for the idle benefits... but it might be awhile.

Do we have an idea of what exactly the limitations are if you are running WIndows 10 versus 10X? Does core migration not work or something? I know in Lakefield Intel is shutting off AVX on the big core to keep ISA compatibility with Tremont.

 

[OriAr]

I wonder how Lakefield's performance compares to SD865, since the power consumption is similar.
This could be Intel's attempt at entering Android SOCs market eventually.

 

[jpiniero]

I wonder how Lakefield's performance compares to SD865, since the power consumption is similar.
This could be Intel's attempt at entering Android SOCs market eventually.

It's too much power for a phone. Just tablets.

 

[CHADBOGA]

I wonder how Lakefield's performance compares to SD865, since the power consumption is similar.
This could be Intel's attempt at entering Android SOCs market eventually.

Considering how much of a debacle Intel's last effort to enter the Android market was, they should give this a wide berth till they can demonstrate even basic core competency in their own main markets.

 

[IntelUser2000]

But I think we are a smaller market than most people. [Yes this makes me sad but I understand why we are a small market for such a device.]

I have my desktop for other purposes.

I loved my XPS 12, but at 3.5lbs and 5 hours of battery life it needed more. The Haswell version got it to 8 hours and maybe today's chips can get it to 10-12. However the convertibles are still in the 2.8lbs range.

The Atom Z-series and ARM devices could get it 0.3lbs lighter making me believe its the heftier cooling required that raises the weight for the Core ones. The Y-series chips are better, but its significantly slower and is not a revamp meaning its not dramatically efficient.

The Lakefield Thinkpad X1 Fold is only 2.2 lbs for example.

Do we have an idea of what exactly the limitations are if you are running WIndows 10 versus 10X? Does core migration not work or something? I know in Lakefield Intel is shutting off AVX on the big core to keep ISA compatibility with Tremont.

The issue with regular Windows is the CPU moving from one process to the other constantly. The preemptive multitasking Windows allows is good for performance and multitasking.

However, it nullifies lot of the power saving advancements. 10 X is supposed to be putting some applications in a container(especially win32) to control that. So its more of a battery life thing than anything else.

On Android for example, if you open another app while one is open, the other one is paused. No shenanigins with dozen different applications running in the background.

The Surface Pro X with ARM isn't much better in terms of efficiency with 11 hours indicating OS is the issue.

X1 Fold is claimed at 11+ hours. But it won't be coming with 10X right away.

 

[Roland00Address]

I have my desktop for other purposes.

I loved my XPS 12, but at 3.5lbs and 5 hours of battery life it needed more. The Haswell version got it to 8 hours and maybe today's chips can get it to 10-12. However the convertibles are still in the 2.8lbs range.

The Atom Z-series and ARM devices could get it 0.3lbs lighter making me believe its the heftier cooling required that raises the weight for the Core ones. The Y-series chips are better, but its significantly slower and is not a revamp meaning its not dramatically efficient.

The Lakefield Thinkpad X1 Fold is only 2.2 lbs for example.

Agreed. I am jealous that the LG Gram 14" is 2.2 lbs, and they have a 17.3" that is 2.95 lbs. Now these devices are lacking a touchscreen and there may be better laptops out there on the weight and battery front, but seriously it is amazing how much screen, power you cram into something that is that small.

And I say this even though I prefer the 11.6 to 13.3" screen size if it has a keyboard.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Agreed. I am jealous that the LG Gram 14" is 2.2 lbs, and they have a 17.3" that is 2.95 lbs. Now these devices are lacking a touchscreen and there may be better laptops out there on the weight and battery front, but seriously it is amazing how much
screen, power you cram into something that is that small.

I know how important the weight is, but based on my experience with the XPS 12, that's mostly true for the convertibles.

If it was even 3lbs rather than 3.5lbs, I think it would have been a much better device. The swinging hinge was actually quite solid though. Too bad they didn't continue it after Haswell. Actually regarding weight/battery life/convertible balance, the HP Dragonfly with the Cometlake option seems to be the best. 38WHr version at 2.2lbs and 56WHr version at 2.5lbs. Get Tigerlake and maybe.

Even getting an i7 might have been an overkill. I realized i5 would have been more than enough considering just setting the power settings wrong meant I wouldn't get full performance.

Touch screen is also a big deal for me. It's just another way of interacting with the device, plus it enables pen. An external mice is an option but oftentimes it'll prevent the CPU from going into lower C states often or even at all.

And I say this even though I prefer the 11.6 to 13.3" screen size if it has a keyboard.

Personally, I'd like it smaller. Maybe its because of the way I think. Growing up during the 90's, having a Windows device in a 10-inch form factor is a big bling factor for me. Actually some were smaller, but 10-inch is about the limit. I could go for 11-inch too.

I'm leaning towards a Lakefield device it looks like.

Windows 10X UI:


That looks really nice ok? Way better than stupid tiles, that take up too much space and need you to scroll too much. It's similar to Android/iOS and actually going back to the roots of Windows and its icons without making it clunky for a Tablet.

 

[beginner99]

I'm leaning towards a Lakefield device it looks like.

Windows 10X UI:

That looks really nice ok?

I'm still not sure what I would do with such a device just as with tablets. I can do consuming just as well on my phone which I already own anyway. And anything involving typing liek writing posts here will need a keyboard to not be extremely annoying.

 

[IntelUser2000]

I'm still not sure what I would do with such a device just as with tablets. I can do consuming just as well on my phone which I already own anyway. And anything involving typing liek writing posts here will need a keyboard to not be extremely annoying.

Do a bit of reading above, and you'll understand.

 

[Dayman1225]

Well the first Lakefield Sku has leaked - the L16G7.... 🙄

1.4GHz base, 1.75Ghz turbo.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1222049248297930753

 

[Bouowmx]

Concerning 1-core score, for Tremont, it's 1.32x performance per GHz compared to Goldmont Plus (See Pentium N5030: 67.6 score at 2.8 GHz). But 1.75 GHz can't seriously be the final frequency? The processor already has a marketing name..

Edit: I totally forgot about the 1 big core. nvm.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Took longer than I expected to get one of those leaks out. Pity they didn't run Geekbench 5 on it.

@Bouowmx

That might be the actual clockspeed depending on what is the intended TDP. Also remember, those chips are stacked, so dissipation of heat is going to be difficult.

 

[Roland00Address]

@Bouowmx

That might be the actual clockspeed depending on what is the intended TDP. Also remember, those chips are stacked, so dissipation of heat is going to be difficult.

Any device that is 1.75 ghz max is dead on arrival for an "expensive device" (aka price point of $500 or more.) There is only so much speed you can get out of a single core without using clockspeed. Even the super wide and energy efficient apple soc cpus in their iphone and ipad are now running at 2.65 Ghz for their big cores.

1.75 ghz does not compete at all with past intel parts, nor will it compete with new form factors where the competitors will be using arm.

 

[Thala]

Any device that is 1.75 ghz max is dead on arrival for an "expensive device" (aka price point of $500 or more.) There is only so much speed you can get out of a single core without using clockspeed. Even the super wide and energy efficient apple soc cpus in their iphone and ipad are now running at 2.65 Ghz for their big cores.

1.75 ghz does not compete at all with past intel parts, nor will it compete with new form factors where the competitors will be using arm.

Maybe this goes into really cheap entry level devices? If you want more performance in similar form factor and power envelope you can just grab an ARM device - which typically are more expensive.

 

[Exist50]

Maybe this goes into really cheap entry level devices? If you want more performance in similar form factor and power envelope you can just grab an ARM device - which typically are more expensive.

I wouldn't think that Foveros and cheap go together. I'm not convinced these are the final clocks, but if they are, it actually is dead on arrival. ARM might even win with emulation overhead, or have a narrow enough gap not to matter.