Intel Quietly Launches Ten New Mobile Processors

Status
Not open for further replies.

danwat1234

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
1,392
0
19,310
9
I'm assuming the 4940MX had a turbo of 4GHZ, so it's 100MHZ faster in both the base clock and the turbo clock versus the 4930MX. Not much performance increase there. Overclocking opportunities on laptops with good cooling solutions? There is no more FSB so it's more complicated.
 

jerm1027

Distinguished
Apr 20, 2011
404
0
18,810
11
There is no more FSB so it's more complicated.
I'm not sure if you've just been living under a rock, or simply don't know what FSB is. Front Side Bus was the connection of the north bridge to the CPU. Tweaking the FSB had the unwanted side effect of also changing memory speed as well, since at the time the memory controller was on the northbridge chipset. So, you had a series of checks and balances, and actually had to run stress tests on your memory in addition to the CPU. With modern unlocked CPUs, there isn't an FSB because a lot of the northbridge (or chipset) is integrated into the CPU itself, and has been replaced by faster standards (DMI, QPI, or HyperTransport). Since the multiplier is unlocked, you can just raise that to overclock and done. No memory to worry about, don't have to worry about your northbridge, memory controller, etc. It's actually gotten simpler.
 

guvnaguy

Honorable
Oct 27, 2012
74
0
10,630
0
While I'm all for lots of options, I must say I miss the Core 2 days when there were far fewer numbers and letters to keep track of. I barely get the naming scheme now.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

I'm just annoyed with how mobile chips are just a mess of chips that follows desktop specs roughly one rung lower... the mobile i7 lineup is a mess of desktop i3/i5/i7 specs (some dual-core chips, some quad-core chips, some with HT, some without), the mobile i5 lines up with the desktop i3 (dual-core with HT), the mobile i3 is somewhere between desktop Pentium and i3, etc.

IMO, there is way too much hair-splitting and inconsistencies (with desktop models) in Intel's mobile lineup.
 

cypeq

Distinguished
Nov 26, 2009
369
0
18,790
4
I'm just annoyed with how mobile chips are just a mess of chips that follows desktop specs roughly one rung lower... the mobile i7 lineup is a mess of desktop i3/i5/i7 specs (some dual-core chips, some quad-core chips, some with HT, some without), the mobile i5 lines up with the desktop i3 (dual-core with HT), the mobile i3 is somewhere between desktop Pentium and i3, etc.IMO, there is way too much hair-splitting and inconsistencies (with desktop models) in Intel's mobile lineup.
This is intentional... effort to misslead unaware customer. Customer will possibly know that i7 is the best of range. what he doesn't know is that he's buying desktop i3 labled as i7. It's probably legal because they don't hide real specs from buyers... only most of them don't understand any of that.

Same goes for moblie gpu market where under desktop name X you get X minus two performance tiers.
 

Keyrock42

Honorable
Jan 15, 2014
8
0
10,510
0
"The four new Core i5 processors are the 4310M, the 4310U, the 4340M, and the 4360U. All four boast two hyper-threaded cores and pack 3 MB of L3 cache."Hold up, did Intel change its naming scheme or did I have it wrong the whole time? I thought i7 = 4 cores hyperthreading, i5 = 4 cores, no hyperthreading, i3 = 2 cores hyperthreading.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Nah. The model branding/numbering between desktop and mobile has always been messed up like that. Even with desktop models those general descriptions go out the windows when you look at low-power T/S variants.

You really cannot rely on model number or product line with Intel's "simpler" numbering scheme. The simplest way to compare models these days is to use tables.

I find it ironic how Intel used to say the alphabet soup after the CPU architecture designation and clock speed as model numbers was "confusing" - seeing what they did to make things "simpler," the alphabet soup from the 386-P4 days seems like the simplest model numbering scheme Intel has ever had: pick a CPU family, pick a clock frequency, find the letters that correspond to the features you want, that's your model number now all you need to do is find the closest match.
 

Keyrock42

Honorable
Jan 15, 2014
8
0
10,510
0

Thanks for your reply. It doesn't make me any less confused, but that's Intel's fault, not yours.

As for the switch from the supposedly complicated (yet in retrospect quite simple) old naming scheme to the new "simple" (yet in reality convoluted and needlessly complicated) naming scheme, I would imagine that "simplicity" was just a guise, the reality of the situation was that using clock speed as part of the naming scheme became exceedingly less attractive when they ran into the 4 GHz thermal brick wall.
 

jasonelmore

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2008
620
5
18,995
3
The real way to judge if a Intel Mobile CPU is good or not is to simply look at it's L3 Cache. 8MB of Cache is desktop grade CPU performance : ie i7 on desktop6MB of Cache is the sweet spot for both price and performance: ie i5 on desktop3MB of Cache: honestly these are i3's or celeron cores. They can slap i7 on it, but all your getting is hyperthreading on a i3 cpu
 

vider

Distinguished
Jul 10, 2008
151
1
18,685
0
Are you for real??? Extreme edition only packing an HD 4600 from previous generation?! Tha' smack?! That's no reason to pay for a high end CPU and a garbage GPU 1096$, are you kidding me ? ? ? Got to be a donkey to fork that much on this.... *-_-
 

TheinsanegamerN

Distinguished
Jul 19, 2011
365
0
18,810
6
Nah. The model branding/numbering between desktop and mobile has always been messed up like that. Even with desktop models those general descriptions go out the windows when you look at low-power T/S variants.You really cannot rely on model number or product line with Intel's "simpler" numbering scheme. The simplest way to compare models these days is to use tables.I find it ironic how Intel used to say the alphabet soup after the CPU architecture designation and clock speed as model numbers was "confusing" - seeing what they did to make things "simpler," the alphabet soup from the 386-P4 days seems like the simplest model numbering scheme Intel has ever had: pick a CPU family, pick a clock frequency, find the letters that correspond to the features you want, that's your model number now all you need to do is find the closest match.
here is another way of looking at the mobile chips.
pentium and celeron: slower, missing features, only useful for netbooks/chromebooks, ece.
i3: dual core, hyperthreaded, 3mb l3,
i5: same as the i3, but has turbo core.
i7: quad core, hyperthreaded, 4mb l3,
There are only 2 exceptions
there is always a single dual core core i7. these models are identical to the mobile i5, except they have 4mb l3 and are clocked 100MHz higher. this will be one digit lower than the lowest quad cores (ie, i7 4600m is dual core, 4700m is lowest quad).
the other exception is the ulv models. they are always dual core, never quad, and the y models are more efficient, but slower, than the u series.
 

jbheller

Distinguished
Nov 1, 2011
59
0
18,630
0
Im assuming that the two most expensive chips Intel Core i7-4910MQ and Intel Core i7-4940MX will be bundled with discrete graphics. The low power Intel Core i7-4860HQ has a new HD5000 (or HD5200) depending on your source of information, and this will probably not bundled with discrete graphics. To be honest I hate the laptop market at the moment, with really low performance chips being designated i7 chips simply to suck in extra customers. A good i5 would be fine especially if bundled with a reasonable discrete graphics card and an SSD.
 

jbheller

Distinguished
Nov 1, 2011
59
0
18,630
0
Oh and the i5-4360U is also a low power chip bundled with a new generaltion integrated HD5000. One for the lower priced ultrabooks

 

jacobian

Honorable
Jan 6, 2014
206
0
10,710
20
I really like Intel's mobile processors, the quad core i7 being my favorite. Sadly, AMD's APUs are no match for anything above Core i3, setting GPU performance aside.
 

danwat1234

Distinguished
Jun 13, 2008
1,392
0
19,310
9
There is no more FSB so it's more complicated.
I'm not sure if you've just been living under a rock, or simply don't know what FSB is. Front Side Bus was the connection of the north bridge to the CPU. Tweaking the FSB had the unwanted side effect of also changing memory speed as well, since at the time the memory controller was on the northbridge chipset. So, you had a series of checks and balances, and actually had to run stress tests on your memory in addition to the CPU. With modern unlocked CPUs, there isn't an FSB because a lot of the northbridge (or chipset) is integrated into the CPU itself, and has been replaced by faster standards (DMI, QPI, or HyperTransport). Since the multiplier is unlocked, you can just raise that to overclock and done. No memory to worry about, don't have to worry about your northbridge, memory controller, etc. It's actually gotten simpler.
Your right I didn't mean to say FSB. You can't raise it much without interfering with RAM stability, PCI stability,etc. Yes I think there is the unlocked multiplier on modern CPUs but now days you can't simply increase the voltage to overclock further, right? You have all this TDP business where you have to boost the TDP value and mess with Turboboost bin timers and do other things to get an affective overclock. Right?With my X9100 it's simple FSB, multiplier and Vcore and I can go to town with Throttlestop.
 
G

Guest

Guest
To bad the 20 core Opteron plans were scrapped after the fiasco of the Bulldozer.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS