Intel's Haswell Reaches a Low 4.5 Watts SDP

Status
Not open for further replies.

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3


It's Intel's measurement of average heat output under typical tablet workloads. If you run something like prime95 or furmark on this platform with no thermal management (which is unlikely to happen), it'll probably hit it's full 11.5W TDP.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3


Interesting, which desktop Ivy Bridge processor is that? The lowest TDP Ivy Bridge SKU I'm aware of has a TDP of ~17W, and that's not a desktop part.

And in any case it wouldn't be the same. For ULV Haswell Intel worked a lot on not only CPU/GPU thermal management, but total platform thermal management as well. The PCH is now integrated on package, so that 4.5W SDP (11.5W TDP) is for the CPU, GPU, PCIe bus, memory controller, and south bridge.

Edit: The Pentium 2129Y has a 10W TDP, but again not a desktop processor.
 

Augray37

Distinguished
May 4, 2011
601
0
19,010
22


yeah i think he's talking about 10W at idle.
 

JPNpower

Honorable
Jun 7, 2013
1,072
0
11,360
41
My desktop CPU uses less power at idle than this does at full load.
My desktop CPU is far faster though and is based on larger transistors, and bigger is better. It also is just flat out better.

Sound stupid? Its how most advertising works actually.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3


It makes very little sense to me for someone to say that without further context, in response to an article that discusses SDP and gives no figures for power consumption at idle... but you're probably right.
 

Azn Cracker

Distinguished
Jul 28, 2009
2,053
0
20,160
181
Haswell is pretty weak for desktops. But for the mobile sectors, things look great! Can't wait for prices to drop so i can grab one and experience this amazing efficiency. Currently have an Ivy Brudge ultrabook so it won't be worth the upgrade unless its cheaper :\
 

enewmen

Distinguished
Mar 6, 2005
2,244
1
19,810
5
Why don't desktop Haswell chips have the feature to run low watts idle or low SDP like the notebook CPUs do? (It's about the same as Ivy desktop chips)? This also doesn't help large data centres. What am I missing??
 

acadia11

Distinguished
Jan 31, 2010
899
0
18,980
0


Uhm no, and in graphics Amd APU destroys Haswell. Anything. There are 6w APU. It's interesting if software ever arrives to take advantage of gpu for cpu functions.
 

kartu

Distinguished
Mar 3, 2009
959
0
18,980
0
Considering how laughably low (by intel's standards) are the margins in mobile space, exactly what is Intel's goal here? Me too?



100+ million (likely to hit 150-200) APUs that will power major consoles disagree.
And once heavy multi-threading becomes a standard in game development, we'll see interesting changes on desktop...

Not to mention that "saving face" part is truly clueless. My wife's APU powered cheapo notebook destroys my i7 Lenovo in gaming, while costing 3 times less. I don't see any difference in speed when running Office or gmail, doh... Let me remember what on earth do I run it, that needs more CPU power.... Oh, eclipse IDE, but wait, still no noticeable difference...

News flash: for majority of users CPU performance DOES NOT MATTER for quite a while. 9 out of 10 gamers are better off sparing some bucks on overpriced Intel CPU+mobo combos and investing into GPUs instead.
 

cats_Paw

Distinguished
Thats all nice and good, but The Industry dosent actually seem to have jumped into the next generation since the first dual/quad cores. Its always "a bit better". Im still waiting for that revolutionary hit.
 

InvalidError

Titan
Moderator

Except multi-core CPUs have been standard on mid-range PCs for nearly 10 years already and remotely well threaded software is still the exception rather than the rule today even after 5+ years of multi-cored consoles.

If the better part of 10 years was not enough for programmers to get used to finding threaded solutions to their problems, I would not expect it to suddenly become particularly common within the next 5+ years. While having eight slow cores on consoles might motivate some programmers to make an extra effort to use more than 1-2, desktop ports are unlikely to make much effort to retain the extra threading if it can be ditched for simpler debugging since individual desktop cores are 2-3X as fast.

Time will tell but historic evidence says well-threaded games will likely remain an exception for the foreseeable future.
 

dragonsqrrl

Distinguished
Nov 19, 2009
1,280
0
19,290
3


It's funny that you criticize Intel's motivations for entering the mobile market due to its lower margins, and by extension successfully driving TDP on their mainstream Haswell platform low enough for passive cooling. But at the same time you praise AMD for getting their hardware into consoles, the hardware pipe for consoles being notorious for its low margins.

If you're going to feed the trolls, try to at least not look like a fanboy(and a troll yourself) in the process.
 

thenh813

Honorable
Mar 5, 2013
120
0
10,710
7
Running on that low of a amount of power?!?!?
That is insane! I could run it of a few D cells for days LOL.
I guess this could redefine the term pocket PC.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS