Intel's Next Unit of Computing Rivals Raspberry Pi in Size

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]Intel's poking its nose everywhere...[/citation]
Good, I wish AMD did too. Why not? Why is it a bad thing? Competition is good and quite frankly, with intels R&D its going to be downright awesome.
 
[citation][nom]rebel1280[/nom]Good, I wish AMD did too. Why not? Why is it a bad thing? Competition is good and quite frankly, with intels R&D its going to be downright awesome.[/citation]
Nah not a bad thing, really, just a bit funny, in a good and slightly scary way. Don't get me wrong, i like Intel a lot, but i just get this image of this huge thing gobbling up everything 😀

And heck, i think an i5 on this thing will be be great for AES256 encryption on a NAS device.
 
The most interesting things about rasberry pi are its size and its price. This thing is way too large to compete in the same area.
 
Why doesn't Intel make a Medfield device to compete with the Raspberry Pi? If Intel does it right, the could have a huge win in performance against the Pi without having a larger size than the Pi and price it accordingly. It could even still run Windows and other x86 operating systems. Now I'm not really interested in buying anything like this be it the Pi or something similar to the PI, but it would be interesting to read about.
 
Intel Ivy Bridge killing All AMD
Intel HD4000 killing lower-end discrete graphic from Nvidia and AMD
Intel Medfield killing ARM
Intel NUC killing Raspberry Pi

What else?
Maybe SSD and Motherboard soon

Intel Everywhere
 


You can tick off SSD

Intel® Solid-State Drive 910 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 710 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 520 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 510 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 330 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 320 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 313 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 311 Series
Intel® Solid-State Drive 310 Series
 
all you amd fanboys say that the downfall of amd will cause intel to "not innovate anymore" and cause prices to skyrocket....

Well, that may be true in the industrial segment of the economy, but in the tech world, it's a whole different ballgame. You must continue to innovate, improve, get faster, or die....

And AMD has only taken a temporary stumble block on that, so quit acting as if AMD is gonna die and the world is gonna end.........
 
[citation][nom]glenricky[/nom]Intel Ivy Bridge killing All AMDIntel HD4000 killing lower-end discrete graphic from Nvidia and AMDIntel Medfield killing ARMIntel NUC killing Raspberry PiWhat else?Maybe SSD and Motherboard soonIntel Everywhere[/citation]

... Intel's HD 4000 is, at best, on par with AMD's A6 graphics. Considering that the HD graphics (unlike AMD/Nvidia) varies (even within the same name) depending on the processor (generally, the i3 HD 4000 will be beaten by i5 HD 4000 and that is beaten by i7 HD 4000, the differing factor being the clock frequency of the HD graphics) and it's just the top i7 HD 4000 that comes close to the A6's 6530D and AMD will come out with Trinity that is far ahead of that and both AMD and Nvidia will make low end graphics cards that surpass it, Intel's HD 4000 will not hurt low end graphics cards at all. $40 cards are still far faster than the HD 4000 in it's best incarnation in the i7s.

Intel isn't *killing* AMD. AMD is making a come back with Piledriver and hopefully again with Steamroller (those together could bring AMD up to at least Sandy and Ivy performance and performance per watt). AMD is also winning against Intel in the low/mid end notebook PC enthusiast market.

Medfield is not *killing* ARM; Medfield's simply a competitor for ARM. It will take quite a lot to convince companies like Apple to port their software and iOS over to a new architecture any time soon.

Intel's NUC is not even a competitor for the Raspberry Pi. The NUC is a far more high end product and is also larger.

Intel already makes both SSDs and motherboards. Intel isn't the best in either, but Intel's SSDs have been heralded as the most reliable SSDs, even if they aren't even close to being the fastest.
 
This could be interesting. I wonder what socket it will take? They say Core i3/i5 so probably a LGA1155 which means these could be real performers, given their size. A sub-$150 mini PC is definitely intriguing.
 
[citation][nom]iLLz[/nom]This could be interesting. I wonder what socket it will take? They say Core i3/i5 so probably a LGA1155 which means these could be real performers, given their size. A sub-$150 mini PC is definitely intriguing.[/citation]

It could be mobile i3/i5 and probably is if it uses SO-DIMMs, so it probably won't have an LGA 1155 socket. If it were desktop i3/i5 compatible, then the CPU cooler could have needed to be as wide (and almost as tall as it is wide) as the whole board!
 
[citation][nom]nieur[/nom]if all the above mentioned stuff comes around $100-150 I am going to grab one[/citation]
Seeing as it is made by Intel and it has a Core Ix processor (not Atom) I'm willing to bet it will be a few hundred dollars more than that.
 
[citation][nom]blazorthon[/nom]Why doesn't Intel make a Medfield device to compete with the Raspberry Pi? [/citation]

Because Pi is very narrow niche market. It's too slow to do anything useful and is mostly sought after by Linux enthusiasts who want to run some custom-built low-resource distro on it. It can't do anything else.

[citation][nom]phatboe[/nom]Seeing as it is made by Intel and it has a Core Ix processor (not Atom) I'm willing to bet it will be a few hundred dollars more than that.[/citation]

A SOCKET. So I bet you can throw in anything from a SB Pentium to an i7, if the BIOS allows. (Then again... where the hell do you install a cooler here? :heink: The whole thing is gonna melt if you give it an x86 CPU without a cooler...)
 
While Im interested in this, it does come off as a knee-jerk reaction the to Raspberry Pi, even if it isnt directly aimed to compete against it. At the very least, it had a heavy influence over the design in general.
 


What about Sandy Bridge Celerons? You skipped them. Again, if this is supposed to have i3s and i5s, it is almost certainly the mobile versions, so the cooler might not be as big of a deal. It could certainly get away with a much smaller cooler that way.
 
I can see this being used in higher end internet kiosks, such as those that play games like Monster mash. Those terminals that are around some restaurants, and truck stops. This would allow both games and internet access, the games could be of a higher end unlike the typical flash based stuff the now run. Those kiosks do run a version of Linux so this could be of good use in those types of places. I can see the Raspberry Pi being used more in internet enabled TV's since its smaller and cheaper than Intels solution. Both have their uses, it will take companies other than Intel and those behind the Pi to figure out new and novel uses for these devices, as well as us technophiles.
 
blazorthorn, actually, HD4000 beats the A8 in graphics on mobile platforms. We aren't talking about desktops here. Until AMD gets their power reqs down, their mobile graphics will continue to suffer.
 
blazorthorn, actually, HD4000 beats the A8 in graphics on mobile platforms. We aren't talking about desktops here. Until AMD gets their power reqs down, their mobile graphics will continue to suffer.
Click to expand...

I saw the benchmark... That was HD 4000 on an i7. It's different for different CPUs, especially CPUs from different families. Most people will be using the Pentiums, i3s, and i5s, in which case they won't get the performance offered by the i7's version. So no, it doesn't beat the mobile A8s either.

Furthermore, with Trinity coming along and having a great improvement over Llano, Intel's near lead here will be short lived at best. Intel's CPUs are obviously vastly superior, but the graphics still isn't winning.

There's also the fact that some notebook manufacturers write their own drivers for HD graphics, but don't fully support all of the features and never update the drivers, so that benchmark wasn't even a universal comparison for all notebook i7 HD 4000s against Llano.
 
It's the GPU clock rate that is the issue FAR more than the CPU (not sure how you don't understand that), so no, you are incorrect and really dishonest with your explanation. Most people buy A4 and A6 over A8 so you would have to compare an i5 vs an A4 or A6 which just gets downright silly. The tests on the net have been fair and accurate and they show HD4000 leading whether you twist the definition or not. Sorry!

My guess is Trinity matches Intel's XM version of HD4000 which clocks at 1300. That bodes well for Trinity but remains to be seen. AMD may need to clock it down for a better performance/watt to extend battery life and compete with Intel's superior efficiency.
 
It's the GPU clock rate that is the issue FAR more than the CPU (not sure how you don't understand that), so no, you are incorrect and really dishonest with your explanation. Most people buy A4 and A6 over A8 so you would have to compare an i5 vs an A4 or A6 which just gets downright silly. The tests on the net have been fair and accurate and they show HD4000 leading whether you twist the definition or not. Sorry!

My guess is Trinity matches Intel's XM version of HD4000 which clocks at 1300. That bodes well for Trinity but remains to be seen. AMD may need to clock it down for a better performance/watt to extend battery life and compete with Intel's superior efficiency.
Click to expand...

Funny... Loooking at my earlier post, you can CLEARLY see where I specifically stated that the different CPUs with the same HD IGP have different GPU performance specifically because of differing clock frequencies, so I obviously know the difference. Whether or not it is the clock frequency that is the defining difference even with the same IGP model name for Intel doesn't matter because most notebooks don't let you change it, so I'm right and you're wrong and that should be the end of it.

The mobile HD 4000 has only been tested on the mobile i7 (last I checked), so we don't even know exactly how the reduced clock frequency versions of the HD 4000 will perform on the i3s and i5s. The test clearly shows that the i7's HD graphics was good. You have no clue as to how it will perform on the lower end CPUs. You should stop spreading your lies about this.

You have absolutely no way of proving that the mobile i3/i5 HD 4000 will even meet the Llano mobile A6 graphics.

Furthermore, the A4/A6 systems aren't even in the same exact price range as the i5 systems (maybe some of the top A6 systems are, but that is A8 territory), so there is absolutely no point in comparing them at all, unless you want to see how systems of different price ranges stack up. The A6 and Ivy i3 systems might be in the same price range.

However, this is still all meaningless because Trinity is coming and it is far better than Llano and HD 4000.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom