LGA 1156 Core i5

[cjl]

True 6 core, 12 thread. One die, as of the last time I heard. Probably with a single, shared L3, and per core L1 and L2.

 

[rags_20]

Isn't 6 odd? I mean, 1, 2, 4 ,8 isn't that the way its supposed to go? Even Phenom x3s have 4 cores physically.

 

[cjl]

It's probably because an 8 core is too large to be easily and cheaply done, and would take too much power and die space to be practical, but they do have some extra headroom at 32nm to improve on a quad.

 

[rags_20]

So how powerful is the integrated graphics going to be? Just like Intel's GMAs or what? I really don't see the point. Even if you have integrated graphics, most people are going to get cards anyway.

 

[cjl]

Well, the 6 core won't have any integrated graphics, as it is intended for the high end market (where, as you said, people will get their own graphics anyways). The LGA1156 parts though (duos and perhaps quads) will get something a bit (but not a lot) faster than the current Intel GMA. The advantage will be in power and heat dissipation - the CPU will still use around the same power level (95W or so), but that includes graphics, reducing system power. Of course, you could add discrete graphics if you want - nothing will prevent that.

 

[apache_lives]

Intel is going to release the LGA 1156 socket, as if LGA 775 and LGA 1366 aren't enough. This will be used by Lynnfield ( Core i5) and uses the P55 chipset. It is the mainstream version of Nehalem. It will support DDR3 only and in dual-channel mode.

Heh and i thought AMD was innocent with Socket A, Socket 754, Socket 940, Socket 939, Socket 940 "AM2", there dead end 4x4, AM2+ and now AM3? hmmmmmm.....

Reguardless of socket both companies are appalling when it comes to upgradability - manufacturers not making bios's or VRM designs to support future chips etc make "future proofing" a BS term - no such thing.

Socket 1156 is just the replacement for 775 - good riddens to the ageing FSB design that *still* puts AMD in place! (at a price), and second its the MAIN STREAM PRODUCT not high end like 1366 etc

 

[rags_20]

^ You joined in 1970? Did TomsHardware exist in 1970? Wow!

 

[apache_lives]

apparently so! 😀

 

[Ravenica]

i7 itself would be a waste for most people wouldn't it? Games don't even utilise 100% of the cpu.. I hope the i5 would be a much more affordable step up..

 

[apache_lives]

Core i7 = MULTITASKING monster + great gaming performance, and since when does a system only run one app (aka a game) - no friggin way - your running firewall, antivirus apps, messenger/chat apps, file sharing apps plus windows - all that across 8 threads is sweet.

Also when a game isnt limited by the CPU or cant use multiple threads (or beyond 2-4 etc) ofcourse it reports a lower then 100% load, but why would you use a low end video card with a high end platform?

What Intel is trying to do here is make those "extreme" and high end markets use the i7 platform because of the capability of using 3+ video cards etc and tri channel memory (if not for performance then for sheer memory volume) and when you get that 8 core upgrade the tri-channel memory controller will make sence, where as that i5 platform with no QPI, dual channel and "only" 16 pcie lanes will start to limit its self.

 

[rags_20]

Like someone posted earlier, I also think that i7 is mainly aimed at servers. i5 will be what is targeted at consumers. Also, i5 also has 4 cores (8 threads) so that's not a problem. I read somewhere that the starting i5 will host a 2.13 GHz clock. I can't imagine that going past 3.2 GHz on an OC. Maybe the highest end i5 will have a 3 GHz clock and the Extreme edition a 3.2/3.33. I read about the 2.13 somewhere, but the other clocks are pure speculation.

 

[rags_20]

apparently so! 😀

How did you change your joined date? Take a look at this. TH was founded in 1996. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toms_Hardware

 

[apache_lives]

How did you change your joined date? Take a look at this. TH was founded in 1996. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toms_Hardware

nah when they updated the forums a while back all the oldies here got there dates set back along way to 1970 - check around - theres a few originals here with the same thing

 

[apache_lives]

oh and the Integrated graphics - closer to the cpu/imc + the same production process should be an advantage (eg what, 90 or 65nm chipset production vs 45nm if integrated into the cpu, more cooling etc too) - not a massive jump but perhaps ~30% if we are lucky, but poor drivers will keep it below nvidia/ati alternatives but acceptable for basic use

 

[rags_20]

How well will the GPU get cooled? I mean, both the CPU and the onboard GPU have just one common HSF, right?

 

[apache_lives]

yup same packing, die etc so same cooling, in the same socket etc

also makes the posibility of adding some sort of cache to the IGP, and adding more power each series, and perhaps extreme overclocking of the IGP? (although at the end of the day its an Intel IGP LOL)

 

[rags_20]

Yeah right. But you can't OC the Integrated graphics, at least as it is in the mobo now.

 

[apache_lives]

ummmm yes you can - for a while now

 

[Helloworld_98]

you can it just doesn't make it that much better and you need a specialized cooler for it.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

yup same packing, die etc so same cooling, in the same socket etc

also makes the posibility of adding some sort of cache to the IGP, and adding more power each series, and perhaps extreme overclocking of the IGP? (although at the end of the day its an Intel IGP LOL)

No benchies yet, but here is a link to an Asian manufacturer who just got an ES of the Clarkdale:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=222931&highlight=clarkdale

The IGP is at 45nm while the CPU is 32nm. Supposedly the IGP has 4X the transistors of the standard Intel 4500 IGP

 

[rags_20]

Did you count and see if there were 1156 contacts? lol

 

[fazers_on_stun]

Did you count and see if there were 1156 contacts? lol

Of course 😀

BTW - my 700th post - hopefully now the moniker under my avatar no longer says I'm "a dick"

[edit] OK now I'm an "old hand"... Wonder where Toms gets these nutty post-number designations from?? At least it doesn't say "old Fart!" LOL

 

[rags_20]

Yeah, I recently became an addict. Here are the "designations". http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/7221-11-journeyman

 

[cjl]

oh and the Integrated graphics - closer to the cpu/imc + the same production process should be an advantage (eg what, 90 or 65nm chipset production vs 45nm if integrated into the cpu, more cooling etc too) - not a massive jump but perhaps ~30% if we are lucky, but poor drivers will keep it below nvidia/ati alternatives but acceptable for basic use

Actually, the IGP will still be at a larger process than the CPU will. Though they are both in the CPU socket, it will still be 2 separate dies, with the CPU at 32nm and the IGP at 45nm.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

Read further into your link. If eveythings the same, the igp will be 2x that of the current 65nm process at 45nm to come. The 4x number was brought out under the misconception that it was to be 32nm as well.
Hopefully doubling the transistor count will allow Intel to almost catch up in performance.