vacancies advertise contact news tip The Vault
facebook rss twitter

Intel Broadwell SoC reduces Haswell power-draw by 30pc

by Tarinder Sandhu on 11 September 2013, 23:15

Tags: Intel (NASDAQ:INTC)

Quick Link: HEXUS.net/qab2vr

Add to My Vault: x

Intel's 4th Generation Core Haswell processors are imbued with impressive dynamic range power, running from 11.5W (mobile) through to 84W (desktop). Readers are likely to know that Intel prioritised energy efficiency above all-out performance in the switch between Ivy Bridge and Haswell architectures.

The chip giant may well be taking the same efficiency tack with the next-generation Broadwell microarchitecture, due in 2014. Though information on Broadwell has been scarce at the annual Intel Developer Forum (IDF), CEO Brian Krzanich indicated that the new architecture would enable a 30 per cent reduction in power when compared to equivalent Haswell chips shipping today, with the gains mostly accruing from using a smaller manufacturing process and increased on-chip integration.

Kirk Skaugen, senior vice president, affirmed that 14nm Broadwell, in mobile form, is very much built with power consumption in mind. He ran through a demonstration that pitted a 4th Generation Core i3 Y-series SoC (11W TDP, 4.5W SDP) against a performance-equivalent Broadwell SoC. The premise here was to show that Broadwell could match incumbent performance while sipping on considerably less power.

Running the all-core Cinebench test, the Haswell SoC averaged 6.8W while the same-socket Broadwell consumed 4.9W - or, in other words, a 28 per cent reduction for the same user experience.

Nothing else of import is yet known about Broadwell, but we reckon it's safe to say that Intel will continue to focus on power consumption more than performance. That Core i5-2500K isn't looking so bad after all, is it?



HEXUS Forums :: 28 Comments

Login with Forum Account

Don't have an account? Register today!
How much more excited would we all be if that were 30% more PERFORMANCE for the same power draw?
cheesyboy
How much more excited would we all be if that were 30% more PERFORMANCE for the same power draw?

Me personally not very, my computers are all more than fast enough for their purpose but the electricity bill is looking a bit painful these days and cool running with long battery would be incredibly useful to me.
cheesyboy
How much more excited would we all be if that were 30% more PERFORMANCE for the same power draw?
Erm, try thinking that one through. If Intel can deliver a processor that takes less power to deliver the SAME performance then that's got to be a more efficient design. So - assuming it's physically possible - you may be able to overclock to the same thermal output as the old designs, but end up with correspondingly better performance.

That said, we've already got enough cpu performance to be able to comfortably run an OS within another OS (virtualization), so I'm quite happy to take the same level (or slightly increased?) performance level and pocket the power savings. Heck, the money saved might even be enough to put a down payment on improving the other hardware in the rig… :)

I did read something the other day saying that cpu and graphics performance these days are very good, and it's “peripheral” factors like memory bandwidth and IO responsiveness that are more of a limiting factor to overall system performance.
kingpotnoodle
Me personally not very, my computers are all more than fast enough for their purpose but the electricity bill is looking a bit painful these days and cool running with long battery would be incredibly useful to me.

Laptop, yes.
Desktop, no

As far as energy bills go, it's all something of a myth. If a 100w CPU can deliver 30% more grunt than a 70w CPU, then it can do the task 30% faster which means using the same electric (or do the task at 70% capacity, which will reduce energy draw too). Low-energy idle states are preferable, of course, but that doesn't need to come at the cost of performance.

crossy
Erm, try thinking that one through. If Intel can deliver a processor that takes less power to deliver the SAME performance then that's got to be a more efficient design. So - assuming it's physically possible - you may be able to overclock to the same thermal output as the old designs, but end up with correspondingly better performance.

Ah yes, just like we can clock the much-more-efficient Haswell up to correspondingly better performance than Ivy and Sandy, you mean?
cheesyboy
Ah yes, just like we can clock the much-more-efficient Haswell up to correspondingly better performance than Ivy and Sandy, you mean?

It would be nice if they at least spent the extra dollar/chip on the thermal compound, at least for the ‘K’ and extreme desktop variants. It might not be their aim to push performance, but it doesn't exactly hurt them to let people try (and makes for ridiculous OC competition speed headlines for minimal extra effort on their part). If they aren't releasing higher performance chips anyway, it doesn't even steal from the higher end of their own market.