Bite me crank, Matey (rolling eyes ...) It's almost like Chipzilla is not trying, anymore. A down-clocked Radeon RX 540 Mobile with a i3-8121U 'plunder'd' from China a year and a half ago? Jeeeezzzz ...
This is the 10nm test chip they have been building, its never had on-die graphics (or functioning graphics, who knows). To sell this chip it was always going to need some other graphics and this fits the price point of a 15w i3....
So, a single semi-disabled test/beta chip on a test/beta node (it doesn't seem that Intel is going to release anything else on 10nm, Ice Lake will be based on their second gen 10nm+ node, which they fixed with the help of ASML) and yet Intel is selling it to the public...
By the way, despite a disabled iGPU Core i3-8121U has a *much* lower turbo frequency than Intel's 14nm equivalent, Core i3-8145U, which has a max turbo of 3.90 GHz (+700 full MHz) although it also has a functioning 620 iGPU with a 300 MHz to 1 GHz frequency. So Core i3-8121U is a *much* inferior CPU all in all, having the same arch but with a lower power efficiency and frequency, and its AVX-512 block is a gimmick that will be useless at such low TDPs anyway.
Yeah I have to agree. Even if it's downclocked and undervolted the GPU will be eating ~30 watts or more by itself. The combined figures mean you might as well build a compact system with a 2400GE (or down-TDP 2400G) with some fast RAM.
But I guess they had to do something with all those 10nm duds, I mean, test chips.
Well shiver me timbers! Thar be a mutiny among the crew. Keel haul the mizzen mast and batten down the rudder! Close the portcullis! Cut yer jib for ramming speed and grease the poop deck!
I don't agree with the "availability of this product at Walmart and Amazon must mean volume production of 10nm chips" logic. These are the smallest dies Intel makes (there's not even a GPU in there), you get more than 700 of them from a single 300mm wafer. At the same time NUCs are not exactly popular and we don't know how many are in stock. So the availabilty of these systems alone indicates nothing. If 10nm volume production had been achieved, we would see cheap notebooks and not NUCs.
I strongly doubt these CPUs lack an iGPU, since that would suggest a redesign. It rather appears that Intel decided to disable the iGPU due to either low yields, low frequency and power efficiency (this CPU has 700 MHz lower turbo clock than Core i3-8145U, Intel's 14nm equivalent, despite zero power draw from its iGPU...) or perhaps a combination of all three. I fully agree this does not suggest high volume production, this is basically a beta CPU.
Thing is though: they have a product made using next gen node (and they were the first to deliver in consumer market). That's all that matters. Apple has one as well, so does Samsung (not offered yet but already manufactured).
Sure, these are all low voltage, tiny chips. You can't make a 100W desktop part using that tech. But it shows that 7/10nm is already here. Now it's just a matter of refining this tech to make larger chips possible.
they have been able to make working chips for long time, the thing is just being able to make working chips is not enough in the semi conductors market you need make it profitable and this requires 2 things: volume and yields, I'm sure they got the volume but the yields are the issue. if you did not get to high enough yields\ defects threshold, you can't mass produce and keep the business profitable meaning in a free market you will just go out of business quickly. all the players know it well this is why Samsung delayed their production of 7nm node and GlobalFoundries just canceled their 7nm node development completely they just knew their node won't be profitable enough (or at all) to justify such a huge spending. as it looks like only TSMC are on tracks with their 7nm node(s) which should not be surprising as they are the largest pure-play semiconductor foundry in the world and by big margins, as the size the decrease and we face more and more issues manufacturing in small feature sizes less and less can keep up.
No, that's not "all that matters". Only high volume manufacturing matters in this industry. And I mean HVM of fully functioning parts, which also do not have a 700 MHz lower turbo clock than the generation of CPUs they supposedly replace, despite no TDP stress from their iGPU. This CPU is literally a beta CPU, which Intel released on a highly problematic node (they do not even intend to fix their original 10nm node, they will rather apply all the fixes to their second gen 10nm+ node, for the HVM release of Ice Lake) just to report a nominal 2018 release of 10nm CPUs to their shareholders and thus avoid a stock sell-off. That's all there is to it.
Sure, and GF abandoned 7nm entirely, TSMC backed off of 7nm EUV for SAQP, Samsung dumped their original 7nm plans (7nm LPE) for a future-EUV-maybe 7nm LPP, etc. Everyone is having trouble getting good 7nm yields, everyone is using 'stopgap' processes while they try and get their 'real' processes up to yield.
These default cases are looking really tired. They should stick with the skull cases or find a way to spruce these up. I don't mean alien/dragon LED graphics. More like Amazon's tv box glowing bar of destiny thing, for example. Or even the ancient mac mini design, which is so much cleaner it has aged really well. Intel should have the resources, and clearly this isn't an experiment.
I don't think I could disagree more. These aren't aimed at flashy gaming youth. They're primarily aimed at business and HTPC uses, neither of which want any flashing lights on their box. Keep it subtle, keep it small.
Yep! We use them in applications where we need something more than a 0-Client. Sometimes just running a thick client, and sometimes running full Windows. They are small, quiet, and mount nicely in out-of-the-way places
I kind of agree. At this point I have no idea if there have been 2 generations of NUC or 12 generations. It's not good trying to challenge Shuttle for the not updated your design in 8 years award.
The base mac mini costs $260 more, for which you get worse graphics (probably, I don't think I've seen benchmarks for the radeon 540 vs intel graphics), 2x the cpu cores, 400mHz higher max freq, an SSD instead of a spinning disc (which shouldn't be an option at this point frankly, so anyone wanting any kind of decent performance is just going to throw in an ssd), FOUR thunderbolt ports, and a better operating system.
I'm not saying that the mac mini isn't completely worth it vs the nuc, but it clearly offers some amount of hardware value for the extra $260. Is it worth the extra cash? For some of us, the OS alone is worth the price difference, nevermind the extra hardware.
Compared to the i3 in the standard NUC (the i3-8109U), the difference appears to be a lower clock speed but also substantially lower power draw for the same cores/thread. 15w for the 8121U vs 28w for the 8109U, which is quite impressive if correct. Also adds support for LPDDR4.
One of the draws of NuCs is the ability to stick whatever you want into them, and tinker with speeds. Soldering memory makes this as worthless as a netbook. Seriously, 4GB of RAM? Anyone who buys that is in for a bad time.
I mean yeah, the 4gb one is not great for general desktop use, but for that isn't what this is really for imo. Think things like kiosks and digital signage.
bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. This CPU+GPU combo is in a much lower power (and cost? idk) bracket than the Ryzen APU so of course the APU will have higher performance. The R5 2500U would be a more apt comparison- and i imagine would outperform this i3 due to more cores.
I think the main purpose of this NUC is get features of Cannon Lake out developer before they release - primary AVX 512. This is obviously not Intel's final 10nm product - so they are releasing it in a limited product, Ice Lake next year is suppose to be actual product.
Keep in mind 10nm is just a number - so 10nm from one vendor is not the same as 10nm - just because one company has a lower number is better. I would not doubt Intel is going back to drawing boards on product to make sure of that.
Why do you keep repeating that 10nm is just a number? Is it possibly because the competition is doing better? And if the tables were reversed and Intel had 7nm right now, would you be still saying that it's 'just a number'? The answer to that question determines whether you are an Intel apologist or not, so I suspect we won't get an answer.
"Intel Markets Engineering Sample CPU to Public in Effort to Raise Investor Confidence"
another publicity stunt to allow Intel say they "shipped 10nm in 2017/18" and technically not be lying. allegedly this isn't even the same 10nm process that Intel will be using when they actually launch 10nm CPUs across the product line; after the failures that led to this mediocre i3 Intel is reportedly making significant changes to the process.
all that said i would love to see a detailed comparison between this NUC and the Kaby/Coffee-lake versions in the same bracket. an apples-apples comparison of performance, power, heat, and die/package size may be illuminating
Indeed as the last row of the “generations” table in the article shows, Intel is in a mess. It doesn’t have a new microarchitecture forthcoming, and it doesn’t know what, if any, <14nm process node it’s going to end up with in a year or two. Contrast with AMD and ARM...
Hi, The first table titled 'Intel Crimson Canyon NUC PCs' didn't play well with reader mode in safari. The content of the table is practically unreadable as the text and background have the same colour: white. Surprisingly the second table: 'Intel's Core Architecture Cadence' is fine. I found this problem is common with Anandtech website, not sure if it is a bug in Safari under osx Mojave.
All this proves is that 10nm yields are terrible. The only part they can produce is a 2C low performance part, indicative of massive problems with yield.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
52 Comments
Back to Article
kb9fcc - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Title, "Cannon Lake" ?PeachNCream - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Yarr! This NUC be me new pirate vessel for a plunderin' the Spanish Main. She sails with a lake full o' cannon! Arrr!Smell This - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Bite me crank, Matey (rolling eyes ...)It's almost like Chipzilla is not trying, anymore. A down-clocked Radeon RX 540 Mobile with a i3-8121U 'plunder'd' from China a year and a half ago? Jeeeezzzz ...
danielfranklin - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
This is the 10nm test chip they have been building, its never had on-die graphics (or functioning graphics, who knows). To sell this chip it was always going to need some other graphics and this fits the price point of a 15w i3....Santoval - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
So, a single semi-disabled test/beta chip on a test/beta node (it doesn't seem that Intel is going to release anything else on 10nm, Ice Lake will be based on their second gen 10nm+ node, which they fixed with the help of ASML) and yet Intel is selling it to the public...By the way, despite a disabled iGPU Core i3-8121U has a *much* lower turbo frequency than Intel's 14nm equivalent, Core i3-8145U, which has a max turbo of 3.90 GHz (+700 full MHz) although it also has a functioning 620 iGPU with a 300 MHz to 1 GHz frequency.
So Core i3-8121U is a *much* inferior CPU all in all, having the same arch but with a lower power efficiency and frequency, and its AVX-512 block is a gimmick that will be useless at such low TDPs anyway.
Alexvrb - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Yeah I have to agree. Even if it's downclocked and undervolted the GPU will be eating ~30 watts or more by itself. The combined figures mean you might as well build a compact system with a 2400GE (or down-TDP 2400G) with some fast RAM.But I guess they had to do something with all those 10nm duds, I mean, test chips.
PeachNCream - Tuesday, December 4, 2018 - link
Well shiver me timbers! Thar be a mutiny among the crew. Keel haul the mizzen mast and batten down the rudder! Close the portcullis! Cut yer jib for ramming speed and grease the poop deck!johannesburgel - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
I don't agree with the "availability of this product at Walmart and Amazon must mean volume production of 10nm chips" logic. These are the smallest dies Intel makes (there's not even a GPU in there), you get more than 700 of them from a single 300mm wafer. At the same time NUCs are not exactly popular and we don't know how many are in stock. So the availabilty of these systems alone indicates nothing. If 10nm volume production had been achieved, we would see cheap notebooks and not NUCs.Santoval - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
I strongly doubt these CPUs lack an iGPU, since that would suggest a redesign. It rather appears that Intel decided to disable the iGPU due to either low yields, low frequency and power efficiency (this CPU has 700 MHz lower turbo clock than Core i3-8145U, Intel's 14nm equivalent, despite zero power draw from its iGPU...) or perhaps a combination of all three.I fully agree this does not suggest high volume production, this is basically a beta CPU.
edzieba - Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - link
Decapping of the i3-8121U does not appear to feature a GPU.DigitalFreak - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
So they got a dual-core CPU with no (or non-functional) IGP working on 10nm. Not something to be proud of.notb - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Thing is though: they have a product made using next gen node (and they were the first to deliver in consumer market). That's all that matters.Apple has one as well, so does Samsung (not offered yet but already manufactured).
Sure, these are all low voltage, tiny chips. You can't make a 100W desktop part using that tech. But it shows that 7/10nm is already here. Now it's just a matter of refining this tech to make larger chips possible.
Eliadbu - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
they have been able to make working chips for long time, the thing is just being able to make working chips is not enough in the semi conductors market you need make it profitable and this requires 2 things: volume and yields, I'm sure they got the volume but the yields are the issue. if you did not get to high enough yields\ defects threshold, you can't mass produce and keep the business profitable meaning in a free market you will just go out of business quickly. all the players know it well this is why Samsung delayed their production of 7nm node and GlobalFoundries just canceled their 7nm node development completely they just knew their node won't be profitable enough (or at all) to justify such a huge spending. as it looks like only TSMC are on tracks with their 7nm node(s) which should not be surprising as they are the largest pure-play semiconductor foundry in the world and by big margins, as the size the decrease and we face more and more issues manufacturing in small feature sizes less and less can keep up.danjw - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
TSMC is not just on track, but delivering products. Apple's A12 SOCs in the current generation iPhones and now iPads. Those are shipping products.Santoval - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
No, that's not "all that matters". Only high volume manufacturing matters in this industry. And I mean HVM of fully functioning parts, which also do not have a 700 MHz lower turbo clock than the generation of CPUs they supposedly replace, despite no TDP stress from their iGPU. This CPU is literally a beta CPU, which Intel released on a highly problematic node (they do not even intend to fix their original 10nm node, they will rather apply all the fixes to their second gen 10nm+ node, for the HVM release of Ice Lake) just to report a nominal 2018 release of 10nm CPUs to their shareholders and thus avoid a stock sell-off. That's all there is to it.edzieba - Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - link
Sure, and GF abandoned 7nm entirely, TSMC backed off of 7nm EUV for SAQP, Samsung dumped their original 7nm plans (7nm LPE) for a future-EUV-maybe 7nm LPP, etc. Everyone is having trouble getting good 7nm yields, everyone is using 'stopgap' processes while they try and get their 'real' processes up to yield.Samus - Tuesday, December 4, 2018 - link
And it's still 15w and it's still in line with the performance of a dual-core 14nm CPU. So where is the benefit!?Dug - Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - link
It's new, so it must be betters!nico_mach - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
These default cases are looking really tired. They should stick with the skull cases or find a way to spruce these up. I don't mean alien/dragon LED graphics. More like Amazon's tv box glowing bar of destiny thing, for example. Or even the ancient mac mini design, which is so much cleaner it has aged really well. Intel should have the resources, and clearly this isn't an experiment.MattMe - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
I don't think I could disagree more.These aren't aimed at flashy gaming youth. They're primarily aimed at business and HTPC uses, neither of which want any flashing lights on their box.
Keep it subtle, keep it small.
CaedenV - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Yep! We use them in applications where we need something more than a 0-Client. Sometimes just running a thick client, and sometimes running full Windows. They are small, quiet, and mount nicely in out-of-the-way placesGunbuster - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
I kind of agree. At this point I have no idea if there have been 2 generations of NUC or 12 generations. It's not good trying to challenge Shuttle for the not updated your design in 8 years award.saratoga4 - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
The NUCs support overclocking right? Any chance of an article looking at Cannonlake the desktop part that was not to be?Valantar - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Not the regular, u-series powered ones, no. That's just the Skull * variants.megadirk - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
So what you are saying is that there is no justifying the price Apple is charging for the Mac Mini?TheinsanegamerN - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
There has never been justification for the apple tax.bubblyboo - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Gotta hit those 30%+ profits margins.nicolaim - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Intel's margins are around 60%!Wasabi_Vengeance - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
The base mac mini costs $260 more, for which you get worse graphics (probably, I don't think I've seen benchmarks for the radeon 540 vs intel graphics), 2x the cpu cores, 400mHz higher max freq, an SSD instead of a spinning disc (which shouldn't be an option at this point frankly, so anyone wanting any kind of decent performance is just going to throw in an ssd), FOUR thunderbolt ports, and a better operating system.I'm not saying that the mac mini isn't completely worth it vs the nuc, but it clearly offers some amount of hardware value for the extra $260. Is it worth the extra cash? For some of us, the OS alone is worth the price difference, nevermind the extra hardware.
Wasabi_Vengeance - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Also, mac mini has ac wifi (nuc has only a/g/n).nicolaim - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
The NUC has "ac" WiFi.Wasabi_Vengeance - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Ahh, thanks. The amazon page says a/g/n, but anand clearly says ac. Def trust anandtech more :Pdan_ger - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Are there any IPC or clock for clock comparisons between coffee lake and cannon lake? or any other 14nm vs the new 10nm.MattMe - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Compared to the i3 in the standard NUC (the i3-8109U), the difference appears to be a lower clock speed but also substantially lower power draw for the same cores/thread. 15w for the 8121U vs 28w for the 8109U, which is quite impressive if correct. Also adds support for LPDDR4.Intel's ARK page for comparison here: https://ark.intel.com/compare/136863,135936
MattMe - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
I know that doesn't explain any IPC comparisons but just wanted to highlight what the differences between the two models are.Eris_Floralia - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
8109U is Coffee Lake-U with GT3e graphics and higher TDP.You should compare it with the 8130U.
TheinsanegamerN - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Soldered memory? No thank you.One of the draws of NuCs is the ability to stick whatever you want into them, and tinker with speeds. Soldering memory makes this as worthless as a netbook. Seriously, 4GB of RAM? Anyone who buys that is in for a bad time.
tomatotree - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
I mean yeah, the 4gb one is not great for general desktop use, but for that isn't what this is really for imo. Think things like kiosks and digital signage.Meteor2 - Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - link
Why would a kiosk need a 1TB hdd?hallstein - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
It would be fascinating to know how this performance in CPU and GPU compared to the AMD Ryzen 5 2400G....I'm guessing not well!
KateH - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
bit of an apples-to-oranges comparison. This CPU+GPU combo is in a much lower power (and cost? idk) bracket than the Ryzen APU so of course the APU will have higher performance. The R5 2500U would be a more apt comparison- and i imagine would outperform this i3 due to more cores.HStewart - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
I think the main purpose of this NUC is get features of Cannon Lake out developer before they release - primary AVX 512. This is obviously not Intel's final 10nm product - so they are releasing it in a limited product, Ice Lake next year is suppose to be actual product.Keep in mind 10nm is just a number - so 10nm from one vendor is not the same as 10nm - just because one company has a lower number is better. I would not doubt Intel is going back to drawing boards on product to make sure of that.
sa666666 - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Why do you keep repeating that 10nm is just a number? Is it possibly because the competition is doing better? And if the tables were reversed and Intel had 7nm right now, would you be still saying that it's 'just a number'? The answer to that question determines whether you are an Intel apologist or not, so I suspect we won't get an answer.Meteor2 - Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - link
Because it’s just a number. In all meaningful metrics, Intel’s 10nm and TSMC’s 7nm are equal. Well, apart from production volumes ;-)KateH - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
"Intel Markets Engineering Sample CPU to Public in Effort to Raise Investor Confidence"another publicity stunt to allow Intel say they "shipped 10nm in 2017/18" and technically not be lying. allegedly this isn't even the same 10nm process that Intel will be using when they actually launch 10nm CPUs across the product line; after the failures that led to this mediocre i3 Intel is reportedly making significant changes to the process.
all that said i would love to see a detailed comparison between this NUC and the Kaby/Coffee-lake versions in the same bracket. an apples-apples comparison of performance, power, heat, and die/package size may be illuminating
Meteor2 - Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - link
Indeed as the last row of the “generations” table in the article shows, Intel is in a mess. It doesn’t have a new microarchitecture forthcoming, and it doesn’t know what, if any, <14nm process node it’s going to end up with in a year or two. Contrast with AMD and ARM...sorten - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
My money is with (and waiting for) AMD's Zen2 for this generation. Intel has delayed 10nm for too long.octoviaa - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Hi,The first table titled 'Intel Crimson Canyon NUC PCs' didn't play well with reader mode in safari.
The content of the table is practically unreadable as the text and background have the same colour: white. Surprisingly the second table: 'Intel's Core Architecture Cadence' is fine.
I found this problem is common with Anandtech website, not sure if it is a bug in Safari under osx Mojave.
nicolaim - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
Lack of USB-C is disappointing.UkeNeverSeme - Monday, December 3, 2018 - link
All this proves is that 10nm yields are terrible. The only part they can produce is a 2C low performance part, indicative of massive problems with yield.zodiacfml - Tuesday, December 4, 2018 - link
Still dual core?! Meh. They are terribletygrus - Wednesday, December 5, 2018 - link
** Intel '14nm Class'You mean 14nm+++ or 14nm++++