Really wish they would stop making dual core i3's. At the very least they should be 4 core 4 thread.
Reserve these junk CPUs for the Pentium/Celeron line.
I also wish they had more cache on the i5 (8MB) and i3 (6MB)
I am glad to see a 6 core 12 thread option, though I really wish it had the 64 EU Iris graphics. With an Iris GPU this should be used in laptops as a mid tier option between the U series (15w) and H series (45w). In fact I think this would be the best option for most people, I would absolutely recommend this over the U series (like the i7-1065G7, unless they needed absolute battery life/mobility) and over any of the H series laptops that all force an expensive power hungry DGPU that's only useful to gamers.
I don't care if it's Ice Lake, Comet Lake, or whatever...I don't see why Intel can't combine all the desirable bits into one good CPU. The 64 EU Iris from Ice Lake looks good, even when stuck with a 4c/8t at 15w. I'd love to see that 64EU 4c/8t as a 25-30w i5 for laptops, with a 6c/12t as an i7. Yes, I think they need to have the 64EU option on the i5 (it should be the only option for the i5 and up).
Intel would really do well to have such a middle ground option. The U series laptops are only good for bare minimum tasks, but they fill every option and price point up until you hit the big heavy expensive gaming laptops. I know tons of people who have wanted/needed more grunt than a weak U series, and literally had no other option than to get gaming laptop they didn't really want/need.
In fact the U series chips are only good for the kind of people who can be served by sub $300 Chromebooks. For everyone else, they have to get a gaming laptop (or just suffer with a U series). I've always wished there were better options for the majority, and it finally looks like there are components that could make it possible.
Reading back over my post I don't think I made it clear why I wish to see the Iris IGP if they aren't "gamers". I think there's a large group of people who play "casual" games, that don't need a ton of GPU but suffer with terrible graphics/performance due to Intel's previously terrible IGPs. Stuff like Rocket League, Stardew Valley, Minecraft, LOL, DOTA, etc. Previously many of these games had to be run at 720p and/or lowest settings just to play. I think it would be great if they could run these kind of things at 1080p near 60FPS on an IGP with at least a few details turned up. This kind of IGP performance does seem possible now, it just needs to be offered in casual options.
I think this kind of 25w class CPU would be the best fit for casual $450-600 laptops and provide an excellent experience for most people (especially a 6 core + 64 EU Iris). Leave the U series for ultra-thin/light and convertible/tablet like devices...the bulky gaming laptops start at $750 and would be the choice for the serious gamers (or mobile workstation).
Actually I'd love to see some slim bezel 17" 1080p laptops too, there are a lot of people who want/need a bigger screen but the only options are huge, heavy, and expensive.
If/when Intel gets 10nm or smaller yields to the point they can start making discount CPUs, then dual-core CPUs (even in U/Y series SKUs) will essentially die off, I'd bet. I'd expect the next generation chip for that market space is either something like Lakefield or a pure-Tremont quad-core.
Problem with the AMD NUCs are that they are likely to not have thunderbolt support. The intel graphics is plenty for media playback, but, with external graphics, the NUCs can be true gaming machines. AMD NUCs are only good up to light gaming. Until AMD support thunderbolt or the next version of USB that has this baked in, I wouldn’t recommend AMD NUCs unless enterprise or home server.
The problem with Intel at this point is the "buyer base" defends them giving the least possible for as high ASP as they seem they can get.
If they would DITCH low core count trash on anything but the very lowest denominator products (such as used in.. I don't know, calculators?) then they like AMD would be giving more cores and threads for a good cost with much less difference in total pci-e lane segregation among other things.
Intel can do "basic" graphics, they have been able to do this for a good while now, but AMD still "rules" for acceptable GAMING grade performance (when not shafted by various OEM/AIB whatever you want to call them) using bare minimum single stick or mix single and dual stick RAM.
IMO. Intel truly needs to "come to the future" stop worrying so much about binning the crud out of all their chips (unless specific market has no other need for such) i.e netbook (no need for uber performance) for the rest, I am sure with their "market leading designs" they can figure out a way to keep ACTUAL TDP low with a higher core AND thread count while keeping "on the shelf pricing" reasonable.
To each their own, they can do it, given seems like no matter what @#$!@# they pull they still record massive profits anyways...time to get with the times Intel as well as those whom buy their products, hell they should enact a "we buy back" program, so they can get all the yummy stuff from chips that are best off to be salvaged if they REALLY want to keep power use down, world wide.
> The CPUs will feature a configurable TDP-up of 25 W, so they will work at higher clocks all the time, thus providing decent levels of performance that one comes to expect from a desktop PC.
Comet Lake = 14 nm. Running 6 of those cores on just 25 W will not provide "decent levels of performance that one comes to expect from a desktop PC".
Some previous i7 NUCs have burned up to 28 W and maybe higher. So, this level of power consumption is not new to the platform.
They sound nice aside from the microphone spy BS. Hopefully someone will make a diagram of what to disable or remove from the PCB to physically turn that crap off. Don't trust software switches.
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
19 Comments
Back to Article
EliteRetard - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Really wish they would stop making dual core i3's.At the very least they should be 4 core 4 thread.
Reserve these junk CPUs for the Pentium/Celeron line.
I also wish they had more cache on the i5 (8MB) and i3 (6MB)
I am glad to see a 6 core 12 thread option, though I really wish it had the 64 EU Iris graphics.
With an Iris GPU this should be used in laptops as a mid tier option between the U series (15w) and H series (45w). In fact I think this would be the best option for most people, I would absolutely recommend this over the U series (like the i7-1065G7, unless they needed absolute battery life/mobility) and over any of the H series laptops that all force an expensive power hungry DGPU that's only useful to gamers.
Jorgp2 - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
A 2c4t i3 has a higher perf/watt than a 4c4t.Do you mean a Comet Lake CPU with 64EUs?
That would be great, but would most likely be a Halo SKU with an L4
EliteRetard - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
I don't care if it's Ice Lake, Comet Lake, or whatever...I don't see why Intel can't combine all the desirable bits into one good CPU. The 64 EU Iris from Ice Lake looks good, even when stuck with a 4c/8t at 15w. I'd love to see that 64EU 4c/8t as a 25-30w i5 for laptops, with a 6c/12t as an i7. Yes, I think they need to have the 64EU option on the i5 (it should be the only option for the i5 and up).Intel would really do well to have such a middle ground option. The U series laptops are only good for bare minimum tasks, but they fill every option and price point up until you hit the big heavy expensive gaming laptops. I know tons of people who have wanted/needed more grunt than a weak U series, and literally had no other option than to get gaming laptop they didn't really want/need.
In fact the U series chips are only good for the kind of people who can be served by sub $300 Chromebooks. For everyone else, they have to get a gaming laptop (or just suffer with a U series). I've always wished there were better options for the majority, and it finally looks like there are components that could make it possible.
mode_13h - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
> the U series chips are only good for the kind of people who can be served by sub $300 ChromebooksNo, there's still a pretty big difference, there. I have a Skylake U-series and an Apollo Lake, so I know what I'm talking about.
mode_13h - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
> I don't see why Intel can't combine all the desirable bits into one good CPU.Hmmm... cost & power consumption?
> The 64 EU Iris from Ice Lake looks good
Ice Lake is 10 nm, while this is 14 nm. I don't think it's an accident that they reserved the bigger GPU for the smaller node.
skavi - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
Ice Lake i5s can have 64 EU G7 graphics. Ice Lake U can also have up to a 28 watt TDP. (Probably near a 50W PL2.skavi - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
)AdditionalPylons - Tuesday, November 19, 2019 - link
Thanks!That reminds me of https://xkcd.com/859/
OFelix - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Yes, I've been waiting for this generation NUC and I'm very sad to see it doesn't have Iris graphicsEliteRetard - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Hmmm...Reading back over my post I don't think I made it clear why I wish to see the Iris IGP if they aren't "gamers". I think there's a large group of people who play "casual" games, that don't need a ton of GPU but suffer with terrible graphics/performance due to Intel's previously terrible IGPs. Stuff like Rocket League, Stardew Valley, Minecraft, LOL, DOTA, etc. Previously many of these games had to be run at 720p and/or lowest settings just to play. I think it would be great if they could run these kind of things at 1080p near 60FPS on an IGP with at least a few details turned up. This kind of IGP performance does seem possible now, it just needs to be offered in casual options.
I think this kind of 25w class CPU would be the best fit for casual $450-600 laptops and provide an excellent experience for most people (especially a 6 core + 64 EU Iris). Leave the U series for ultra-thin/light and convertible/tablet like devices...the bulky gaming laptops start at $750 and would be the choice for the serious gamers (or mobile workstation).
Actually I'd love to see some slim bezel 17" 1080p laptops too, there are a lot of people who want/need a bigger screen but the only options are huge, heavy, and expensive.
drothgery - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
If/when Intel gets 10nm or smaller yields to the point they can start making discount CPUs, then dual-core CPUs (even in U/Y series SKUs) will essentially die off, I'd bet. I'd expect the next generation chip for that market space is either something like Lakefield or a pure-Tremont quad-core.Great_Scott - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
It's good to see that Frost Canyon doesn't have Ice Lake.I wonder how many people they expect to fool with the "cold" product codenames?
nandnandnand - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
Who can bother keeping track of all the Lakes, Canyons, and Coves?Good thing AMD NUCs are coming.
chang3d - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
Problem with the AMD NUCs are that they are likely to not have thunderbolt support. The intel graphics is plenty for media playback, but, with external graphics, the NUCs can be true gaming machines. AMD NUCs are only good up to light gaming. Until AMD support thunderbolt or the next version of USB that has this baked in, I wouldn’t recommend AMD NUCs unless enterprise or home server.Dragonstongue - Saturday, November 16, 2019 - link
The problem with Intel at this point is the "buyer base" defends them giving the least possible for as high ASP as they seem they can get.If they would DITCH low core count trash on anything but the very lowest denominator products (such as used in.. I don't know, calculators?) then they like AMD would be giving more cores and threads for a good cost with much less difference in total pci-e lane segregation among other things.
Intel can do "basic" graphics, they have been able to do this for a good while now, but AMD still "rules" for acceptable GAMING grade performance (when not shafted by various OEM/AIB whatever you want to call them) using bare minimum single stick or mix single and dual stick RAM.
IMO. Intel truly needs to "come to the future" stop worrying so much about binning the crud out of all their chips (unless specific market has no other need for such) i.e netbook (no need for uber performance) for the rest, I am sure with their "market leading designs" they can figure out a way to keep ACTUAL TDP low with a higher core AND thread count while keeping "on the shelf pricing" reasonable.
To each their own, they can do it, given seems like no matter what @#$!@# they pull they still record massive profits anyways...time to get with the times Intel as well as those whom buy their products, hell they should enact a "we buy back" program, so they can get all the yummy stuff from chips that are best off to be salvaged if they REALLY want to keep power use down, world wide.
(^.^)
mode_13h - Friday, November 15, 2019 - link
> The CPUs will feature a configurable TDP-up of 25 W, so they will work at higher clocks all the time, thus providing decent levels of performance that one comes to expect from a desktop PC.Comet Lake = 14 nm. Running 6 of those cores on just 25 W will not provide "decent levels of performance that one comes to expect from a desktop PC".
Some previous i7 NUCs have burned up to 28 W and maybe higher. So, this level of power consumption is not new to the platform.
yacoub35 - Sunday, November 17, 2019 - link
They sound nice aside from the microphone spy BS. Hopefully someone will make a diagram of what to disable or remove from the PCB to physically turn that crap off. Don't trust software switches.flgt - Sunday, November 17, 2019 - link
Can these be run like a laptop configuration where you hook them to a USB-C monitor that also delivers power to the NUC?meacupla - Sunday, November 17, 2019 - link
For such a low power device, I'm surprised they didn't go with USB-C PD for power