I just want handling of 4 drives + NVME for boot. I really wish mobile parts were offered on desktop boards, even if they weren't socketed. I'd be fine with soldered to the board.
It happens every once in a while. Until recently I had a Biostar ITX board with a soldered-down Ivy Bridge i3. In my experience they tend to lag a little behind the latest and greatest tech, though.
Move all the guts into the lid, and leave the base for battery and keyboard only. That completely solves the problem with blocked air intakes when the laptop is used on a bed, and protects the battery from heat.
While ruining the balance of the device or making it heavy as a brick. A heavy top (screen) means it will tilt over unless the base counter-balances it. I think MS managed something with the convertibles where the screen detaches into a tablet but far from ideal and there's only so much you can do against physics even with smart hinges or moving the weight around before you make the laptop unwieldy.
One of the hindrances to get much better and cheaper webcams into laptops was that, integrated or not, they were usually connected to the system using a USB bus. Has Intel changed that here? It would be both great and high time for that change. Any cheapo selfie camera from a $ 200 smartphone usually beats the image quality of integrated laptop webcams, unless one looks at premium ultraportables and 2-in-1s like the Surface Book. So, long-winded way of asking: how is that AI-enhanced image processing getting the raw video data? Still on the USB bus, making all local stops?
That might be better than 2 P cores on a celeron. At least its a nice direction for celeron as a future celeron might be 1 P core with 8 E cores or 2 + 4.
It's gonna be much worse than the 2c celeron it replaces because it's at a 40% clock disadvantage. The problem is not 1+4 because the pentium above it is fine, the problem is Intel's artificial segmentation cutting out turbo combined with base clocks being much lower than prior gens.
Yes, but 4 E cores at roughly Skylake performance aren't exactly the horrible two core slow Atoms of yore. Those were dreadfully slow. Here, even those 1+4 slowpokes poke a lot faster.
I would love to see a review of the lowest-of-the-low end. Please, can we have the Snapdragon 700 series of the current mid-range, 800 series of yesterday's flagship phones, versus the Atoms of today's low end laptops and some ARM Chromebooks? Even historic comparisons to 10 years old laptops would be nice (you won't be able to test current devices and software, but just a reference point would be interesting) The "Anandtech Bench" is interesting, but is mostly x86 on Windows.
"4 E cores at roughly Skylake performance aren't exactly the horrible two core slow Atoms of yore" They'd be closer than you might think - Skylake performance at 1100Mhz is still painfully slow. I recently got rid of a system based around a Celeron 1037U, which is an Ivy Bridge dual-core with no HT and no turbo at 1.8Ghz. It ran like a wounded dog - and even with the cumulative improvements from Ivy to Haswell to Skylake, that would be faster on a per-core basis than this. Having more cores will help keep the system marginally responsive, but it'll slow down tremendously under any sort of load.
It all seems rather pointless given that disabling Turbo entirely has no yield benefits.
For those reading this thread: I'm currently on a 2-core, 4-thread i7-3520M with 16 GB of RAM and only CPU graphics. I've got Firefox with over 30 tabs currently on this page, Vivaldi with a dozen or so tabs currently on Gmail, two LibreOffice spreadsheets open, and a LibreOffice Writer document open, and an XTerm window open. Only Firefox and the Xterm are on this display. I just ran cpufreq-info with the following results:
2.18 GHz, 1.75 GHz, 1.54 GHz, and 1.49 GHz.
I don't know how well a 12th generation 1+4 core processor at 1.1 GHz max compares to my 3rd generation i7 at the frequencies above in terms of performance. But those who do know can figure it out.
Thank God there is AMD around. Now Intel have the best Desktop cpu and now the best Mobile SKU. Bet Intel willl be on time in 2023 with the refresh on a finer process thanks to the new two modules Ireland EUV FAB and the gigantic three modules EUV D1X FAB. No AMD? Coffee Lake since 2030. Competition is always very good.
intels igpu is horrible compared to amd 6000 for these low watt cpus, so intel is far from having the best moblie cpus. For desktop, zen 4 is coming this year already. Intel desktop is beating a 1.5 year old amd chips, not exactly promising for a company the size of intel, quite embarrassing actually.
AMD briefly had a higher market cap than Intel because the stock market is often somewhat disconnected from things like actual revenues and actual profits. Intel is a much, much bigger company than AMD.
You can evaluate a company's size by what the consensus is on the stock exchange market. You can also evaluate a company's size on its capacity to make things.
Intel can produce about 4-5 times as much as AMD. Their products might not be the first choice for some (or most), but if you can't pay your way into the... let's call it top 20% of the market, you can only buy Intel.
from what I have seen the 12700H is beating everything up to the 6900HS. It's likely these other mobile CPUs will do really well. When the part came out isn't that important. When new CPUs come from AMD there will be new CPUs from intel. It's what you can buy at the time that matters (Or what you're willing to wait for).
definition of beating... a benchmark for single and multicore? where you have a major heat and power consuming piece on your desk?.... just like on the desktop, they need lots of power to do so.
"Beating" when the TDP isn't constrained, yes. Power draw (so, noise and heat) is higher to attain that peak performance.
If you need that peak performance, Intel have you sorted. If you want something that's good all-around AMD have a compelling offering, and if you don't want to spend extra for a dGPU, AMD is the best game in town.
I basically agree about AMD's 6000 having a much better iGPU, but the question is whether the vast majority of buyers of such ultraportables actually use their iGPU for anything but office stuff and maybe occasional light online gaming. And for serious gamers, even the 12 RDNA2 CUs of Rembrandt aren't fast enough.
There's a huuuuuge world between "occasional light online gaming" and whatever "serious gamers" means these days, though. I think there are a lot of gamers would appreciate the possibility of having their work notebook suddenly become capable of 1080p gaming at decent frame-rates, and for people on a budget it's an absolute revelation.
Ever since llano we'v eheard the peanut gallery chant "ther eis no market for APUs with big iGPUs". Thankfully the market hasnt listened, because APUs have been selling like hotcakes.
the finer process is a marginal diffference vs a whole arch.. this arch is barely competitive with 1.5y old arch, tehy need to crank the voltage and uber turbo to get there...
I wonder if these are even going to be remotely competitive against ryzen 6000 Mobile igpu. From the initial benchmarks, it looks like amd new igpu is going to make intel cry with their subpar igpu. Intel, you need to do better.
They definitely won't be competitive with the 12 CU models, but they should be with the 6 CU models. I don't think anything is expected to change from Intel IGP wise until Meteor Lake (so 2023) sadly.
If history holds though the problem for consumers is that the 12 CU models will rarely appear in laptops without a discrete GPU. I hope they do, because it certainly sounds great.
They should appear in lenovo thinkbook. I have that with a ryzen 6 core 12 threads,but i know it was offered with 8 core and 16 threads. That system does not have a discrete gpu for the 15 inch or 14 inch models.
Correct, at the moment they basically only have 2 SKUs (8+12 and 6+6) divided into different power bins (HX, H, HS, U).
I agree that it's unfortunate - I was hoping for 8 or even 10 CUs on the cut-down parts. As it is, thee 6CU model's performance is still competitive with (slower than, most of the time, but hanging in there) Intel's high-end Xe, and it should match or beat out the models lower down the chain with disabled EUs.
I do wish they'd make a 6 core chip with the big iGPU. Would make for a nice dedicated 45w CPU for a laptop with no dGPU. As it is we use the 4800h and you have 8 cores with little to do.
Of favor used stuff from ebay or buy a console or just play games on their existing computer/tablet/phone/etc. Like you can literally run a video game on just about anything so there isn't exactly a compelling reason to create more ewaste by throwing money at new computer hardware unless you're also purchasing said hardware for other reasons. Gaming is, after all, a secondary reason to own computer equipment.
Those tests were for H CPUs with the full configuration of the iGPU. Those H cpus are often paired with discrete GPUs for gaming so it's somewhat useless. Most of the CPUs these will be up against won't have the full iGPU.
"Those H cpus are often paired with discrete GPUs for gaming so it's somewhat useless" A discrete GPU will "spread" the generated heat, allowing for better cooling. Also, you could deactivate the discrete GPU (on some devices) and get better battery life when not gaming.
Nice lineup from intel. Even the Celeron U parts get 8mb cache and 5 cores. Depends on pricing for these but solid designs all round. A usable for 2 years laptop for $300 sounds plausible. AMD will get less design wina as usual.
design wins? do you really believe builders are creating these designs based on specs of a system.... damn you are far behind in reality.... Intel just pays money to OEM to use there chips in stead of AMD, gives massive discounts and even ARC GPU for free in the combo just to get there things offered. That is what happens when you have large monopoly for a long time... you ditch competition out with money buying everything and giving money just to reduce competition sales.... and consumer is the one after the facts that is the damn... consumers are so blind, look at all these comments.
Not many of those "design wins" end up actually being sold in a large enough number to count. And many of these "design wins" are slightly re-hashed, existing devices.
Intel doesn't pay companies to use their products - that doesn't make sense. Intel's main source of revenue is from SELLING to those OEMs. By pay, do you mean sell to OEMs at a discount?
According to several interviews I've read/watched of people familiar with the industry, OEMs prefer Intel because OEMs want their hand held during the design process of a laptop and Intel provides better documentation, guidance, and consultation than AMD or Nvidia
Well, as an OEM you want reliability, supply on demand and price. Intel provides all of these. Don't think I am an intel fan, far from it (owner of a Rog Strix AMD advantage edition), but these parts look good. For me, the most important factor is pricing. The lowest end Pentium and Celeron will still be miles ahead of the atom chips intel hasn't upgraded for a decade now and we have no other alternative.
"Even the Celeron U parts get 8mb cache and 5 cores." Miserable performance at 1.1Ghz locked, though. It's garbage, but garbage with shiny numbers attached to make it sound less terrible.
Lakefield was a turd of a chip, and I fully expect every "1+4" arrangement to be similarly useless. 2+4 is the minimum to get something approaching a useful productivity device.
AMD will always get fewer design wins, as they can't produce as many chips.
I'll hold off judgement until reviews come out, considering Celeron last gen was 0+4, I think adding a P core to Celeron, as well as a new E core architecture (Gracemont vs Goldmont) will make for a decent chromebook / cheap laptop chip.
Sorry, but you don't know what really drives a CPU. The cache is an extremely important factor. These Celerons have up to now had only 2-3mb cache shared for all cores. Move that to 8 is massive performance uplift. The frequency is because these should be below 10w parts, they are not aimed at gaming, but potent enough to browse, watch YouTube, do some work and even play an older or less demanding game at 720p on a $150 mini pc
That PL2 difference is wild and unexplained between P vs U. Looks like U has *significantly* worse silicon binning? Or Intel “7” maintains Intel 10’s poor low-power scaling.
That's maximum turbo behavior which nobody has any clue what it will look like in practice. Chances are very high that all core boost clock on the 6P part will be much lower than that of the 2P part.
Running at base clock those parts will have their respective power consumption of 15W vs 28W.
64W and 55W are maximum power consumption when boosting over 4Ghz. at the 1.8Ghz/1.3Ghz clock speeds you listed there, they'd be operating at the the advertised 9W to 28W levels.
" Looks like U has *significantly* worse silicon binning" They might build them (or bin them) on a process tweaked towards low power consumption at low frequency, and damn the power consumption at high frequency.
Well, how can you actually measure the two nodes if there are no chips that have the same architecture, but built on both nodes? You can't. My Ryzen 3700X is built on TSMC 7nm. AlderLake is on Intel 7. Based on what I've seen, It seems like the two nodes are absolutely comparable. What makes you think the aren't?
Not very surprised they couldn't fit the 28W parts into the 15W TDP, given that 12700H with 6 P and 8 E runs at 45W with 2.1Ghz on the P cores and about 1.8Ghz on the E cores, so super super low frequencies. They need to work more on the efficiency.
Efficiency is a ratio of output vs input, not a measurement of power consumption. H series AlderLake is absolutely more efficient than Zen3+ when both are boosting to 75W.
It's less efficient when they're both at 50W and below, though. Swings and roundabouts, but personally I care more about <45W than >75W in a mobile platform.
My preferred mobile platform is ultra portables, so I agree with you there, but specifically H series is less efficient below 45W. P series or U series could be optimized for peak efficiency at these wattages below 40W, so we'll wait and see.
Even their 9W chips are a little too warm-running to be passively cooled. I wish Intel would put a little more effort into developing decent performing processors that don't need noisy fans. Phones have been doing it for ages and there is really no good reason for laptops to fail to get there. I mean sure we briefly had like Bay Trail and successors that don't need fans, but those are not getting a lot of attention from Intel which is a shame since they make for the best laptops where creativity is concerned (creative thinking I mean, not that silly "creators" marketing category used as a catch-all for people that upload junk to YouTube) due to the lack of any noise.
Honestly Intel has been designing chips that don't need to be passively cooled for a long time. I've undervolted the 8250u in my fall 2018 13.3"spectre and it used from 0.6w at idle to 6w at max load. It never goes above 2.5ghz with those constraints, but things still run at an acceptable speed even moving from the 5900x in my gaming PC. If you set those 9w chips to 95% in power management I don't doubt you you'd be able to run passively even under Windows 11.
Hi Ryan and Ian, this typo slipped past the editor: "Bringing up the rear is the Core i3-1220P, which offers only two efficiency cores and eight performance cores." Eight performance cores; that's an i3 worth buying! And, imagine what the i7 of that family would look like. Unless this was a preview of mobile Meteor Lake😁
OMG what the hell is going on at this site, not visited for a few months as frankly it was way too biased towards Intel, visit Today and its a whole front page virtually of Intel marketing blurbs, I remember the Days this used to be my go to site for informed and unbiased opinions, what a joke someones obviously had a decent advertising budget thrown there way
My proof of Bias? AMD Today announced the release of the Epyc Milan X processor before Month end, which will of course open the 5800x3d claimed to be the fastest games processor available, the Milan x is said to be head and shoulders above other Epyc processors which in themselves are already the fastest server CPUs, whats wrong Anandtech is it not made by Intel and therefore not worthy of coverage Pathetic
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
94 Comments
Back to Article
adt6247 - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Man, I'd LOVE to be able to get an i3-1210U or Pentium 8500 on an ITX motherboard so I could build a fileserver out of it.dontlistentome - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Or the i3-1220p - idle will be the same, but the extra turbo will be useful.mATX for me - would need 2 PCIe slots for a 10G SFP+ card and a 24x SATA card.
adt6247 - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
I just want handling of 4 drives + NVME for boot. I really wish mobile parts were offered on desktop boards, even if they weren't socketed. I'd be fine with soldered to the board.drothgery - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
NUC?Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
It happens every once in a while. Until recently I had a Biostar ITX board with a soldered-down Ivy Bridge i3. In my experience they tend to lag a little behind the latest and greatest tech, though.TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
You can easily buy an i3 and underclock/undervolt it to 15w levels if you really dont want the power draw.DannyH246 - Friday, February 25, 2022 - link
LOL - last 7 major articles all Intel marketing. Remember when this site used to actually review stuff.Interu wa shinde iru - Friday, March 4, 2022 - link
couldn't agree with you more!Schugy - Saturday, March 5, 2022 - link
You nailed it.Interu wa shinde iru - Friday, March 4, 2022 - link
taking marketing to the forums? whaddup intel? ^-^jho1670 - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Not sure I need a 1080p webcam. I need a camera with an image sensor that performs better in low[er] light conditions.ikjadoon - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
And even that is not a requirement. Make the lids thicker, you cowards. Spend a bit here.People have been complaining about laptop webcams for half a decade and most $3000 Windows & macOS laptops are willing to spare us the embarrassment.
I’d happily take a thicker nudge at the rear to house the camera module—I never look at the back of my laptop.
Notebookcheck’s testing shows terrible delta E values, as well.
ikjadoon - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
*are not willingvegemeister - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Move all the guts into the lid, and leave the base for battery and keyboard only. That completely solves the problem with blocked air intakes when the laptop is used on a bed, and protects the battery from heat.at_clucks - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
While ruining the balance of the device or making it heavy as a brick. A heavy top (screen) means it will tilt over unless the base counter-balances it. I think MS managed something with the convertibles where the screen detaches into a tablet but far from ideal and there's only so much you can do against physics even with smart hinges or moving the weight around before you make the laptop unwieldy.Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"I’d happily take a thicker nudge at the rear to house the camera module"Same here. Would make a nice ergonomic touch point for opening the lid, too.
eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
One of the hindrances to get much better and cheaper webcams into laptops was that, integrated or not, they were usually connected to the system using a USB bus. Has Intel changed that here? It would be both great and high time for that change. Any cheapo selfie camera from a $ 200 smartphone usually beats the image quality of integrated laptop webcams, unless one looks at premium ultraportables and 2-in-1s like the Surface Book. So, long-winded way of asking: how is that AI-enhanced image processing getting the raw video data? Still on the USB bus, making all local stops?ikjadoon - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Aren't most webcams connected via a USB bus, e.g., the 4K Logitech Brio?What's the hindrance with USB, out of curiosity?
TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
USB was a hinderance for HD videoIf you were using 1.1.
alfalfacat - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Those Celeron parts sound incredibly painful, locked to 1.1GHz base clock on a single big core when Tiger Lake got you 1.8GHz on a dual core.shabby - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Didn't think we'd be back to "single" core cpus but here we are.heffeque - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
I see 5 cores (1+4), or am I reading the table wrong?shabby - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
The table is right, but it's still a single performance core.Azix - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
That might be better than 2 P cores on a celeron. At least its a nice direction for celeron as a future celeron might be 1 P core with 8 E cores or 2 + 4.alfalfacat - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
It's gonna be much worse than the 2c celeron it replaces because it's at a 40% clock disadvantage. The problem is not 1+4 because the pentium above it is fine, the problem is Intel's artificial segmentation cutting out turbo combined with base clocks being much lower than prior gens.Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
This. People underestimate how much a lack of turbo hurts. The second a few Windows updates kick off, boom, there go all your cycles.eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Yes, but 4 E cores at roughly Skylake performance aren't exactly the horrible two core slow Atoms of yore. Those were dreadfully slow. Here, even those 1+4 slowpokes poke a lot faster.Calin - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
I would love to see a review of the lowest-of-the-low end.Please, can we have the Snapdragon 700 series of the current mid-range, 800 series of yesterday's flagship phones, versus the Atoms of today's low end laptops and some ARM Chromebooks?
Even historic comparisons to 10 years old laptops would be nice (you won't be able to test current devices and software, but just a reference point would be interesting)
The "Anandtech Bench" is interesting, but is mostly x86 on Windows.
Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"4 E cores at roughly Skylake performance aren't exactly the horrible two core slow Atoms of yore"They'd be closer than you might think - Skylake performance at 1100Mhz is still painfully slow.
I recently got rid of a system based around a Celeron 1037U, which is an Ivy Bridge dual-core with no HT and no turbo at 1.8Ghz. It ran like a wounded dog - and even with the cumulative improvements from Ivy to Haswell to Skylake, that would be faster on a per-core basis than this. Having more cores will help keep the system marginally responsive, but it'll slow down tremendously under any sort of load.
It all seems rather pointless given that disabling Turbo entirely has no yield benefits.
bob27 - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
For those reading this thread: I'm currently on a 2-core, 4-thread i7-3520M with 16 GB of RAM and only CPU graphics. I've got Firefox with over 30 tabs currently on this page, Vivaldi with a dozen or so tabs currently on Gmail, two LibreOffice spreadsheets open, and a LibreOffice Writer document open, and an XTerm window open. Only Firefox and the Xterm are on this display. I just ran cpufreq-info with the following results:2.18 GHz, 1.75 GHz, 1.54 GHz, and 1.49 GHz.
I don't know how well a 12th generation 1+4 core processor at 1.1 GHz max compares to my 3rd generation i7 at the frequencies above in terms of performance. But those who do know can figure it out.
StevoLincolnite - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Not wrong... Just misunderstood the posters comment.Samus - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
I thought the same thing back at CES when they announced the turbo-less Celeron. 1.1GHz in 2022. Yikes.Gondalf - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Thank God there is AMD around. Now Intel have the best Desktop cpu and now the best Mobile SKU. Bet Intel willl be on time in 2023 with the refresh on a finer process thanks to the new two modules Ireland EUV FAB and the gigantic three modules EUV D1X FAB. No AMD? Coffee Lake since 2030.Competition is always very good.
GoldenBullet - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
intels igpu is horrible compared to amd 6000 for these low watt cpus, so intel is far from having the best moblie cpus. For desktop, zen 4 is coming this year already. Intel desktop is beating a 1.5 year old amd chips, not exactly promising for a company the size of intel, quite embarrassing actually.hemedans - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Amd is bigger than Intel though, since they Acquire Xilinxdrothgery - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
AMD briefly had a higher market cap than Intel because the stock market is often somewhat disconnected from things like actual revenues and actual profits. Intel is a much, much bigger company than AMD.Wereweeb - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Lmao.Calin - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
You can evaluate a company's size by what the consensus is on the stock exchange market.You can also evaluate a company's size on its capacity to make things.
Intel can produce about 4-5 times as much as AMD. Their products might not be the first choice for some (or most), but if you can't pay your way into the... let's call it top 20% of the market, you can only buy Intel.
ikjadoon - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Alder Lake is beating 1-year old AMD CPUs…Zen3: Nov 2020
Alder Lake: Nov 2021
10nm’s embarrassing half decade doesn’t mean Alder Lake somehow released in April 2022. 🥲
//
I’m hoping AMD 6000 is available in more 15W flagship laptops: Dell XPS, HP Spectre, Lenovo X1, etc. Every year, you gotta hunt for the random SKUs.
Azix - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
from what I have seen the 12700H is beating everything up to the 6900HS. It's likely these other mobile CPUs will do really well. When the part came out isn't that important. When new CPUs come from AMD there will be new CPUs from intel. It's what you can buy at the time that matters (Or what you're willing to wait for).duploxxx - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
definition of beating... a benchmark for single and multicore? where you have a major heat and power consuming piece on your desk?.... just like on the desktop, they need lots of power to do so.Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"Beating" when the TDP isn't constrained, yes. Power draw (so, noise and heat) is higher to attain that peak performance.If you need that peak performance, Intel have you sorted. If you want something that's good all-around AMD have a compelling offering, and if you don't want to spend extra for a dGPU, AMD is the best game in town.
zepi - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Yes, TSMC is ahead of Intel in process technology - AMD isn't even in the race.eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
I basically agree about AMD's 6000 having a much better iGPU, but the question is whether the vast majority of buyers of such ultraportables actually use their iGPU for anything but office stuff and maybe occasional light online gaming. And for serious gamers, even the 12 RDNA2 CUs of Rembrandt aren't fast enough.Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
There's a huuuuuge world between "occasional light online gaming" and whatever "serious gamers" means these days, though. I think there are a lot of gamers would appreciate the possibility of having their work notebook suddenly become capable of 1080p gaming at decent frame-rates, and for people on a budget it's an absolute revelation.TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Ever since llano we'v eheard the peanut gallery chant "ther eis no market for APUs with big iGPUs". Thankfully the market hasnt listened, because APUs have been selling like hotcakes.Calin - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
" Intel desktop is beating a 1.5 year old amd chips,"Great improvement considering the situation a couple of years ago though.
duploxxx - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
keep dreaming Gondalf: https://www.newegg.com/d/Best-Sellers/Processors-D...nr 1-2 and 4 still AMD based...
the finer process is a marginal diffference vs a whole arch.. this arch is barely competitive with 1.5y old arch, tehy need to crank the voltage and uber turbo to get there...
GoldenBullet - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
I wonder if these are even going to be remotely competitive against ryzen 6000 Mobile igpu. From the initial benchmarks, it looks like amd new igpu is going to make intel cry with their subpar igpu. Intel, you need to do better.thestryker - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
They definitely won't be competitive with the 12 CU models, but they should be with the 6 CU models. I don't think anything is expected to change from Intel IGP wise until Meteor Lake (so 2023) sadly.If history holds though the problem for consumers is that the 12 CU models will rarely appear in laptops without a discrete GPU. I hope they do, because it certainly sounds great.
GoldenBullet - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
They should appear in lenovo thinkbook. I have that with a ryzen 6 core 12 threads,but i know it was offered with 8 core and 16 threads. That system does not have a discrete gpu for the 15 inch or 14 inch models.brucethemoose - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Only the top end (8 core, I believe) SKUs have the full 12CU GPU.Which is really unfortunate, TBH...
Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Correct, at the moment they basically only have 2 SKUs (8+12 and 6+6) divided into different power bins (HX, H, HS, U).I agree that it's unfortunate - I was hoping for 8 or even 10 CUs on the cut-down parts. As it is, thee 6CU model's performance is still competitive with (slower than, most of the time, but hanging in there) Intel's high-end Xe, and it should match or beat out the models lower down the chain with disabled EUs.
TheinsanegamerN - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
I do wish they'd make a 6 core chip with the big iGPU. Would make for a nice dedicated 45w CPU for a laptop with no dGPU. As it is we use the 4800h and you have 8 cores with little to do.tkSteveFOX - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Those looking for gaming on a tight budget will favor amd for sure.PeachNCream - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Of favor used stuff from ebay or buy a console or just play games on their existing computer/tablet/phone/etc. Like you can literally run a video game on just about anything so there isn't exactly a compelling reason to create more ewaste by throwing money at new computer hardware unless you're also purchasing said hardware for other reasons. Gaming is, after all, a secondary reason to own computer equipment.supdawgwtfd - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"Gaming is, after all, a secondary reason to own computer equipment."That's your opinion...
Gaming is huge.
Azix - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Those tests were for H CPUs with the full configuration of the iGPU. Those H cpus are often paired with discrete GPUs for gaming so it's somewhat useless. Most of the CPUs these will be up against won't have the full iGPU.Calin - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"Those H cpus are often paired with discrete GPUs for gaming so it's somewhat useless"A discrete GPU will "spread" the generated heat, allowing for better cooling.
Also, you could deactivate the discrete GPU (on some devices) and get better battery life when not gaming.
tkSteveFOX - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Nice lineup from intel. Even the Celeron U parts get 8mb cache and 5 cores. Depends on pricing for these but solid designs all round.A usable for 2 years laptop for $300 sounds plausible.
AMD will get less design wina as usual.
duploxxx - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
design wins? do you really believe builders are creating these designs based on specs of a system.... damn you are far behind in reality.... Intel just pays money to OEM to use there chips in stead of AMD, gives massive discounts and even ARC GPU for free in the combo just to get there things offered. That is what happens when you have large monopoly for a long time... you ditch competition out with money buying everything and giving money just to reduce competition sales.... and consumer is the one after the facts that is the damn... consumers are so blind, look at all these comments.Calin - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Not many of those "design wins" end up actually being sold in a large enough number to count. And many of these "design wins" are slightly re-hashed, existing devices.kwohlt - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Intel doesn't pay companies to use their products - that doesn't make sense. Intel's main source of revenue is from SELLING to those OEMs. By pay, do you mean sell to OEMs at a discount?According to several interviews I've read/watched of people familiar with the industry, OEMs prefer Intel because OEMs want their hand held during the design process of a laptop and Intel provides better documentation, guidance, and consultation than AMD or Nvidia
tkSteveFOX - Friday, February 25, 2022 - link
Well, as an OEM you want reliability, supply on demand and price. Intel provides all of these. Don't think I am an intel fan, far from it (owner of a Rog Strix AMD advantage edition), but these parts look good. For me, the most important factor is pricing.The lowest end Pentium and Celeron will still be miles ahead of the atom chips intel hasn't upgraded for a decade now and we have no other alternative.
Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"Even the Celeron U parts get 8mb cache and 5 cores."Miserable performance at 1.1Ghz locked, though. It's garbage, but garbage with shiny numbers attached to make it sound less terrible.
Lakefield was a turd of a chip, and I fully expect every "1+4" arrangement to be similarly useless. 2+4 is the minimum to get something approaching a useful productivity device.
AMD will always get fewer design wins, as they can't produce as many chips.
kwohlt - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
I'll hold off judgement until reviews come out, considering Celeron last gen was 0+4, I think adding a P core to Celeron, as well as a new E core architecture (Gracemont vs Goldmont) will make for a decent chromebook / cheap laptop chip.tkSteveFOX - Friday, February 25, 2022 - link
Sorry, but you don't know what really drives a CPU. The cache is an extremely important factor. These Celerons have up to now had only 2-3mb cache shared for all cores. Move that to 8 is massive performance uplift. The frequency is because these should be below 10w parts, they are not aimed at gaming, but potent enough to browse, watch YouTube, do some work and even play an older or less demanding game at 720p on a $150 mini pcikjadoon - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
That PL2 difference is wild and unexplained between P vs U. Looks like U has *significantly* worse silicon binning? Or Intel “7” maintains Intel 10’s poor low-power scaling.64W P-series = 6x P-core @ 1.8 GHz + 8x E-core @ 1.3 GHz
55W U-series: 2x P-core @ 1.8 GHz + 8x E-core @ 1.3GHz
9W gains you three times more P-cores. Sheesh.
brantron - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Same GPU. Playing a game is about the only scenario where a power level like that would be sustained.Run something unrealistic in a loop, like Javascript benchmarks, and you wouldn't see half that.
thestryker - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
That's maximum turbo behavior which nobody has any clue what it will look like in practice. Chances are very high that all core boost clock on the 6P part will be much lower than that of the 2P part.Running at base clock those parts will have their respective power consumption of 15W vs 28W.
kwohlt - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
64W and 55W are maximum power consumption when boosting over 4Ghz. at the 1.8Ghz/1.3Ghz clock speeds you listed there, they'd be operating at the the advertised 9W to 28W levels.Calin - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
" Looks like U has *significantly* worse silicon binning"They might build them (or bin them) on a process tweaked towards low power consumption at low frequency, and damn the power consumption at high frequency.
Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Bit of both. U is no longer the premium mobile range. Those 8 E cores take a fair slice of power, too.jutre - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Amazing to read an article on new CPUs with no reference to the photolithography process node. As if it wasn’t the elephant in the Intel room.Drumsticks - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Alder Lake has been known to be shipping on Intel7 (previously 10nm, equivalent to TSMC n7) for months now. What news is there to bring up about it?supdawgwtfd - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"equivalent"Hehehehe
kwohlt - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Well, how can you actually measure the two nodes if there are no chips that have the same architecture, but built on both nodes? You can't. My Ryzen 3700X is built on TSMC 7nm. AlderLake is on Intel 7. Based on what I've seen, It seems like the two nodes are absolutely comparable. What makes you think the aren't?Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
It's finally gotten close, now, in the final iteration. Took a while, though, and they've been lying about the density for some time.yeeeeman - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Not very surprised they couldn't fit the 28W parts into the 15W TDP, given that 12700H with 6 P and 8 E runs at 45W with 2.1Ghz on the P cores and about 1.8Ghz on the E cores, so super super low frequencies. They need to work more on the efficiency.milli - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Base clocks ≠ all-core turbokwohlt - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"They need to work more on the efficiency."Efficiency is a ratio of output vs input, not a measurement of power consumption. H series AlderLake is absolutely more efficient than Zen3+ when both are boosting to 75W.
Spunjji - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
It's less efficient when they're both at 50W and below, though. Swings and roundabouts, but personally I care more about <45W than >75W in a mobile platform.kwohlt - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
My preferred mobile platform is ultra portables, so I agree with you there, but specifically H series is less efficient below 45W. P series or U series could be optimized for peak efficiency at these wattages below 40W, so we'll wait and see.PeachNCream - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Even their 9W chips are a little too warm-running to be passively cooled. I wish Intel would put a little more effort into developing decent performing processors that don't need noisy fans. Phones have been doing it for ages and there is really no good reason for laptops to fail to get there. I mean sure we briefly had like Bay Trail and successors that don't need fans, but those are not getting a lot of attention from Intel which is a shame since they make for the best laptops where creativity is concerned (creative thinking I mean, not that silly "creators" marketing category used as a catch-all for people that upload junk to YouTube) due to the lack of any noise.Dizoja86 - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Honestly Intel has been designing chips that don't need to be passively cooled for a long time. I've undervolted the 8250u in my fall 2018 13.3"spectre and it used from 0.6w at idle to 6w at max load. It never goes above 2.5ghz with those constraints, but things still run at an acceptable speed even moving from the 5900x in my gaming PC. If you set those 9w chips to 95% in power management I don't doubt you you'd be able to run passively even under Windows 11.eastcoast_pete - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Hi Ryan and Ian, this typo slipped past the editor:"Bringing up the rear is the Core i3-1220P, which offers only two efficiency cores and eight performance cores." Eight performance cores; that's an i3 worth buying! And, imagine what the i7 of that family would look like. Unless this was a preview of mobile Meteor Lake😁
Ryan Smith - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Thanks!supdawgwtfd - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
Concreate.Thie.
They company.
ksec - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
Saw Dr. Ian Cutress's name on the article. Some one save it and sell it as NFT LoLuefi - Wednesday, February 23, 2022 - link
As long as they don't embed Microsoft's Pluton on chip DRM, it'll be infinitely better than AMD's pozzed 6000.gizmo23 - Thursday, February 24, 2022 - link
"Intel is expecting the bulk of P series laptops (and virtually all U series) to stick with integrated graphics."That Evo spec has "Optional Intel Arc discrete graphics "
Does that mean Intel's Arc are going to use fewer PCI lanes? Use less power?
mervesarkaya - Wednesday, March 2, 2022 - link
i cant wait to have italufan - Thursday, March 3, 2022 - link
OMG what the hell is going on at this site, not visited for a few months as frankly it was way too biased towards Intel, visit Today and its a whole front page virtually of Intel marketing blurbs, I remember the Days this used to be my go to site for informed and unbiased opinions, what a joke someones obviously had a decent advertising budget thrown there wayalufan - Friday, March 4, 2022 - link
My proof of Bias?AMD Today announced the release of the Epyc Milan X processor before Month end, which will of course open the 5800x3d claimed to be the fastest games processor available, the Milan x is said to be head and shoulders above other Epyc processors which in themselves are already the fastest server CPUs, whats wrong Anandtech is it not made by Intel and therefore not worthy of coverage
Pathetic