Patriot Viper V765 Keyboard Review
Combo deal: Office 2016 Pro and W10 for $34
Shadow of the Tomb Raider: RTX and DLSS Update
ASUS RT-AX88U (AX6000) router review
The Division 2: PC graphics performance benchmark review
URCDkey Spring Sale(up to 86% off) Windows 10 Pro $11
MSI GeForce GTX 1660 Gaming X review
MSI GeForce GTX 1660 VENTUS XS 6G OC review
Palit GeForce GTX 1660 StormX OC review
Corsair Crystal 680X PC Chassis Review
Core i3 8130U (Kaby Lake-R) won't get four cores but does get a turbo
Notebooks and laptops with a Kaby Lake-R generation Core i3/i5 CPU are available. The new budget Core i3 Kaby Lake-R sticks towards two cores, however, there is something new going on, this proc receives a wide Turbo range.
LaptopMedia claims that the Intel Core i3 8130U will be a two core part with HyperThreading (thus four threads). However, Intel would make use of a turbo that can run up towards 3.4 GHz. Which is a first for this laptop series Core i3 procs. The base frequency would be 2.2 GHz with that Turbo boost towards 3.4 GHz. 4MB cache present and the iGPU used is a UHD Graphics 620 with clock clocks at 300 to 1000 MHz. The TDP of the Core i3 8130U is mentioned to be 10 to 15 watt but can be defined by the laptop manufacturer.
| Intel Core i3-8130U | Intel Core i3-7130U | |
| Cores | 2 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock | 2.2 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Turbo | 3.4 GHz | – |
| LL cache | 4MB | 3MB |
| iGPU | Intel UHD Graphics 620 | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
| GPU frequency | 300-1000 MHz | 300-1000 MHz |
| TDP | 10-15W | 7.5-15W |
Tweaker mods Z170 motherboard and gets Core i3 8350 (Coffee Lake) working - 12/04/2017 04:11 PM
Ever since the very beginning, we have been mentioning that Z370 is not that different from Z270 in terms of processors that could be supported. Well, an Asia based tweaker dropped that down a notch m...
Core i3 8300 with Four Cores and Eight Threads Spotted - 08/03/2017 08:38 AM
We've stated a couple of times already that AMD is stirring up the market on every segment with a processor. The recent Ryzen 3 series for example are all quad-core processors, historically Intel alw...
Acer Launches C720 Chromebook with Intel Core i3 Processor - 07/11/2014 07:48 AM
Acer launches an industry's first Chromebook model using a 4th Generation Intel Core i3 processor. The award-winning Acer C720 Chromebook is now available in two models powered by the Intel Core i3 p...
Intel Haswell-E released in September Core i3 and Pentiums 20 july - 06/22/2014 02:38 PM
Some new info appeared on the much awaited Haswell-E lineup, a document leaked indicating that Haswell-E will be released in September and new Core i3 and Pentiums CPUs on July the 20th. Recently w...
Intel to cut Core i3 Ivy Bridge pricing? - 07/06/2012 10:58 AM
X-bit Labs explains that that Intel slashed the pricing of some of its ultra low-voltage processors by just over 10 percent to spur adoption of ultrabooks: All-in-all, Intel has reportedly decided to...
rl66
Senior Member
Posts: 1926
Joined: 2007-05-31
Senior Member
Posts: 1926
Joined: 2007-05-31
#5505538 Posted on: 12/30/2017 12:53 PM
Nice W... too bad it's not 4 real core when Atom have 4 core, but Atom seem more expensive and more for server.
Nice W... too bad it's not 4 real core when Atom have 4 core, but Atom seem more expensive and more for server.
Ricepudding
Senior Member
Posts: 445
Joined: 2017-02-17
Senior Member
Posts: 445
Joined: 2017-02-17
#5505553 Posted on: 12/30/2017 02:01 PM
This seems to be more about power than anything, guess it would depend if someone wants a higher clocked dual core or a lower clocked quad core.
Atom tend to be lower clock speeds too dont they?
This seems to be more about power than anything, guess it would depend if someone wants a higher clocked dual core or a lower clocked quad core.
Nice W... too bad it's not 4 real core when Atom have 4 core, but Atom seem more expensive and more for server.
Atom tend to be lower clock speeds too dont they?
airbud7
Senior Member
Posts: 6565
Joined: 2011-07-20
Senior Member
Posts: 6565
Joined: 2011-07-20
#5505559 Posted on: 12/30/2017 02:33 PM
3.4 turbo...that's fast for a laptop/ nice.
throw in a ssd and Zoom!
3.4 turbo...that's fast for a laptop/ nice.
throw in a ssd and Zoom!
DLD
Senior Member
Posts: 777
Joined: 2002-09-14
Senior Member
Posts: 777
Joined: 2002-09-14
#5505589 Posted on: 12/30/2017 05:57 PM
Unacceptable. Laptop, mobile telephone or whatever, dual core is simply the thing of the past. Greedy bastards want to shrink what they sell to you, and even at a higher price. Intel seems to be touching the bottom of the gutter, in terms of decency/fair play towards their customers. But what really makes me sad is the response of the people - interesting how people will readily swallow just about anything and everything they're served with. Resignation of the "OK, could have been even worse than this, at least they let us breathe, for the time being" type.
Unacceptable. Laptop, mobile telephone or whatever, dual core is simply the thing of the past. Greedy bastards want to shrink what they sell to you, and even at a higher price. Intel seems to be touching the bottom of the gutter, in terms of decency/fair play towards their customers. But what really makes me sad is the response of the people - interesting how people will readily swallow just about anything and everything they're served with. Resignation of the "OK, could have been even worse than this, at least they let us breathe, for the time being" type.
Fender178
Senior Member
Posts: 3656
Joined: 2004-09-28
Senior Member
Posts: 3656
Joined: 2004-09-28
#5505641 Posted on: 12/30/2017 10:34 PM
While this CPU is good and all with 3.4GHZ turbo core but why waste money on a laptop with those Kaby Lake -R cpus when Coffee Lake is out and Coffee Lake has true Quad Core i3s in the laptop market. Makes no sense. I think Intel has the same mindset as Nvidia with the GTX 1060 5GB.
While this CPU is good and all with 3.4GHZ turbo core but why waste money on a laptop with those Kaby Lake -R cpus when Coffee Lake is out and Coffee Lake has true Quad Core i3s in the laptop market. Makes no sense. I think Intel has the same mindset as Nvidia with the GTX 1060 5GB.
MM10X
Senior Member
Posts: 4237
Joined: 2008-08-21
Senior Member
Posts: 4237
Joined: 2008-08-21
#5505647 Posted on: 12/30/2017 10:50 PM
I'm very happy with the 5250u in my laptop, 2 cores is plenty for the majority of users.
I'm very happy with the 5250u in my laptop, 2 cores is plenty for the majority of users.
sykozis
Senior Member
Posts: 20812
Joined: 2008-07-14
Senior Member
Posts: 20812
Joined: 2008-07-14
#5505648 Posted on: 12/30/2017 10:55 PM
Most of the people that end up with these processors are people like me that are simply looking for a cheap laptop that can browse the web and check e-mail. They're not looking for gaming systems or productivity systems. For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine. Not every activity requires a quad core processor.
I'm perfectly happy with my i3 380m and i3 7100u. Both serve their purposes flawlessly.
How much processing power do you really need to browse forums on the internet and manage e-mail?
Unacceptable. Laptop, mobile telephone or whatever, dual core is simply the thing of the past. Greedy bastards want to shrink what they sell to you, and even at a higher price. Intel seems to be touching the bottom of the gutter, in terms of decency/fair play towards their customers. But what really makes me sad is the response of the people - interesting how people will readily swallow just about anything and everything they're served with. Resignation of the "OK, could have been even worse than this, at least they let us breathe, for the time being" type.
Most of the people that end up with these processors are people like me that are simply looking for a cheap laptop that can browse the web and check e-mail. They're not looking for gaming systems or productivity systems. For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine. Not every activity requires a quad core processor.
I'm very happy with the 5250u in my laptop, 2 cores is plenty for the majority of users.
I'm perfectly happy with my i3 380m and i3 7100u. Both serve their purposes flawlessly.
How much processing power do you really need to browse forums on the internet and manage e-mail?
CrazY_Milojko
Senior Member
Posts: 1985
Joined: 2013-02-26
Senior Member
Posts: 1985
Joined: 2013-02-26
#5505664 Posted on: 12/31/2017 12:15 AM
Most of the people that end up with these processors are people like me that are simply looking for a cheap laptop that can browse the web and check e-mail. They're not looking for gaming systems or productivity systems. For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine. Not every activity requires a quad core processor.
I'm perfectly happy with my i3 380m and i3 7100u. Both serve their purposes flawlessly.
How much processing power do you really need to browse forums on the internet and manage e-mail?
^^^ this. For my needs laptops using 2c/4t Core i3 are more than powefull enough since first itteration of mobile Core i3 CPUs and I do prefer those Core i3 laptops without additional GPU: Intel HD is more than enough for my needs while using laptop: when I want more CPU/GPU power or to game I fire up some of my gaming desktops, ups, I don't game anymore so I just sit down next to one of my kids and watch them play
Good thing about those Core i3 2c/4t CPU's is that they don't heat up much (those U gen versions almost none) and aren't power hungry. That being said laptop battery lasts significantly longer on these Core i3 compared to it's biger Core brothers.
This week I got for testing purposes one brand new HP Pavilion running Core i7-7700HQ, 2x 4GB DDR4 2400 (upgraded to 2x 8GB 2400), 256GB NVMe SSD + 1TB HDD 7200rpm, GeForce GTX1050, 1080p screen.. and hands down this thing is blazing fast thanks to that beasty CPU and NVMe 256GB SSD but... But I hate it! Battery lasts between 2.5 and 3 hours doing usual stuff: browsing internet, music, movies... and doing the same at my 2 years old Core i3 laptop battery lasts at least 4.5, mostly 5 hours of constant use. Worst thing is that I can't remove battery from this damn HP 7700HQ laptop when I want to run it on AC without complete dissasemble it (not that complicated tho). Thanks but no thanks, I'm keeping my Core i3....
Most of the people that end up with these processors are people like me that are simply looking for a cheap laptop that can browse the web and check e-mail. They're not looking for gaming systems or productivity systems. For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine. Not every activity requires a quad core processor.
I'm perfectly happy with my i3 380m and i3 7100u. Both serve their purposes flawlessly.
How much processing power do you really need to browse forums on the internet and manage e-mail?
^^^ this. For my needs laptops using 2c/4t Core i3 are more than powefull enough since first itteration of mobile Core i3 CPUs and I do prefer those Core i3 laptops without additional GPU: Intel HD is more than enough for my needs while using laptop: when I want more CPU/GPU power or to game I fire up some of my gaming desktops, ups, I don't game anymore so I just sit down next to one of my kids and watch them play
Good thing about those Core i3 2c/4t CPU's is that they don't heat up much (those U gen versions almost none) and aren't power hungry. That being said laptop battery lasts significantly longer on these Core i3 compared to it's biger Core brothers.This week I got for testing purposes one brand new HP Pavilion running Core i7-7700HQ, 2x 4GB DDR4 2400 (upgraded to 2x 8GB 2400), 256GB NVMe SSD + 1TB HDD 7200rpm, GeForce GTX1050, 1080p screen.. and hands down this thing is blazing fast thanks to that beasty CPU and NVMe 256GB SSD but... But I hate it! Battery lasts between 2.5 and 3 hours doing usual stuff: browsing internet, music, movies... and doing the same at my 2 years old Core i3 laptop battery lasts at least 4.5, mostly 5 hours of constant use. Worst thing is that I can't remove battery from this damn HP 7700HQ laptop when I want to run it on AC without complete dissasemble it (not that complicated tho). Thanks but no thanks, I'm keeping my Core i3....
Fender178
Senior Member
Posts: 3656
Joined: 2004-09-28
Senior Member
Posts: 3656
Joined: 2004-09-28
#5505666 Posted on: 12/31/2017 12:27 AM
Unacceptable. Laptop, mobile telephone or whatever, dual core is simply the thing of the past. Greedy bastards want to shrink what they sell to you, and even at a higher price. Intel seems to be touching the bottom of the gutter, in terms of decency/fair play towards their customers. But what really makes me sad is the response of the people - interesting how people will readily swallow just about anything and everything they're served with. Resignation of the "OK, could have been even worse than this, at least they let us breathe, for the time being" type.
Well as every one said not every Laptop CPU needs to be a quadcore CPU a dual core with 4 threads is plenty of power for watching YouTube and surfing the web. Among other things.
Most of the people that end up with these processors are people like me that are simply looking for a cheap laptop that can browse the web and check e-mail. They're not looking for gaming systems or productivity systems. For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine. Not every activity requires a quad core processor.
I'm perfectly happy with my i3 380m and i3 7100u. Both serve their purposes flawlessly.
How much processing power do you really need to browse forums on the internet and manage e-mail?
I have an old HP laptop with a 1st generation dual core i7 with Linux mint installed and it runs like a champ. The only bottleneck of that PC would be having ony 6GB of RAM and getting access to the other RAM slot is not easy. With that laptop I was able to run 1080p videos @60 FPS just fine.
Unacceptable. Laptop, mobile telephone or whatever, dual core is simply the thing of the past. Greedy bastards want to shrink what they sell to you, and even at a higher price. Intel seems to be touching the bottom of the gutter, in terms of decency/fair play towards their customers. But what really makes me sad is the response of the people - interesting how people will readily swallow just about anything and everything they're served with. Resignation of the "OK, could have been even worse than this, at least they let us breathe, for the time being" type.
Well as every one said not every Laptop CPU needs to be a quadcore CPU a dual core with 4 threads is plenty of power for watching YouTube and surfing the web. Among other things.
Most of the people that end up with these processors are people like me that are simply looking for a cheap laptop that can browse the web and check e-mail. They're not looking for gaming systems or productivity systems. For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine. Not every activity requires a quad core processor.
I'm perfectly happy with my i3 380m and i3 7100u. Both serve their purposes flawlessly.
How much processing power do you really need to browse forums on the internet and manage e-mail?
I have an old HP laptop with a 1st generation dual core i7 with Linux mint installed and it runs like a champ. The only bottleneck of that PC would be having ony 6GB of RAM and getting access to the other RAM slot is not easy. With that laptop I was able to run 1080p videos @60 FPS just fine.
rl66
Senior Member
Posts: 1926
Joined: 2007-05-31
Senior Member
Posts: 1926
Joined: 2007-05-31
#5505679 Posted on: 12/31/2017 02:17 AM
This seems to be more about power than anything, guess it would depend if someone wants a higher clocked dual core or a lower clocked quad core.
Atom tend to be lower clock speeds too dont they?
Yes around 1.95, they also have minimum graphic solution and memory limit... but it's 4 core and low powered CPU too.
I was wondering if the huge turbo mode of this I3 will be enough on Windows compared to a lower clocked 4 core's I3 that could have the same max "Wattage",
I think it would have been usefull for entry level laptop.
This seems to be more about power than anything, guess it would depend if someone wants a higher clocked dual core or a lower clocked quad core.
Atom tend to be lower clock speeds too dont they?
Yes around 1.95, they also have minimum graphic solution and memory limit... but it's 4 core and low powered CPU too.
I was wondering if the huge turbo mode of this I3 will be enough on Windows compared to a lower clocked 4 core's I3 that could have the same max "Wattage",
I think it would have been usefull for entry level laptop.
Aura89
Senior Member
Posts: 7066
Joined: 2008-07-31
Senior Member
Posts: 7066
Joined: 2008-07-31
#5505695 Posted on: 12/31/2017 03:37 AM
3.4 turbo...that's fast for a laptop/ nice.
throw in a ssd and Zoom!
There's Nothing "zoom" about two cores, no matter how fast they individually are.
For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine.
Nope. I got an i7 dual-core in the 6000 family i believe and that sucker is slow for pretty much everything. Sure, it can do single tasks generally just fine, but once you start doing multiple tasks, that thing just dies in performance. Essentially, considering your PC these days are always doing multiple tasks, that means to you have to boot it up and wait awhile to actually feel like it's of any decent speed.
Dual-core is a thing of the past, and people trying to make excuses, like you are, for why they still exist, are the problem.
In regards to this CPU, i'd rather a quad-core @ 1.2Ghz max each then this hunk of junk.
3.4 turbo...that's fast for a laptop/ nice.
throw in a ssd and Zoom!
There's Nothing "zoom" about two cores, no matter how fast they individually are.
For this purpose, a dual core with hyperthreading is perfectly fine.
Nope. I got an i7 dual-core in the 6000 family i believe and that sucker is slow for pretty much everything. Sure, it can do single tasks generally just fine, but once you start doing multiple tasks, that thing just dies in performance. Essentially, considering your PC these days are always doing multiple tasks, that means to you have to boot it up and wait awhile to actually feel like it's of any decent speed.
Dual-core is a thing of the past, and people trying to make excuses, like you are, for why they still exist, are the problem.
In regards to this CPU, i'd rather a quad-core @ 1.2Ghz max each then this hunk of junk.
DLD
Senior Member
Posts: 777
Joined: 2002-09-14
Senior Member
Posts: 777
Joined: 2002-09-14
#5505762 Posted on: 12/31/2017 12:42 PM
and people trying to make excuses, like you are
Spot on, Aura. There is something in a human being, you might call it a "slavish" instinct, a readiness to comply with and to obey to the "authorities", to those who hold (or pretend to be holding) the power. That instinct of the poor who is afraid of getting even poorer if he does not flatter the riches, etc. That's why we have such world we live in: compromise after compromise, finding excuses for our cowardice, finding excuses for the bullies, until it all gets f**ked up one fine day... That's why we have this "I-am-mister-know-it-all-and-can-do-anyting-I-want-and-the-rest-of-you-better-shut-up" policy of Intel and m$oft for many years now, among the other things.
gx-x
Senior Member
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2007-03-18
Senior Member
Posts: 1192
Joined: 2007-03-18
#5505763 Posted on: 12/31/2017 12:44 PM
There's Nothing "zoom" about two cores, no matter how fast they individually are.
Nope. I got an i7 dual-core in the 6000 family i believe and that sucker is slow for pretty much everything. Sure, it can do single tasks generally just fine, but once you start doing multiple tasks, that thing just dies in performance. Essentially, considering your PC these days are always doing multiple tasks, that means to you have to boot it up and wait awhile to actually feel like it's of any decent speed.
Dual-core is a thing of the past, and people trying to make excuses, like you are, for why they still exist, are the problem.
In regards to this CPU, i'd rather a quad-core @ 1.2Ghz max each then this hunk of junk.
That's strange. I remember having an i3-2100 (3.1GHz) and it handled just fine in multitasking (two different browser with open tabs, photoshop, illustrator alt-tabing copy paste etc). Your system must be bloated with junk or something, idk. :/ Have it checked. Perhaps you have facebook opened all the time. That bloatware is often the culprit of bad performance.
There's Nothing "zoom" about two cores, no matter how fast they individually are.
Nope. I got an i7 dual-core in the 6000 family i believe and that sucker is slow for pretty much everything. Sure, it can do single tasks generally just fine, but once you start doing multiple tasks, that thing just dies in performance. Essentially, considering your PC these days are always doing multiple tasks, that means to you have to boot it up and wait awhile to actually feel like it's of any decent speed.
Dual-core is a thing of the past, and people trying to make excuses, like you are, for why they still exist, are the problem.
In regards to this CPU, i'd rather a quad-core @ 1.2Ghz max each then this hunk of junk.
That's strange. I remember having an i3-2100 (3.1GHz) and it handled just fine in multitasking (two different browser with open tabs, photoshop, illustrator alt-tabing copy paste etc). Your system must be bloated with junk or something, idk. :/ Have it checked. Perhaps you have facebook opened all the time. That bloatware is often the culprit of bad performance.
Fender178
Senior Member
Posts: 3656
Joined: 2004-09-28
Senior Member
Posts: 3656
Joined: 2004-09-28
#5505782 Posted on: 12/31/2017 02:09 PM
and people trying to make excuses, like you are
Spot on, Aura. There is something in a human being, you might call it a "slavish" instinct, a readiness to comply with and to obey to the "authorities", to those who hold (or pretend to be holding) the power. That instinct of the poor who is afraid of getting even poorer if he does not flatter the riches, etc. That's why we have such world we live in: compromise after compromise, finding excuses for our cowardice, finding excuses for the bullies, until it all gets f**ked up one fine day... That's why we have this "I-am-mister-know-it-all-and-can-do-anyting-I-want-and-the-rest-of-you-better-shut-up" policy of Intel and m$oft for many years now, among the other things.
You have no idea what you are talking about. No one has claimed that they new it all. They are just posting from their personal experiences. Plus I see noone posting any excuses either. I see only troll postings like this one.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 180
Joined: 2017-09-10
Exciting stuff.....