Intel NUC 13 Pro (Arena Canyon) review
Endorfy Arx 700 Air chassis review
Beelink SER5 Pro (Ryzen 7 5800H) mini PC review
Crucial T700 PCIe 5.0 NVMe SSD Review - 12GB/s
Sapphire Radeon RX 7600 PULSE review
Gainward GeForce RTX 4060 Ti GHOST review
Radeon RX 7600 review
ASUS GeForce RTX 4060 Ti TUF Gaming review
MSI GeForce RTX 4060 Ti Gaming X TRIO review
GeForce RTX 4060 Ti 8GB (FE) review
Intel Makes Wireless AC 9560 A Bit More Embedded
It's been talked about for a while now, but Intel is slowly embedding AC WIFI to their processors. The first partially ones will get supported by Cannon Lake & Gemini Lake.
Intel has unveiled the Wireless 9560 (embedded on the processor side it is called 9520), this will be the first product with partially integrated WiFi. So it is not 100% integrated just yet, but many primary functions have been migrated into the CPU or the SoC or the PCH, which saves costs, space and energy reports computerbase.
An add-in module then can connect directly towards the processor, and that leaves out utilization of costly PCIe lanes. By moving the primary connections into the processor, over time it is expected that the WIFI solution will get cheaper. So basically the WLAN module no longer needs to be powered by a PCIe lane or USB, since the addressing is already done in the CPU or the SoC or chipset. The wireless AC-9560 adapter is therefore only a "companion module" for AC WIFI functionality, without it WIFI obviously does not work.
In addition to the regular M.2 2230 format, the bridge chip can also be obtained as 12 by 16 mm package module, saving more physical space on the PCB.
WaroDaBeast
Senior Member
Posts: 1963
Joined: 2004-12-03
Senior Member
Posts: 1963
Joined: 2004-12-03
#5466988 Posted on: 08/27/2017 08:57 PM
Ugh, embedded wifi. No thanks, Intel, I like to upgrade my computers.
Ugh, embedded wifi. No thanks, Intel, I like to upgrade my computers.
sykozis
Senior Member
Posts: 22472
Joined: 2008-07-14
Senior Member
Posts: 22472
Joined: 2008-07-14
#5467052 Posted on: 08/28/2017 12:46 AM
It is nice to see Intel trying to take over another market by forcing their wifi on people. I mean, personally, I prefer Intel based wifi adapters but this is taking things a bit too far. I prefer to be able to replace wifi adapters if/when they fail instead of having to replace processor and motherboard due to wifi failure.
You'll still be able to upgrade your computer. You'll just be stuck with whatever wifi spec Intel chooses.
It is nice to see Intel trying to take over another market by forcing their wifi on people. I mean, personally, I prefer Intel based wifi adapters but this is taking things a bit too far. I prefer to be able to replace wifi adapters if/when they fail instead of having to replace processor and motherboard due to wifi failure.
Ugh, embedded wifi. No thanks, Intel, I like to upgrade my computers.
You'll still be able to upgrade your computer. You'll just be stuck with whatever wifi spec Intel chooses.
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 7432
Joined: 2012-11-10
I'm not sure how I feel about this. Seems both great and not-so-great at the same time. It seems great because as long as they don't charge too much extra for this, it will make some platforms overall smaller and cheaper to manufacture. As long as proper drivers exist, it also guarantees a consistent experience (seriously, if anybody has dealt with setting up their own embedded system, wifi drivers can be a headache). I am a bit wary of this though: Intel's SoCs have been notoriously difficult to work with, especially Bay Trail. And yet Intel wonders why their embedded devices aren't successful...
I'm also wary because if anybody has ever felt a wifi chip, it gets pretty warm, especially under frequent operation. SoCs are already limited by heat and this is just contributing toward more. As another concern, wifi (at least in my experience) doesn't tend to last forever, which is likely correlated to the heat problem. Lifespan has improved a lot over the years, but it seems to have the shortest lifespan of any "solid state" PC technology, except for batteries and maybe LCD inverters.
Not that this affects my opinion of the product, but I don't understand is how Intel deemed this as being a cheaper option (keep in mind, they're mostly interested in what's cheaper for themselves, not so much the consumer). Wifi chipsets tends to operate at higher voltages than CPUs, but if it's part of the SoC then it's going to be stuck with whatever voltage the CPU is supplied. I'm assuming there must be an external amplifier, which as a result doesn't really simplify the motherboard design a whole lot, and results could vary a lot depending on the platform.
Ultimately what this really comes down to is who they're targeting. Intel pretty much dropped out of the phone market, which something like this would've been the most ideal for. If they want this to be more successful than Bay Trail, they need to help make this more accessible to platforms other than Windows. I think this product has potential but Intel always seems to screw up at least one really big thing when it comes to embedded devices. They could easily dominate the market but they don't understand their audience. Perhaps now they finally do?