GALAX HOF Pro PCIe 4.0 NVMe review
How to: Firmware Update the AMD Radeon RX 5600 XT
MSI Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming Z review
Sapphire Pulse Radeon RX 5600 XT OC review
ASUS STRIX Radeon RX 5600 XT TOP review
Gigabyte Radeon RX 5600 XT Gaming OC review
Arctic Liquid Freezer II 280 liquid cooler review
Promo: Windows 10 Pro licenses for under 10 USD
Team Group MP33 NVMe 512 GB SSD Review
ADATA SE800 1TB Portable SSD review
Intel Releases Specs Core i3 i3-8121U and it is 10nm Cannon Lake
It's a mobile CPU used in laptops but still, Intel has added the Core i3-8121U to its ARK website, and that is the first chip produced at 10nm. The Core i3-8121U is a dual-core processor with a 2.2 GHz base clock and 3.2 GHz Turbo ability. This is a Hyper-threading enabled SKU and thus offers work on four threads.
What's interesting is that it is a 10nm cannon lake processor, which indicates that Intel is ready to fab 10nm processors in bigger volumes. When it comes to pure specifications, the Core i3-8121U really isn't an improvement compared to the Core i3-8130U, made at 14nm. That is a variant with a GPU and a higher turbo speed of 3.4 GHz, the Core i3-8121U does not get an IGP. The proc a has a cache of 4 MB also, totally similar. Laptops that use the Core i3-8121U will this require an extra GPU, something like the Radeon RX 540. What is notable is that the Core i38121U supports lpddr4, ergo 16GB laptops are possible.
Thanks, SH SOTN for the news submit.
Intel reportedly suspends H310 supply on tight 14nm capacity - 05/09/2018 06:49 AM
Intel's new-generation H310 desktop processors fabricated on 14nm process reportedly have run out of supply in less than one month after the chipset was launched in early April 2018, with sources fro...
Intel Retires Kaby Lake-X-processors After launching them just 10 months ago - 05/01/2018 01:32 PM
Intel will be retiring their Kaby Lake-X-processors, the i5-7640X and i7-7740X where the outsiders on the X299 platform. That means that ten months after introducing them, both quad-core processors...
Intel Refreshes NUCs With Gemini Lake SoCs - 02/20/2018 09:03 AM
You've seen them, or maybe even have one yourself. The small NUC boxes that function as a low-cost Internet PC, an HTPC or simple PC for office usage. Intel is refreshing the existing lineup and is ...
Intel releases stable Spectre updates for Skylake - 02/08/2018 01:17 PM
On its website, Intel announced it has released stable patches for the second Spectre variant. Currently, the patches are only available for Skylake processors but Intel notes that patches for other p...
Intel requests to halt applying Spectre and Meltdown patches for number of CPUs on certain systems - 01/23/2018 09:12 AM
Intel sends word to manufacturers and end users to not to apply the current version of its Meltdown and Specter patches. This is for specific systems. They identified an issue and cause, making the ...
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4641
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4641
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5547378 Posted on: 05/16/2018 05:26 PM
Part of me wonders if Intel has had 10nm working fine for a while now, but the problem is maybe it can't clock as high (which could also explain why clocks from AMD/GloFo haven't been all that impressive). Seeing as Intel hasn't really improved their architecture's IPC since Haswell, I'm pretty sure shrinking the die to 10nm while sacrificing clock speeds would not look like they're making progress.
However, high clock rates don't really matter in laptops. Intel could still make 10nm mobile chips, where there would only be improvements and no downsides, since high clock speeds are largely irrelevant in mobile devices.
Those 10nm issues. Again 15W TDP and -200MHz turbo.
Part of me wonders if Intel has had 10nm working fine for a while now, but the problem is maybe it can't clock as high (which could also explain why clocks from AMD/GloFo haven't been all that impressive). Seeing as Intel hasn't really improved their architecture's IPC since Haswell, I'm pretty sure shrinking the die to 10nm while sacrificing clock speeds would not look like they're making progress.
However, high clock rates don't really matter in laptops. Intel could still make 10nm mobile chips, where there would only be improvements and no downsides, since high clock speeds are largely irrelevant in mobile devices.
TLD LARS
Senior Member
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-03-01
Senior Member
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-03-01
#5547406 Posted on: 05/16/2018 07:01 PM
I really dont undestand this chip, its a low power budget chip without GPU.
Hope to see it against a AMD Ryzen 3 2200U with same core count, roughly same MHz, same TDP and the build in Vega.
This could be a dive in the trashcan to find something to sell, because i think this is the first GPU less Intel laptop CPU, in a long time.
I really dont undestand this chip, its a low power budget chip without GPU.
Hope to see it against a AMD Ryzen 3 2200U with same core count, roughly same MHz, same TDP and the build in Vega.
This could be a dive in the trashcan to find something to sell, because i think this is the first GPU less Intel laptop CPU, in a long time.
slimmy427
Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 2017-01-31
Member
Posts: 87
Joined: 2017-01-31
#5547430 Posted on: 05/16/2018 08:20 PM
Part of me wonders if Intel has had 10nm working fine for a while now, but the problem is maybe it can't clock as high (which could also explain why clocks from AMD/GloFo haven't been all that impressive). Seeing as Intel hasn't really improved their architecture's IPC since Haswell, I'm pretty sure shrinking the die to 10nm while sacrificing clock speeds would not look like they're making progress.
However, high clock rates don't really matter in laptops. Intel could still make 10nm mobile chips, where there would only be improvements and no downsides, since high clock speeds are largely irrelevant in mobile devices.
Maybe someone can clarify this for me. Would the potential limitations of smaller chips/pathways be how common or dirty the electric standards are? To me, limiting through put can make interruptions far more critical. Which could cause the limited boost and frequency ranges as of lately.
I literally have nothing to back this theory but, I'm hoping someone else does
Part of me wonders if Intel has had 10nm working fine for a while now, but the problem is maybe it can't clock as high (which could also explain why clocks from AMD/GloFo haven't been all that impressive). Seeing as Intel hasn't really improved their architecture's IPC since Haswell, I'm pretty sure shrinking the die to 10nm while sacrificing clock speeds would not look like they're making progress.
However, high clock rates don't really matter in laptops. Intel could still make 10nm mobile chips, where there would only be improvements and no downsides, since high clock speeds are largely irrelevant in mobile devices.
Maybe someone can clarify this for me. Would the potential limitations of smaller chips/pathways be how common or dirty the electric standards are? To me, limiting through put can make interruptions far more critical. Which could cause the limited boost and frequency ranges as of lately.
I literally have nothing to back this theory but, I'm hoping someone else does
schmidtbag
Senior Member
Posts: 4641
Joined: 2012-11-10
Senior Member
Posts: 4641
Joined: 2012-11-10
#5547439 Posted on: 05/16/2018 08:38 PM
Maybe someone can clarify this for me. Would the potential limitations of smaller chips/pathways be how common or dirty the electric standards are? To me, limiting through put can make interruptions far more critical. Which could cause the limited boost and frequency ranges as of lately.
I literally have nothing to back this theory but, I'm hoping someone else does
I'm not sure I 100% understand what you're asking, but there are 2 things to worry about when you shrink the transistors to these sizes:
1. I get the impression that the smaller you go, there's a greater chance of impurities making something fail. Think of it like potholes in the road - if you're driving a big truck, the wheels are large enough that it won't really affect the ride much. The pothole may limit how fast you can go, but you can still drive over it. Meanwhile if you drive a Mini Cooper with those tiny wheels, that pothole could cause some serious damage when going at the same speed as the truck.
2. Quantum tunneling (where electrons start passing through transistors even when the gate is supposed to be closed). To my understanding, the higher the voltage, the more likely this problem will occur. But, voltage tends to correlate to frequency. So, as you can imagine, frequency has to be limited to sustain stability.
As far as I'm aware, the cleanliness of the voltage source itself isn't much of an issue. Modern VRMs are pretty accurate and go through multiple phases.
Maybe someone can clarify this for me. Would the potential limitations of smaller chips/pathways be how common or dirty the electric standards are? To me, limiting through put can make interruptions far more critical. Which could cause the limited boost and frequency ranges as of lately.
I literally have nothing to back this theory but, I'm hoping someone else does
I'm not sure I 100% understand what you're asking, but there are 2 things to worry about when you shrink the transistors to these sizes:
1. I get the impression that the smaller you go, there's a greater chance of impurities making something fail. Think of it like potholes in the road - if you're driving a big truck, the wheels are large enough that it won't really affect the ride much. The pothole may limit how fast you can go, but you can still drive over it. Meanwhile if you drive a Mini Cooper with those tiny wheels, that pothole could cause some serious damage when going at the same speed as the truck.
2. Quantum tunneling (where electrons start passing through transistors even when the gate is supposed to be closed). To my understanding, the higher the voltage, the more likely this problem will occur. But, voltage tends to correlate to frequency. So, as you can imagine, frequency has to be limited to sustain stability.
As far as I'm aware, the cleanliness of the voltage source itself isn't much of an issue. Modern VRMs are pretty accurate and go through multiple phases.
TLD LARS
Senior Member
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-03-01
Senior Member
Posts: 125
Joined: 2017-03-01
#5547443 Posted on: 05/16/2018 08:58 PM
Maybe someone can clarify this for me. Would the potential limitations of smaller chips/pathways be how common or dirty the electric standards are? To me, limiting through put can make interruptions far more critical. Which could cause the limited boost and frequency ranges as of lately.
I literally have nothing to back this theory but, I'm hoping someone else does
I think most of the reason for the fairly low frequencies, is the jump in number of cores while keeping the TDP relatively low.
Ryzen and Vega really likes low frequencies and you start to face a wall if you push them hard, Intel and Nvidia does not have the very steep curve and runs better at high frequencies.
The switching losses in the chips get higher the faster the CPU runs, so i dont think we will se much higher then 5GHz for a long time in the future, i think the future is faster cache, memory, more work per clock and lower power.
Maybe someone can clarify this for me. Would the potential limitations of smaller chips/pathways be how common or dirty the electric standards are? To me, limiting through put can make interruptions far more critical. Which could cause the limited boost and frequency ranges as of lately.
I literally have nothing to back this theory but, I'm hoping someone else does
I think most of the reason for the fairly low frequencies, is the jump in number of cores while keeping the TDP relatively low.
Ryzen and Vega really likes low frequencies and you start to face a wall if you push them hard, Intel and Nvidia does not have the very steep curve and runs better at high frequencies.
The switching losses in the chips get higher the faster the CPU runs, so i dont think we will se much higher then 5GHz for a long time in the future, i think the future is faster cache, memory, more work per clock and lower power.
coth
Senior Member
Posts: 412
Joined: 2005-02-23
Senior Member
Posts: 412
Joined: 2005-02-23
#5547471 Posted on: 05/16/2018 11:05 PM
It's not mainstream. It's a niche product. Mainstream i3 CNL-U are likely to be 9100 and 9006.
I really dont undestand this chip, its a low power budget chip without GPU.
It's not mainstream. It's a niche product. Mainstream i3 CNL-U are likely to be 9100 and 9006.
user1
Senior Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: 2016-01-29
Senior Member
Posts: 1459
Joined: 2016-01-29
#5547520 Posted on: 05/17/2018 05:06 AM
I really dont undestand this chip, its a low power budget chip without GPU.
Hope to see it against a AMD Ryzen 3 2200U with same core count, roughly same MHz, same TDP and the build in Vega.
This could be a dive in the trashcan to find something to sell, because i think this is the first GPU less Intel laptop CPU, in a long time.
Very well could be from the trash can, intel sampled this silicon in late 2016 , it was supposed to launch mid 2017..... , probably have a lot of left over chips from the first retail production run.
well that or this is all they could muster after a year.
not looking good eitherway.
I really dont undestand this chip, its a low power budget chip without GPU.
Hope to see it against a AMD Ryzen 3 2200U with same core count, roughly same MHz, same TDP and the build in Vega.
This could be a dive in the trashcan to find something to sell, because i think this is the first GPU less Intel laptop CPU, in a long time.
Very well could be from the trash can, intel sampled this silicon in late 2016 , it was supposed to launch mid 2017..... , probably have a lot of left over chips from the first retail production run.
well that or this is all they could muster after a year.
not looking good eitherway.
fatboyslimerr
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Joined: 2015-04-14
Junior Member
Posts: 12
Joined: 2015-04-14
#5547630 Posted on: 05/17/2018 12:54 PM
Yeh Intel really could be in trouble if 10nm yields/performance aren't up to scratch although 8700K and 8600K still the best choices for gaming at 1080p.
Zen2 on 7nm, let's say it can clock to 5GHz on a golden chip...Intel might start to look a bit scared and confused...
Yeh Intel really could be in trouble if 10nm yields/performance aren't up to scratch although 8700K and 8600K still the best choices for gaming at 1080p.
Zen2 on 7nm, let's say it can clock to 5GHz on a golden chip...Intel might start to look a bit scared and confused...
Click here to post a comment for this news story on the message forum.
Senior Member
Posts: 9864
Joined: 2012-07-20
Those 10nm issues. Again 15W TDP and -200MHz turbo.