Hacker News Reader

Comment by paulpan | Hacker News Reader

Weird to see this "partial" announcement - since it's mostly for the U-series chips (up to 28W TDP). This suggests that Intel must really be getting pressure to release something competitive against AMD's Renoir offerings. The more performance-orient chips (traditionally known as "H series" but who know the new branding...) is still unannounced and unknown.

Will have for 3rd party benchmarks to determine the real performance improvements. The single-core and GPU are certainly the highlights, but it's odd that even the top-end i7 chips still retain the 4 physical cores. AMD's 4700U is already at 8 physical cores.

View on HN

Yeah. But I think 4 cores at 50% higher base single thread vs 8 cores is actually a pretty reasonable tradeoff for many workloads. If they managed 6 cores though... would have been pretty awesome.

I hope this delivers. I'd hate to see Intel go down in flames.

Right, that's perhaps a glaring omission. Last year's (Ice Lake) i7-10710U was a 6-core, 12-thread part with a TDP of 25W. https://ark.intel.com/content/www/us/en/ark/products/196448/...

But it's entirely missing from this announcement. Seems like a regression.

4C 11th gen is probably faster than 6C 10th gen (which is not Ice Lake BTW) because of higher IPC, larger cache, and better power efficiency.

Same base block argument. At 25W, the i7-10710U has a base clock at 1.6GHz, the newer parts are at 3.0GHz at 28W.

For laptops (which are far more likely to thermal throttle), this is a huge deal.

That is not an Icelake chip. IceLake and Comet Lake are both "10th Generation" Core. Icelake was limited to more premium offerings and was only 4 cores and lower.

10th Gen that ended in a U are Comet Lake (14nm++++) 10th Gen that ended in a G with a number are Ice Lake (10nm)

Mia culpa as others pointed out, the i7-10710U was a Comet Lake part rather than Ice Lake. Seems even more glaring then that Intel had a 6-core U-series chip and now no longer offers one.

That said, also agreed with everyone that core count isn't absolute and we should be looking at the clock frequency, etc. One metric I'm curious to know more is sustained performance - e.g. if the chip can only hit its turbo for <30secs, then that just isn't very good...

Compared to the AMD chips already shipping it will have +17% single-threaded boost clock. The base clock is much higher so only benchmarks will tell what the real performance comparison is. And when this ships it will be up against the 5000 Ryzen mobile APUs. What's curious is that it seems these chips do compare favorably to AMD but on the GPU side, with things like AV1 decode and a big performance boost. Between Intel-only high-end laptop models and AMD not being able to keep up with demand Intel is not under all that much stress though.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com