***News*** Intel announces CPU with integrated GPU, plus six core desktop CPU

From Custom PC

http://www.custompc.co.uk/news/605416/intel-announces-cpu-with-integrated-gpu-plus-six-core-desktop-cpu.html

As if the demonstration of the world's first 32nm processor technology wasn't enough to get people excited today, Intel has also decided to announce a veritable treasure chest of new products. Some of these are based on Intel's 45nm technology, while others are based on the newly announced 32nm transistors. The latter products are all codenamed with the Westmere umbrella name for the architecture, but they come in a number of interesting flavours.

Let's kick off with the big breakthrough, which is the first CPU with an integrated GPU, codenamed Clarkdale. No specifics have been revealed about the GPU yet, but Intel told us that we could expect it to offer an improved equivalent of the integrated graphics found in Intel's current G45 chipset. Designed for the mainstream market, the CPUs will feature two cores, but will also be able to handle four threads via Hyper-Threading.

Interestingly, while the CPU core in Clarkdale will be fabricated using Intel's new 32nm technology, the chip's DDR3 memory controller and GPU will be built using 45nm transistors. The three will sit together in a multi-chip package, and communicate via a high-speed QPI (Quick Path Interconnect) link.

The chips are designed to be used with Intel's forthcoming mainstream 5-series chipsets, which will feature 16 PCI-E 2.0 lanes that can either be assigned to a single 16x slot or two 8x slots. Intel hasn't yet announced whether the chipsets will support CrossFire or SLI, but we'd expect them to support both given Intel's commitment to the two technologies when it launched the X58 chipset.

Also designed for the 5-series chipsets is Intel's new line of mainstream quad-core CPUs, which are codenamed Lynnfield. These will be produced with 45nm transistors and will be able to handle eight threads via Hyper-Threading. Meanwhile, Intel has also announced two equivalent mobile CPUs, codenamed Clarksfield and Arrandale, which will feature four 45nm cores (eight threads with Hyper-Threading) and two 32nm cores (four threads with Hyper-Threading) respectively. Like Clarkdale, Arrandale will also feature integrated graphics.

Okay, so that's the mainstream market sorted out, but what do performance freaks stand to get out of the 32nm revolution? Well, this is where it starts to get interesting, as Intel has revealed its plans to make a top-end six-core desktop processor that's capable of handling twelve threads with Hyper-Threading. Codenamed Gulftown, the new CPU is scheduled to be released in 2010. As well as this, Intel has also now officially revealed its plans for the first eight-core Xeon processor, codenamed Nehalem-EX, which will be built with 45nm transistors.

Intel also says that it plans to use the extra transistor budget freed up in the move to the 32nm technology to add some new features. These will probably be officially announced as a subsequent version of SSE at a later date, and Intel says that it's 'similar to adding SSE 4.1 in Penryn.' The new features will include seven new instructions for accelerating encryption and decryption algorithms, which Intel says could allow full disk encryption.

Personally i think the whole intergrated GPU thingy will only end up benefiting low end laptops that want to save power...i maybe wrong though.Daytona_178

6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus kemar7856

GTA IV is a prime example of a game that benefits from more then 2 cores.

[QUOTE="kemar7856"]6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus nVidiaGaMer

GTA IV is a prime example of a game that benefits from more then 2 cores.

[QUOTE="kemar7856"]6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus nVidiaGaMer

GTA IV is a prime example of a game that benefits from more then 2 cores.

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

[QUOTE="kemar7856"]6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus clyde46

GTA IV is a prime example of a game that benefits from more then 2 cores.

Its fine if you already have a dual core but if your building a new comp it only makes sense to buy a quad core.

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

[QUOTE="kemar7856"]6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus clyde46

GTA IV is a prime example of a game that benefits from more then 2 cores.

i could agree going quadcore... now, but going 6 and 8 cores... it is kinda redundant for gaming...

but if your doing other things like more cpu intensive things then maybe not quite as redundant.. honestly i think its more for bragging rights than anything.

6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus kemar7856

if you go quad nothing under : Q9550 3.6GHZ / Q9650 3.8GHZ / Phenom II 940 3.4ghz+ Overclock
according what i posted earlier then ur post Lach0121 ;)marcthpro

i agree 100% though im not getting the 940 lol

im getting the phenom II 970 at 3.5ghz stock.. or maybe even the 990 at 3.9ghz stock.... that should be fine for a few years lol.

prolly the 990 and easily overclock it over 4ghz no problem,

[QUOTE="kemar7856"]6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus nVidiaGaMer

GTA IV is a prime example of a game that benefits from more then 2 cores.

[QUOTE="clyde46"][QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

GTA IV is a prime example of a game that benefits from more then 2 cores.

nVidiaGaMer

Its fine if you already have a dual core but if your building a new comp it only makes sense to buy a quad core.

[QUOTE="kemar7856"]6 cores , 8 cores 12 cores -does'nt matter if games only use 2 right now but still its cool but the gpu thing wont really benfit desktops because they constanlt need better gpus darx55

Will a Q6600 'last' a while before being made redundant?will952

Meh GPU on a CPU... it's always going to stay as powerful as their onboard graphics chipsets, so why even bother?lundy86_4

Cheaper motherboards and for office work etc and general use no gaming or very little gaming or older games it is fine. Not everyone needs the lastest GPU. I think by the time we see these Intel expect some of the graphics load to be done by the CPU i.e Ray tracing so I believe they think you don't need no GPU other than the one the have intergrated.

if you go quad nothing under : Q9550 3.6GHZ / Q9650 3.8GHZ / Phenom II 940 3.4ghz+ Overclock
according what i posted earlier then ur post Lach0121 ;)marcthpro

I have my Q9550 at stock clocks and I max every single game that I throw at it, so why bother with overclock? lol

Personally i think the whole intergrated GPU thingy will only end up benefiting low end laptops that want to save power...i maybe wrong though.Daytona_178

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="clyde46"] GTA IV is one of very small list of games that currently benefit from quad cores. At the moment the dual core is fine. An besides most everyday apps only use 2 cores at most. The only people really that can benefit from more than 2 cores are gamers, server providers and video editing artists.imprezawrx500

Its fine if you already have a dual core but if your building a new comp it only makes sense to buy a quad core.

Can you keep your dual core is better than quad core argument out of here.

We don't need more cores. We need faster performance per cores.redneckdouglas

[QUOTE="redneckdouglas"]We don't need more cores. We need faster performance per cores.Daytona_178

Yeah we hit a wall of 4Ghz of something around that but processing power per core is rising slowly at the same time at the same MHz of previous models. The biggest jump was with the C2D but we have steadily inproved proformance per core with subsequent models.

[QUOTE="Daytona_178"]Personally i think the whole intergrated GPU thingy will only end up benefiting low end laptops that want to save power...i maybe wrong though.nintendog66

the biggest benefit i see is a large bandwith and latency improvement in cpu-gpu communication.comp_atkins

Ray tracing with the 6 core HT 12 core ray tracing with the CPU-GPU communcation. I see good graphics. Why doesn't anyone else?

[QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"][QUOTE="clyde46"] GTA IV is one of very small list of games that currently benefit from quad cores. At the moment the dual core is fine. An besides most everyday apps only use 2 cores at most. The only people really that can benefit from more than 2 cores are gamers, server providers and video editing artists.imprezawrx500

Its fine if you already have a dual core but if your building a new comp it only makes sense to buy a quad core.

I made the same mistake in 2005 by getting a 3800+ when single cores were better then dual cores and then single cores died out so the same thing is bound to happen now.

[QUOTE="imprezawrx500"][QUOTE="nVidiaGaMer"]

Its fine if you already have a dual core but if your building a new comp it only makes sense to buy a quad core.

nVidiaGaMer

I made the same mistake in 2005 by getting a 3800+ when single cores were better then dual cores and then single cores died out so the same thing is bound to happen now.

[QUOTE="redneckdouglas"]We don't need more cores. We need faster performance per cores.Daytona_178

It's not really that they hit a wall in regards to speed ability, it's more along the line of they hit a wall of how small they can make these things and at some point in time with the current architecture, they can only go so small and so fast....

I guess it's a combo of both size and speed. Eventually, it'll plateau out to a point where no improvements will be able to be made. Either the architecture of how the CPU is made needs to change or the actual way information is processed needs to change....quantum computing anyone????

[QUOTE="marcthpro"]if you go quad nothing under : Q9550 3.6GHZ / Q9650 3.8GHZ / Phenom II 940 3.4ghz+ Overclock
according what i posted earlier then ur post Lach0121 ;)Sordidus

I have my Q9550 at stock clocks and I max every single game that I throw at it, so why bother with overclock? lol