Intel Broadwell Architecture Preview: A Glimpse into Core M
by Ryan Smith on August 11, 2014 12:01 PM ESTPutting It All Together: Small Core M
Next to power constraints, the final element of Intel’s fanless challenge is the size of the SoC itself. Sub-10mm thickness doesn’t just put constraints on the heat capacity of the device but it also constrains just how large an SoC and its supporting circuitry can be. As a result Intel has focused on making Broadwell-Y the smallest Core processor yet, making the entire SoC under 500mm2 in size.
As was the case with power, reducing the size of Broadwell-Y is a multi-faceted effort. The 14nm process plays a big part here, allowing for one of the smallest Core CPU dice yet. At 82mm2 the Broadwell-Y CPU die is some 37% smaller than the Haswell-Y CPU die, none the less packing a dual-core CPU and a full GPU slice.
With such a small die Intel was in turn able to reduce the size of the entire SoC package through the combination of the reduced die area and further optimizations to the packaging itself. Haswell-Y’s already small ball pitch of .65mm was further reduced to just .5mm, producing a package with Intel’s smallest solder ball pads yet. Intel considers the reduction in the ball pitch to be the key change that allowed Broadwell-Y to be so small, as they were already pad-limited on Haswell-Y despite having ample excess packaging even after taking the CPU die’s larger size into account. As a result Broadwell-Y takes up almost 50% less surface area (XY) than Haswell-Y.
Intel has also made a number of changes for Broadwell-Y to reduce the Z-height of the Y SoCs, as even 1.5mm for the SoC starts to become a significant design constraint in a sub-10mm device. Again owing to the 14nm process, the Z-height of the Broadwell-Y die itself is down to 170um. Meanwhile the Z-height of the substrate has been cut in half from 400um to 200um, which accounts for nearly half of the total reduction in SoC Z-height.
The final element in reducing the SoC Z-height, and what’s likely the most unorthodox change for Broadwell-Y’s packaging, is Intel’s 3DL inductors. The 3DLs aren’t just to improve energy efficiency as we discussed before, but they are part of Intel’s efforts to reduce the SoC size. For Broadwell-Y the 3DLs are on their own PCB on the back of the SoC, extending well below the back of the package. To accommodate this, logic boards housing Broadwell-Y will have a hole in them where the 3DL PCB would be in order to allow the complete SoC to fit. Because there are no BGA connections here this change isn’t quite as radical as it first appears, but it’s a very good example of just what lengths Intel was willing to go to reduce the package Z-height.
All told then, the combination of these space optimizations has reduced Broadwell-Y’s Z-height by nearly 30%, from 1.5mm on Haswell-Y to 1.04mm on Broadwell-Y (3DL PCB not included). By bringing Broadwell-Y’s thickness under 1.1mm, the SoC is now no taller than the other common components on a logic board (e.g. RAM), meaning the SoC will no longer stick out above the other components, which is useful both for saving space and for allowing simpler (flatter) heatsinks.
Finally, the smaller size of the Broadwell-Y package will also have a knock-on effect on the size of the logic board, further feeding into Intel’s goals to get Broadwell-Y into smaller devices. Intel tells us that the size of a complete platform (logic) board for Broadwell-Y has been reduced by roughly 25% as compared to Haswell-Y, allowing Broadwell-Y to better fit into not just thinner devices but overall smaller devices too.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
158 Comments
View All Comments
isa - Monday, August 11, 2014 - link
I appreciate the thoughts, but I'm actually an ASIC designer, so I have no problem with lingo - I just am not informed regarding my specific question. And my current laptop is a Penryn 2008 laptop, so forgive me if we ignore the need question and stay focused on what version(s) of Broadwell are intended for mainstream (non-gaming) desktop replacement laptops. thanks!ZeDestructor - Monday, August 11, 2014 - link
You want the full HQ/MQ series for your next laptop. Those are the full quad-core-enabled machines, which is something your probably want for a hi-performance machine. Since this is a gaming laptop though, you may want to look into building a small mini-ITX desktop though, they're comparable if your primary definition of "mobile gaming" is "drag computer to a LANparty/friend's place" rather than actually gaming on a train or similar.name99 - Tuesday, August 12, 2014 - link
If you can afford it, why are you dicking around with trying to save a few hundred dollars?If you want a serious machine, buy an rMBP with quadcore i7.
If you want a light machine, buy an MBA.
Then either stick Parallels on it (if you use OSX) or just run Boot Camp and never touch OSX, except maybe once every two months to update the firmware.
If you can afford it, life's too short to waste time trying to figure out which of fifty slightly different laptop PCs will suck less in their different hardware, different pre-installed crap-ware, different drivers. Just pay a little more and get something that most people consider works well.
ZeDestructor - Tuesday, August 12, 2014 - link
As an ASIC designer, OSX is just a non-option. Hell, even Linux is rather hairy compared to Windows for ASIC stuff.I personally like the Dell Precision line, but Lenovo Thinkpad W and HP Elitebook would also doo. In a pinch, a ridiculously-specced Compal (in it's various Sager rebrands) would also do, but IMO are just not built anywhere close.
Kjella - Monday, August 11, 2014 - link
Y = tabletsU = ultraportables
H = laptop/desktops
EP/EX = workstations/servers
So H. Out in Q2 2015, by current best guesses.
isa - Monday, August 11, 2014 - link
Thanks, Kjella. Upon further googling after reading your post, I learned that there apparently will be a mobile and deskop version of the H flavor, and it does look like the mobile H is the most likely for me. But that's not rumored to come out until May or June 2015, which is disappointing.Even weirder, since the first desktop version of Broadwell will be available in PCs in May/June 2015, and since the first version of Skylake (rumored to be a desktop version) is rumored to be "available" 2H 2015, it seems Broadwell H desktop is slated for a very, very short product life. Similarly, is Broadwell H mobile also slated for an extremely short product life?
Perhaps I missed it, but it would be great if there were an Anandtech chart comparing Intel's definitions of "announced", "launched", "samples", "volume shipments", "available", and similar Intelese to figure out about how many months from each it is till Joe Consumer can buy the chip in question. I suspect these definitions and even the lingo can vary with each tick and tock, but some kind of cheat sheet guestimates would be great (and revised as better info arrives, of course).
isa - Monday, August 11, 2014 - link
To further clarify the need for a cheat sheet, I'm familiar with the timing of tick and tock for the last few years, but it seems that 2014/2015 at a minimum will diverge so much from the last few years that previous expectations add confusion rather than clarity.ZeDestructor - Monday, August 11, 2014 - link
Judging by the delay for BW, Skylake will probably be pushed forward at least 6 months, if only to make up the R&D costs of BW. Then again, Intel wants that tablet market, so they might not either.IntelUser2000 - Wednesday, August 13, 2014 - link
"Similarly, is Broadwell H mobile also slated for an extremely short product life?"No its not. Companies like Intel cares about 5% profit differences, so having a short product life would make absolutely no sense. Broadwell isn't coming to "mainstream" desktops, only high-end enthusiast ones like the K series.
So they will all happily be a family like this:
-Skylake mainstream desktop
-Broadwell H/U/Y/K
name99 - Tuesday, August 12, 2014 - link
Semiaccurate says that quadcores (which I take to mean H-series) will not be out until 11 months from now.(Makes you wonder WTF has happened to the Skylake timeline. They haven't yet admitted that that has even slipped, let alone by how much.)