Back to Article

  • arnavvdesai - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    Am hoping these are worthwhile upgrades because I plan to upgrade my desktop & get a new laptop when Win8 launches.
    Looking forward to some detailed analysis.
  • MonkeyPaw - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    From what I hear, Win8 won't be all that much of a change for desktop users. I think Tablet and ARM support are its big draws. Reply
  • bitcrazed - Friday, December 16, 2011 - link

    You hear wrong. There are MANY improvements in Win8 for desktop/laptop users including new streamlined UI via the ribbon, significantly improved file copy/move, massive improvements to the networking stack, significant power & efficiency improvements, 10s boot times, Hyper-V for developers/testers/enthusiasts, etc.

    And that's all we know from the dev preview. Wait until the beta for a much expanded list of improvements.
  • aguilpa1 - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    So when will laptops with IB be available? Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    Quad core parts in April, dual core in May. Added that part to the article as well. Reply
  • douglaswilliams - Friday, December 09, 2011 - link

    Quad core PARTS in April...but doesn't that mean it will be some time after that for the actual laptops to be available?

    It took Dell three months (September to December) for the second round of SNB processors to show up in their Precision line of laptops.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    I'm guessing you're surfing with Firefox? The original table rendered fine in IE9 and Chrome, but Firefox doesn't wrap after a hyphen so the CPU names all required more width. I've added a manual linebreak into the table to clean things up, but we're obviously a bit limited in what we can do in 600 pixels. However, I did go ahead and make a PNG for you:
  • QChronoD - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    I'm going to assume that Intel still hasn't added a thunderbolt controller to these chipsets. It would be an awesome addition to the UM77. Then it would be possible to have discrete graphics when you're at your desk, but not have to worry about the power draw when on the go. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    True. Thunderbolt will still be a separate chip, although 2012 will bring us new chips. Reply
  • Tchamber - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    I don't really inderstand the draw of thunderbolt, as giabit is faster than most hard drives and we have so many standards for monitors already. We already have optimus. Reply
  • bitcrazed - Friday, December 16, 2011 - link

    What about being able to daisy-chain multiple displays from a single TB socket on a laptop? You can do this today with a MacBook Pro.

    What I'd like to know is, if I was to buy a pair of TB displays today, will next year's IvB powered machines be able to drive these daisy-chained displays like my MBP does today?
  • tipoo - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    Oh, I was under the impression that IB would have Thunderbolt functionality integrated in its chipset. Is that Haswel? Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    I don't think Intel has confirmed that Haswell will feature integrated TB support. Remember that it's more than just adding it to the PCH. You need to upgrade the DMI to increase the bandwidth between the CPU and PCH, otherwise it will be a bottleneck. Haswell's SoC might solve that, though. Reply
  • sotoa - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    I can't believe they are waiting to put the Thunderbolt in! Considering Apple had it 1st Q 2011, we should be on next gen Lightpeak already. (I like the name Lightpeak, lol).

    What can you do with Thunderbolt you ask? What's the big deal? Well, that little port has so much possibilities. One port to rule them all! Just look at what Sony did with that in their Vaio Z.

    External GPU, laptop docks, multi monitors, External HDD's, SSD's, port reductions and consolidations.... I can't wait to see what Lightpeak does!
  • Knifeshade - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    I'm placing my bet on no quad-core 13" from Apple.

    The dual-core variants are clocked pretty high, I think to warrant a QC MBP 13 from Apple, those 35W quads would have to perform better than their dual core siblings in the same TDP envelope.

    And I just can't see that. Otherwise, what's the point of the mobile IVB dual cores then, everybody would stick a 35W quad core in their laptops.
  • JarredWalton - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    Well, there's price for one. Even with SNB, the cheapest quad-core chips (i7-2630QM/2670QM) are around $300 (OEMs probably pay less of course), while the i5-2410M is less than half that. I'd say there's a very good chance Apple will try for a quad-core 35W chip in the MBP13. Reply
  • Knifeshade - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    While I agree with you, I think it comes down to whether a 35W quad can beat a 35W dual for Apple to put it in their MBP 13. It's my guess anyway.

    A quad core with a 35W TDP should theoretically have a smaller base freq. compared to dual core parts, and therefore should have a smaller DC Turbo.

    Unless Apple wants full quad core lineups across their MBP no matter what, that is also anybody's guess too.
  • tipoo - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    Also, I'd think they want to differentiate the Pro from the Air more, right now the main draw is just the HDD capacity imo. If they got rid of the optical drive in favor of a quad core CPU and a discreet GPU for the same price, I'd be all over that. A higher res display would be great too. Reply
  • Phylyp - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    Even the low-end ULV gets VT-d, TXT, etc. while the top-end desktop i7 (unlocked) doesn't. Sigh. This is like Vista's editions, except the Ultimate (which will be the 2011-pin processors) is a significantly overpriced item. Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    Ugh, yeah I hated that with the Core 2 series and its STILL here. Why would the high end ones miss out on VT, it makes no sense. Reply
  • iwod - Wednesday, December 07, 2011 - link

    I didn't read the full article as i am in Office :P

    But isn't this the first time Intel has all the features, VT-d etc enabled on all of their Chips Lineup?

    And finally hyper-threading is enabled on all chips as well. Which means you always get Core x 2 Thread. No more stupid 4 Core 4 Thread Chips.

    So i dont understand the article where it said " In a nutshell, it is a higher clocked SB with better graphics" Which is simply not true. And this Lineup is much better then Desktop!
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    This is the way it was in SNB as well. Mobile quads have always been 8 threaded, whereas quad core desktop i5 have lacked Hyper-Threading. All mobile SNB chips had VT-d and other additions too. Reply
  • Visual - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    Those "business" features that your comp can get remotely "monitored", "updated" or "backed up" even if offline seem quite scary to my paranoid mind... Have they been around for long in other laptops, or are they a new thing? How do they work, and how are they secured? Reply
  • A5 - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    I think they have to be explicitly turned on by some administrative options (and possible require an extra software install). It's a feature designed for system admins at companies - consumer laptops don't come with any of the background stuff needed to enable it. Reply
  • tipoo - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    When I saw the mobile line I was disappointed that most of the chips will get the HD2500, and only the high end will get the 4000 which made little sense as most high end users would have a dGPU. But at least all the mobile ones get the 4000, that's good news, we're entering a time when the most base GPU's will be somewhat acceptable for modest gaming. And this one has OpenCL as well, which might have potential.

    I'd like Anandtech to test if there's a difference between the desktop, mobile, and ultramobile HD4000's though, there was a difference between the laptop HD3000 and the ULV one.
  • Mr Perfect - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    What is the VGA row in the table for? Laptops can't really be shipped without graphics, so does it indicate support for discreet GPUs or quite literally a VGA output port? Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    VGA as in video output. I added output to the table so it's more obvious now. Reply
  • Mr Perfect - Friday, December 09, 2011 - link

    Oh, ok thanks. I'm surprised they bother listing that as a feature any more. HDMI or DisplayPort is worth bragging about, but VGA?! Reply
  • M.W. - Thursday, December 08, 2011 - link

    I'm looking at the i7-3667U with only 17W TDP here. It's 1W less than AMD E-350!
    We're in for killer Windows 8 tablets!
  • MrSpadge - Friday, December 09, 2011 - link

    AMD is being quite generous assigning E350 (or E450) a 18 W TDP. Typical power draw in CPU limited tasks will be higher for the Intel.. but so will be performance (a lot).

  • Shadowmaster625 - Friday, December 09, 2011 - link

    Intel just released the Celeron 807UE. It is a 10W sandy bridge. Which means we can expect a 10W IB at around 1.3GHz. Even a 10W sb would be more powerful than my notebook, which is about as fast as an E350. That should be the end of AMD... Reply
  • Valis - Thursday, December 22, 2011 - link

    Is that CPU or GPU performance? Because the SB is nowhere near the GPU performance compared to say a A-series AMD, and the 350s got an update to 450 in August. Reply
  • Namisecond - Tuesday, January 03, 2012 - link

    That's always been my knee-jerk reaction to Intel integrated graphics too until I saw some numbers at notebookcheck

    Sure, it's just the 3DMark series of benchmarks (01, 03, 05, and 06) but even the mobile Intel 2000 part is beating out the AMD HD6320 (in the E-450), the Intel 3000 series beats the 6320 by quite a big margin.

    Once we start comparing the Intel 3000 to the GPUs in the AMD A-series, (6520G, and 6620G) the 3DMark06 scores are remarkably within 10% of each other.
    Of course, this is just one synthetic benchmark of 3D gaming. How the Intel GPU handles other tasks like decoding HD video may be a different story.
  • Namisecond - Tuesday, January 03, 2012 - link

    Too bad the celeron 807ue is a single core running at 1ghz if wikipedia is correct. I've been hoping for a 10W multicore sandy bridge (or ivy bridge) mobile part for a while but I don' t think Intel is interested in bringing SVB or IVB down to Atom power consumption levels...
  • hgurol - Tuesday, December 13, 2011 - link

    What am I gonna do with SRT if my laptop doesnt have 2 HDD bays and I have never seen 2 HDD bays in a 14", 15" laptop which I always prefer. Reply
  • Wesleyrpg - Friday, January 13, 2012 - link

    well at least AMD have a Quad Core Processor with a 35W power envelope! (Acutally they have quite a few)

    Don't get me wrong, im no AMD Fanboy, and to be honest i think Intel Processors are vastly superior, its just curious to see AMD having a product that Intel don't compete with!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now