Package Improvements

As we move to smaller process nodes, the thermal density of high-performance silicon becomes more of an issue, and so all the processor companies put resources into their mechanical design teams to come up with a solution for the best thermal performance but also comes in line with costs. For example, we’ve seen Intel over the years transition from a soldered down heatspreader, to liquid metal, to basic thermal paste (because saving 0.1 cents means a lot across 70m CPUs), and then all the way back again when customers started demanding it.

However, in that time, we’ve pretty much kept the same socket design for mainstream processors. There hasn’t been much emphasis on changing the design itself for thermomechanical improvements in order to retain reuse and compatibility. There have been some minor changes here and there, such as substrate thinning, but nothing that substantial. The move to a new socket for Alder Lake now gives Intel that opportunity.

For Alder Lake, Intel is using an optimized packaging process to reduce the amount of soldered thermal material used in the processors. Combining that with a thinner die, and Intel is having to increase the thickness of the heatspreader to maintain the required z-height for the platform. The idea here is that the limiting factor in the cooling solution is any time we have a thermal interface, from one material to another – in this case, die to solder, and solder to heatspreader. Solder is the weak point here, so if the heatspreader gets thicker to meet the die, then less solder is needed.

Ultimately direct-die liquid cooling would be the boon here, but Intel has to come up with a solution that fits millions of processors. We have seen Intel offer different packaging solutions based on the SKU itself, so it will be interesting if the mid-range still get the Thin Die + Thin STIM treatment, or if they’ll go back to the cheap thermal paste.

Overclocking: We Have Headroom

It wouldn’t be too much of a leap to say that for most users, the only useful overclocking they might want to look at is enabling XMP on their memory. Modern processors these days are so close to their actual voltage and thermal limits out of the box these days that even if there was 200-300 MHz to gain, especially for the top Core i9 parts, it wouldn’t be worth the +100W it produces. I’m also getting to an age now where I prefer a good stable system, rather than eking out every frame, but having lived in the competitive OC scene for a while, I understand the drive that a lot of those users have to go above and beyond. To that end, Intel is introducing a few new features, and reviving some old ones, for Alder Lake.

Alder Lake also complicates things a bit with the P-core and E-core design.

To start, all the cores on the K/KF parts can be overclocked. The P-cores can be overclocked individually, whereas the E-cores are in groups of four. All the E-cores can be disabled, but at least one P-core needs to be enabled for the system to work (this has interesting consequences for Intel’s design). All cores can have additional AVX offsets, per-core ratio and voltage controls, and the ring/uncore ratios can also be adjusted. Memory also has the bells and whistles mentioned on a previous page. Those with integrated graphics can also be adjusted.

What Alder Lake brings back to the table is BCLK overclocking. For the last decade or so, most overclocking is done with the CPU multiplier, and before that it was BCLK or FSB. Intel is now saying that BCLK overclocking has returned, and this is partly due to motherboard customizations in the clock generator. Every Alder Lake CPU has an internal BCLK/clock generator it can use, however motherboard vendors can also apply an external clock generator. Intel expects only the lowest-end motherboards will not have an external generator.

The use of two generators allows the user to overclock the PCIe bus using the external generator, while maintaining a regular BCLK on other parts of the system with the internal clock. The system can also apply voltage in an adaptive way based on the overclock, with additional PLL overrides.

On top of this, Intel is integrating more user-accessible telemetry for its cores, particularly the E-cores, and real-time frequency analysis. On top of this, users can adjust the memory frequency in the operating system, rather than having to reboot – this is an extension of the memory turbo functionality previously mentioned.

For regular users, Intel is also offering a one-click immediate overclock feature. On launch, the Core i9 will be supported and overclock the P-cores +100 MHz and the E-cores +300 MHz immediately. It sounds like Intel is confident that all CPUs will be able to do this, but they want it to be user selectable. Beyond that, I confirmed the tool does still void the warranty. Intel’s VP dismissed it as an issue, citing that the recent overclocker warranty program they canned had such a low pickup, it wasn’t worth continuing. I’d say that the two things are mutually exclusive, but that’s up to Intel.

DDR5: Detailed Support, XMP, Memory Boost Performance and Conclusions
Comments Locked

395 Comments

View All Comments

  • laduran - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    This is an amazing generational leap in performance from Intel. I hope this performance leap survives the leap to mobile parts. How awesome would it be to have 20 thread Core i5 based laptop that can game as well as have all day battery life?
  • Alistair - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    it is 16, not 20
  • Farfolomew - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    I think Intel missed the bus on this. Apple has shown the way forward on future SoC designs: highly integrated and fast memory bandwidth, joint GPU/CPU memory access, and very large GPU die. The hybrid design is just a small part of what makes the M1 so powerful and efficient. I'm hoping AMD can spin up a design similar to their console SoCs that can compete with the M1.
  • Farfolomew - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    Boat, bus, whatever...I knew that didn't sound right LOL
  • Farfolomew - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    Why didn't Intel use this opportunity to rebrand their Core line? They're all the way up to 12th gen, surely it's time to come up with something new? Brand matters, sure, but if this is as revolutionary as Intel claims, (over 10 years since such a radical change has occurred, per the beginning of this article) then come up with a new name for cryin' out loud! At the very least, keep the Core moniker, but call it something different like maybe Core h(ybrid)X. ie, Core h5, Core h7, Core h9. Do something! Sheesh
  • Hifihedgehog - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    Intel Fusion, maybe? Core is pretty unoriginal when you think about it.
  • kwohlt - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    My understanding is that each "Core" from Intel has been an iteration, and that the underlying Microarchitecture originates from the original Core 2 line from 2006, and that an entirely new, from the ground-up, architecture is expected to replace Core in 2025 (Royal Core Project)
  • Farfolomew - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    That would be awesome, I hope that's true. This current Core line dates back to the Pentium Pro, iterated to the Pentium III mobile, then turned into Core 2 Duo, Core iX, and now here. So yeah, over 20 years of the same underlying architecture. Maybe this Royal Core Project is a departure from x86? ARM with powerful emulated x86 would be delightful.
  • Silver5urfer - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    What nonsense is that ? ARM already disposed off 32Bit blocks from their new 2022 designs and you think magically that ARM BS will emulate x86-x64 ? I want what you are smoking. I think it's that new Apple miracle crack only found on interwebs.
  • iranterres - Thursday, October 28, 2021 - link

    These "new" core performance designations are the perfect strategy when you know you have severe power efficiency issues, day one.

    LOL @ 125w

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now