Unfortunately, Core M 5Y70 is mediocre. cause of hard throttling, It scores 30~40 lesser than Prototype. and 5Y10 is COMPLETLY ABSURD. It scores CB less than Z3795!!!
Those TDPs are most definitely not real, which means only two things: either the OEMs prepare for those TDPs, and then you have an overheating device, or Intel is being misleading with its claims for THOSE TDPs (performance could be much lower than claimed/shown in benchmarks at that TDP).
Curious as well what you are basing these comments, given Intel has already sampled demo tablets that are passively cooled in thin form factor tablets....
If they throttle as bad as the Core M in the Yoga 3, the added clock speed might not count for much. 5W is a pretty tight budget (yes it can boost past that).
I think it was found the Yoga 3 uses the 3.5W TDP, it'd explain the throttling since that isn't much room at all. A few months of extra refinement of the 14nm process along with a new stepping and a 4.5 or 6W TDP would do a tonne to keep it running well.
Better than they expected? You're kidding, right? After delivering an underwhelming 5Y70, they're now giving us a bunch of worse performing chips and one that is a few percent better performing. Anything that actually matters (decent laptop performance and up) remains, so far, for Q2 or later.
The Yoga 3 Pro is underpowered based on the reviews. Probably better to keep using a 15 W part with proper cooling, instead of a "4,5W" part with a 25mm noise maker.
I agree. I think the Yoga form factor doesn't need a 4.5w part. Not that Core-M is slow, but it isn't going to replace current Core U chips in performance. Haswell really is a great mobile CPU.
The problem with mobile (for Intel) is that CPU's aren't really the problem with battery life. Sure they can be faster and produce less heat, but too much effort is put into SoC's when the real issue lingers. It's the screens.
We either need a breakthrough in LED technology (or a push for cost-effective OLED) or in battery technology.
Not really. The Surface Pro 3 display uses under 4w at max brightness (yes, it's very efficient (uses less power than the 9.7" iPad Air at equivalent brightness levels).
SoC is definitely the biggest draw. Batteries are the issue, now.
(Meant to reply here) Not really. The Surface Pro 3 display uses under 4w at max brightness (yes, it's very efficient (uses less power than the 9.7" iPad Air at equivalent brightness levels).
SoC is definitely the biggest draw. Batteries are the issue, now.
Off hand I'd consider raising the minimum GPU speed a slight regression/downgrade rather than an improvement? I assume the old versions could run their GPU at 300mhz if they needed to and running at 100mhz when possible should take less power so having a min of 300mhz should be a slight increase in power consumptions in certain situations. It's possible that Intel found that the GPU never really got down to those speeds or it doesn't really use any more power than 100% but I'd guess it was done to make the binning easier to get the higher cpu/gpu boosts.
previous info said that the turbo goes for both cores, if i'm not mistaken. that's great for performance, i'd just like to know what kind of power those chips draw at 2,9ghz.
What is the competition for Core-M? This seems to be a better CPU/GPU than Apple A8X/Tegra K1 but still it is not fit for tablets. Atom as of now cannot hold a candle to Apple A8X/Tegra K1, I feel like either Intel needs to bring this architecture down to like 2.5W level to really target ultrathin fanless devices or dramatically improve the perf of Atom to meet competition. Plus the pricing differences between these are insane which makes me think this wont go into Ipad-like tablets. Not sure what this chip is meant for. Surface Pro 4? All the popular convertibles/2-in1s run on U series and taking this chip would be a regression.
Um, it would be the Tegra K1 and A8X, as you mention. The pricing issue is a problem for Intel, of course, but that won't stop NVIDIA, Samsung, Qualcomm, and Apple from continuing to push ARM into Intel's bread and butter.
You must be kidding. This thing is $281 for top model and likely $225 for lower models (just like the last ones on haswell). That is NOT competition for a $25-35 soc from ARM side. That is partially why Yoga 3 pro is $1300 and why you are NOT likely to see this in anything under $700 (IIRC Intel said $800+). K1 is in $300 & $400 tablets already, let me know when Intel gets this into anything under even $500. $281 is nearly the price of an entire shield tablet ($300). That's like saying a Lamborghini is competition for a ford focus...LOL.
ARM's SOC competition is BAYTRAIL and soon Cherrytrail. Then again when they basically GIVE Baytrail away for free, is that even competition? ROFL. When you lose 1.1B on 1.15B worth of crap you are giving them away (they'll hit that 40mil unit target, but only because they're essentially free). But then Baytrail gets it clock cleaned by K1 (See scores of T100 Asus w/z3740 inside, here on anandtech vs. Shield tablet) so...Maybe it should be free ;)
Again, you make my point for me. BayTrail isn't really competitive with the K1 nor the A8X. Price is Intel's problem, not ours. They could choose to price these things at $50 if they chose.
The product these parts compete in at the 4.5W TDP are the A8X and the K1.
Can you run windows (x86) on a tegra or apple chip?
Intel Core is supposed to be used in PCs. No manufacturer will put a Core processor in an iOS or android device.
The competition to ARM processors is Atom, even though it's not able to compete with high-end ARM designs anymore. That might change with airmont; if intel even cares anymore. They can't become a major player by being so slow.
Why is that a relevant argument? You can run Windows on Atom; the only distinguishing features between Atom and Core is price and performance; given, as you say, that Atom is no longer performance competitive with ARM then that leaves Core M as being performance competitive with ARM.
Again, price is Intel's problem; if Intel wishes to compete with ARM in the tablet space they need something more powerful than their current batch of Atom SoC.
According to Wikipedia the y10 can cTDP down to 4W, the y10c cTDP up to 6W (and a 1ghz clock floor) while the y10 is locked at the baseline 4.5W. However ark.Intel.com doesn't list any cTDP options for the y10 and y10a; while listing the y10c as cTDPing to 3.5 or 6 from a base of 4.5.
Well they keep postponing the Core M launch! That's bad! I want to buy a Core M device during this month!
What is holding them up? It shouldn't be low production volumes. But rather retailers not selling enough of their old stock. Well.... you must lower the prices further to convince people to buy your 'old' products!
Well they keep postponing the Core M launch! That's bad! I want to buy a Core M device during this month!
What is holding them up? It shouldn't be low production volumes. But rather retailers not selling enough of their old stock. Well.... you must lower the prices further to convince people to buy your 'old' products!
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
42 Comments
Back to Article
jhoff80 - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Out of curiosity, with some end-users already getting the Yoga Pro 3, any idea when the site will have a comprehensive review of the new chips?PhytochromeFr - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Unfortunately, Core M 5Y70 is mediocre. cause of hard throttling, It scores 30~40 lesser than Prototype. and 5Y10 is COMPLETLY ABSURD. It scores CB less than Z3795!!!III-V - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
That's the Yoga 3's issue, not Core M's issue.PhytochromeFr - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Panasonic LZ4 has same issue.PhytochromeFr - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
ah, sry. not LZ4. it is RZ4.Krysto - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Those TDPs are most definitely not real, which means only two things: either the OEMs prepare for those TDPs, and then you have an overheating device, or Intel is being misleading with its claims for THOSE TDPs (performance could be much lower than claimed/shown in benchmarks at that TDP).AnakinG - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
How did you come to that conclusion???Frenetic Pony - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
He is a wizard that can see into the future, do not question his might!Wixman666 - Wednesday, November 5, 2014 - link
DON'T SAY IT OUT LOUD! OMG too late :(chizow - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Curious as well what you are basing these comments, given Intel has already sampled demo tablets that are passively cooled in thin form factor tablets....http://www.anandtech.com/show/8515/quick-look-at-c...
Samus - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Laziest trollin' attempt ever.tipoo - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
If they throttle as bad as the Core M in the Yoga 3, the added clock speed might not count for much. 5W is a pretty tight budget (yes it can boost past that).frostyfiredude - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
I think it was found the Yoga 3 uses the 3.5W TDP, it'd explain the throttling since that isn't much room at all. A few months of extra refinement of the 14nm process along with a new stepping and a 4.5 or 6W TDP would do a tonne to keep it running well.toyotabedzrock - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
I guess the 14 nm ramp is going better than they expected, not surprising given Intel's past performance.On a mostly unrelated note will we see a decapped A8X and the 64bit Denver from Nvidia? I really want to see what is inside those chips.
chizow - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
I'm sure Chipworks will have exposed die shots in 1-4 weeks from retail availability....name99 - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Better than they expected? You're kidding, right?After delivering an underwhelming 5Y70, they're now giving us a bunch of worse performing chips and one that is a few percent better performing. Anything that actually matters (decent laptop performance and up) remains, so far, for Q2 or later.
Pantsu - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
The Yoga 3 Pro is underpowered based on the reviews. Probably better to keep using a 15 W part with proper cooling, instead of a "4,5W" part with a 25mm noise maker.Samus - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
I agree. I think the Yoga form factor doesn't need a 4.5w part. Not that Core-M is slow, but it isn't going to replace current Core U chips in performance. Haswell really is a great mobile CPU.The problem with mobile (for Intel) is that CPU's aren't really the problem with battery life. Sure they can be faster and produce less heat, but too much effort is put into SoC's when the real issue lingers. It's the screens.
We either need a breakthrough in LED technology (or a push for cost-effective OLED) or in battery technology.
fokka - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
or manufacturers should stick with nice 1080p panels for a little longer, instead of killing efficiency with 1800p and more.lilmoe - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
+1Walkop - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Not really. The Surface Pro 3 display uses under 4w at max brightness (yes, it's very efficient (uses less power than the 9.7" iPad Air at equivalent brightness levels).SoC is definitely the biggest draw. Batteries are the issue, now.
Walkop - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
(Meant to reply here)Not really. The Surface Pro 3 display uses under 4w at max brightness (yes, it's very efficient (uses less power than the 9.7" iPad Air at equivalent brightness levels).
SoC is definitely the biggest draw. Batteries are the issue, now.
kpb321 - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Off hand I'd consider raising the minimum GPU speed a slight regression/downgrade rather than an improvement? I assume the old versions could run their GPU at 300mhz if they needed to and running at 100mhz when possible should take less power so having a min of 300mhz should be a slight increase in power consumptions in certain situations. It's possible that Intel found that the GPU never really got down to those speeds or it doesn't really use any more power than 100% but I'd guess it was done to make the binning easier to get the higher cpu/gpu boosts.Meaker10 - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Just like a 2.6ghz base i7 will idle below that so will the gpu in this.dgingeri - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Most importantly: can it play World of Warcraft?eddman - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Am I right to assume that those turbo frequencies are for just one core active? What are the numbers for two cores?fokka - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
previous info said that the turbo goes for both cores, if i'm not mistaken. that's great for performance, i'd just like to know what kind of power those chips draw at 2,9ghz.arkhamasylum87 - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
What is the competition for Core-M? This seems to be a better CPU/GPU than Apple A8X/Tegra K1 but still it is not fit for tablets. Atom as of now cannot hold a candle to Apple A8X/Tegra K1, I feel like either Intel needs to bring this architecture down to like 2.5W level to really target ultrathin fanless devices or dramatically improve the perf of Atom to meet competition. Plus the pricing differences between these are insane which makes me think this wont go into Ipad-like tablets. Not sure what this chip is meant for. Surface Pro 4? All the popular convertibles/2-in1s run on U series and taking this chip would be a regression.michael2k - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Um, it would be the Tegra K1 and A8X, as you mention. The pricing issue is a problem for Intel, of course, but that won't stop NVIDIA, Samsung, Qualcomm, and Apple from continuing to push ARM into Intel's bread and butter.TheJian - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
You must be kidding. This thing is $281 for top model and likely $225 for lower models (just like the last ones on haswell). That is NOT competition for a $25-35 soc from ARM side. That is partially why Yoga 3 pro is $1300 and why you are NOT likely to see this in anything under $700 (IIRC Intel said $800+). K1 is in $300 & $400 tablets already, let me know when Intel gets this into anything under even $500. $281 is nearly the price of an entire shield tablet ($300). That's like saying a Lamborghini is competition for a ford focus...LOL.ARM's SOC competition is BAYTRAIL and soon Cherrytrail. Then again when they basically GIVE Baytrail away for free, is that even competition? ROFL. When you lose 1.1B on 1.15B worth of crap you are giving them away (they'll hit that 40mil unit target, but only because they're essentially free). But then Baytrail gets it clock cleaned by K1 (See scores of T100 Asus w/z3740 inside, here on anandtech vs. Shield tablet) so...Maybe it should be free ;)
michael2k - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Again, you make my point for me. BayTrail isn't really competitive with the K1 nor the A8X. Price is Intel's problem, not ours. They could choose to price these things at $50 if they chose.The product these parts compete in at the 4.5W TDP are the A8X and the K1.
eddman - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Can you run windows (x86) on a tegra or apple chip?Intel Core is supposed to be used in PCs. No manufacturer will put a Core processor in an iOS or android device.
The competition to ARM processors is Atom, even though it's not able to compete with high-end ARM designs anymore. That might change with airmont; if intel even cares anymore. They can't become a major player by being so slow.
michael2k - Wednesday, November 5, 2014 - link
Why is that a relevant argument? You can run Windows on Atom; the only distinguishing features between Atom and Core is price and performance; given, as you say, that Atom is no longer performance competitive with ARM then that leaves Core M as being performance competitive with ARM.Again, price is Intel's problem; if Intel wishes to compete with ARM in the tablet space they need something more powerful than their current batch of Atom SoC.
eddman - Wednesday, November 5, 2014 - link
Can you not see it? Atom is nowhere as powerful as Core to be used on high-end ultraportable PCs.Intel is not targeting Core towards android at all. It is to be used with windows x86 devices only, where it can be useful.
Core is a complex and high performing architecture that cannot be produced on the cheap.
That is why Atom exists. As I said, airmont will be the one to compete with cortex-A5x ARMs, if it can manage to perform well enough, that is.
P.S. Core is still at least twice as fast as ARM when it comes to raw IPS performance, with A57 at about 4-5 DMIPS/MHz, yet Core is about 8-9.
casperes1996 - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
Can anyone please explain the difference between y10 and y10a? y10c too for that matter if there's more than the gnu difference.DanNeely - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link
According to Wikipedia the y10 can cTDP down to 4W, the y10c cTDP up to 6W (and a 1ghz clock floor) while the y10 is locked at the baseline 4.5W. However ark.Intel.com doesn't list any cTDP options for the y10 and y10a; while listing the y10c as cTDPing to 3.5 or 6 from a base of 4.5.kavaron - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
If someone is using windows core M with 1080p instead of 1800p will the battery life get a boost?kavaron - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
If someone is using windows core M with 1080p instead of 1800p will the battery life get a boost?THE_DOM!NAT0R - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Well they keep postponing the Core M launch! That's bad! I want to buy a Core M device during this month!What is holding them up? It shouldn't be low production volumes. But rather retailers not selling enough of their old stock. Well.... you must lower the prices further to convince people to buy your 'old' products!
PhytochromeFr - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro, Panasonic RZ4 and Dell Latitude 7350 is launched at october.THE_DOM!NAT0R - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Well they keep postponing the Core M launch! That's bad! I want to buy a Core M device during this month!What is holding them up? It shouldn't be low production volumes. But rather retailers not selling enough of their old stock. Well.... you must lower the prices further to convince people to buy your 'old' products!
Wolfpup - Tuesday, November 4, 2014 - link
Fanless x86 Surface! Fanless x86 Surface! :-D