It’s a pre-production unit I would say. So it’s basically the dozen unit(s) you validate the manufacture line with
I think it’s a i7-12900H or something. With a RTX 3070? something like that.
A prototype would be … hm. something like this
This picture is not fake. I have seen one another instance of this – something that vaguely resembles a CPU flanked by two extraordinarily large memory … thingys.
A Prototype is something that is "not yet a product and is a utility to explore the feasibility of concepts. Things like Arduino projects. Something like a Pre-production (or a developer model like the Intel DG1) is basically a product, with a few kinks waiting to be ironed out.
yes, and they built a few. but not the release model?
HPG is much like a concept at this moment. Imagine actually releasing AIC with slotted GDDR6.
Even Intel Arc is in pre-production silicon testing.
My two cents: without any data on performance and power efficiency, I can only read the tea leaves, but I’d prefer Alder Lake-U to Alder Lake-P by a large margin due to much needed (potentially) improved battery life, comparable to Apple laptops’.
Edit: This shouldn’t really come off as a surprise, yet it has, but I’ve just learnt an OEM can adjust the maximum operating TPD of a chip. With this in mind, I’m wondering, could (or rather, can) we adjust that ourselves in order to achieve a result similar to that of equipping Framework with a lower TDP CPU, considering that we have access to the source code of Framework’s EC; and will, hopefully, also have access to the code of future firmwares?
the Alder Lake-P have a max of 6P8E config, although it comes with smaller power output, it is significantly stronger then the best 11th gen (even the beast i9 k version) could offer. Geekbench had a lot of the scores available for the theoritical performance. I think the EC will not be a issue, as they are using open source. Personally i will hook it up to my giant laptop fan, hook a EGPU and turn it into a serious workstation, and tune it to the max. When i need to go to school, i just turn it to the most power effiencient form. This might be the ideal style of such upgrade and the liberty of the freed EC.
a 6p8e would also be capable of drawing too much power (of being too powerful) that our laptop cannot handle. However the i7-1280P indeed have 6p8e but as I said. Do anyone really need the two extra performance core on his ultrabook? I don’t think so.
An imaginary lineup that covers a pretty board spectrum with three config would be the i7-1260p (high end), i5-1240p (mid-high end) and i5-1235 (mid end) and anything else being unnecessary. Although we can feature a “bare minimum” setup with the Pentium 8505 for budget users.
Which CPU do you think fit your bill?
i7-1270P / i7-1260P
i5-1250P/15-1240P
i3-1220P
i7-1265U/i7-1255U
i5-1245U/i5-1235U
i3-1215U
0voters
Keep in mind that the P series CPUs feature more cores, more graphics as well as more cache, as well as increased power consumption, while U series CPU feature less cores, about similar graphics (with less frequency) and less cache, despite being marketed as “i7” (which indicates high performance). A i7-1265U have the same number of cores as a i3-1220P except with a higher turbo and beefier graphics.
i am using a dell precision 7760 right now. i opt for no gpu and put one of the quick access ssd slot as the egpu connector which works greater then i expected. especially with those thicc workstations there are infinite variety. the framework shown me how this variety can be achieved with thin and light, just hope they can get something more then relying on thunderbolt only
I’ll gladly take increased battery life and a low operating temperature over raw performance in an ultrabook any day, so I’d choose either 1250U or 1260U for their chilly, out of the box wattages.
Yeah, for what I’m looking for in an ultrabook, those u series seem pretty interesting. I’d take battery life over more power, it’s a thin and light, not a workstation or a desktop replacement. Pretty excited for reviews to come out farther down intel’s stack.
I would agree. However, remember that running less cores on a higher clock tend to be less efficient (and stable) than running more cores on a lower clock. However, my current preference of the i7-1260P is largely due to the fact that not much is known about the E cores, so I am counting on the extra P cores to do the work that that otherwise will be handled to the E cores. Even if it is illustrated that a 6 P 8E is extremely performant on games, it is to be reminded that it has the 6 P cores to be performant, whereas 4P and 2P cores might be less performant.
Which is also compounded by the fact that most intel chips will not turbo boost (to the max allowed) for more than 30 seconds even if all other components of the system are able to handle the extra load.
Desktop chips seem to have reversed the trend (and boost indefinitely), which is a very good thing.
If the i7-1255U can boost all the time when I play my game, I see no reason to choose that. Otherwise I think having a processor that can handle the extra work without boosting (1260p) will be better off.
While I agree that a ultrabook don’t need the best performance (hence me skipping over the i7-1280P and the H series), I think for many people it’s their daily driver and it will need to be performant enough for the case when you are performing demanding tasks.
At least all four i7 models have 96EU on the graphics, which is pretty good. I should expect a 50% increase in performance from the i5-1035G5. I can finally play World of Tanks on medium graphics and compiling my code for large projects on the same machine.
Hence you can choose between a few when you buy any decent laptops!
I see no problem offering a “high performance” model (that are not overboard) to the ones that want said high performance. I also see no problem offering a “low performance” model for those that want long battery life.
Currently the poll shows that most people want i7 and i5 P cores.
For me it all depends on the U-series, if those e-cores can pull their weight then I’ll be fine with U-series and I’ll appreciate the better battery life
I’d like either ARC or Radeon dGPU if offered with some sort of Optimus implementation so that the dGPU isn’t pulling power when I don’t need it
If U-series can’t deliver the goods in gaming then P-series is what I want but I know I don’t want H-series
The cost to battery life and more importantly my wallet would be too much for me I think
I think the P series and the U series are with the same price? Like the previous genss of Intel Core Desktop and Mobile. A i7 mobile still cost you around $300 even though a desktop $300 chip pack way way more punch
For example, the i7-10700 Desktop is $323-333 while the i7-10510U sell for a whoppin $409 for less cache, less cores, less TDP, and less Bus Speed.
Which is massive nonsense but I guess it’s kind of “well you are getting the most performant chip of that platform we offer so yeah” type, even if the mobile chips use less silicon and probably have a higher yield, and even if the 10510U is superceded by the mobile H series (which has about 80% more TDP, 50% more cores and 100% more cache and 100% more Bus Speed but is only $10 more expensive)
Careful……list prices are basically meaningless in the b2b world. Anyone building laptops will be buying in enough volume to not have to worry about what the product page on Intel Ark says the price is!
The list price is really not much more than the suppliers first bid in negotiations.
Basically this, regardless of what Intel Ark says, Intel and their partners have every incentive to charge more for what would be considered a “higher” tier product, H-series is more performant and so it will command a higher price tag maybe i5 H-series will cost the same as i7 U-series, impossible to say but the pricing on Intel Ark is useless
What I meant by that is that the system integrators always get a discount compared to the Intel Ark price - every integrator gets their own price for their own reasons, it’s just the way business to business transactions work.
Presumably H series laptops will almost always be more expensive, simply because they will be built to support the higher demand chips, will probably have additional hardware like a dedicated GPU and probably be physically larger.
That said, engineering thin and light machines is much more difficult and thus expensive than big, hefty ones, so ultrabooks using U series chips will probably be just as expensive as H series machines at the higher end.
It’s just a way of providing to different markets with different users, who have different needs and different approaches to meeting those needs - sensible way of doing business!
Oh I knew what you meant, I don’t remember who said it, I think it was Dr. Ian Cutress but it could have been any in the tech media who had heard of a laptop brand being offered free APUs by AMD to entice not using Intel
I was just adding onto what you said by noting that product segmentation is a thing and that H-series will cost more than P-Series, which will cost more than U-series, all else being equal
it was covered briefly on LTT’s WAN Show that said AMD is offering 1 million chips to the manufacturer (as well as tremendous discounts from Intel and other offers) and the manufacturer refusing to take AMD’s offer and eventually someone blowing the whistle on it
Both of which sound super sketchy and shady in its own ways. Whoever that manufacturer is must be really influential
, at least it brought Iris Xe! Although they were limited to 4 cores…