On January 3, the birthday of the company's founding father Gordon Moore (born January 3, 1929), Intel announced a family of new 7th generation Intel Core processors and new Intel 200 series chipsets. We have the opportunity to test the Intel Core i7-7700 and Core i7-7700K processors and compare them with the previous generation processors.
7th Gen Intel Core Processors
The new 7th Gen Intel Core processor family is codenamed Kaby Lake, and these processors are a bit of a stretch new. They, like the 6th generation Core processors, are manufactured using a 14nm process technology and are based on the same processor microarchitecture.
Recall that earlier, before the release of Kaby Lake, Intel released its processors in accordance with the "Tick-Tock" algorithm: the processor microarchitecture changed every two years and the production process changed every two years. But the change of microarchitecture and technical process was shifted relative to each other by a year, so that the technical process changed once a year, then, a year later, the microarchitecture changed, then, again a year later, the technical process changed, etc. However, the company has to maintain such a fast pace for a long time could not and eventually abandoned this algorithm, replacing it with a three-year cycle. The first year is the introduction of a new technical process, the second year - the introduction of a new microarchitecture based on the existing technical process, and the third year - optimization. Thus, another year of optimization was added to "Tick-Tock".
The 5th generation Intel Core processors, codenamed Broadwell, ushered in the 14nm ("Tick") process technology. These were processors with the Haswell microarchitecture (with minor improvements), but produced using a new 14-nanometer process technology. The 6th generation Intel Core processors, codenamed Skylake ("Tock"), were manufactured using the same 14nm process technology as Broadwell, but with a new microarchitecture. And the 7th generation Intel Core processors, codenamed Kaby Lake, are manufactured using the same 14nm process technology (although now it is designated "14+") and are based on the same Skylake microarchitecture, but all of this is optimized and improved. What exactly optimization and what exactly improved - so far it is a mystery shrouded in darkness. This review was written before the official announcement of the new processors, and Intel could not provide us with any official information, so there is still very little information about the new processors.
In general, at the very beginning of the article, it was not by chance that we remembered about the birthday of Gordon Moore, who in 1968 together with Robert Noyce founded the Intel company. Over the years, this legendary man has been credited with many things that he never said. First, his prediction was elevated to the rank of law ("Moore's law"), then this law became the fundamental plan for the development of microelectronics (a kind of analogue of the five-year plan for the development of the national economy of the USSR). However, Moore's law had to be rewritten and corrected several times, since reality, unfortunately, cannot always be planned. Now you need to either rewrite Moore's law once again, which, in general, is already ridiculous, or simply forget about this so-called law. Actually, Intel did just that: since it no longer works, they decided to gradually consign it to oblivion.
However, back to our new processors. It is officially known that the Kaby Lake processor family will include four separate series: S, H, U and Y. In addition, there will be an Intel Xeon series for workstations. Kaby Lake-Y processors targeted at tablets and thin laptops, as well as some models of Kaby Lake-U series processors for laptops, have already been announced. And at the beginning of January, Intel introduced only a few models of the H- and S-series processors. The S-series processors are oriented towards desktop systems, which have an LGA design and which we will talk about in this review. Kaby Lake-S has an LGA1151 socket and is compatible with motherboards based on Intel 100 series chipsets and the new Intel 200 series chipsets. We do not know the release plan for Kaby Lake-S processors, but there is information that a total of 16 new models for desktop PCs are planned, which will traditionally make up three families (Core i7 / i5 / i3). All Kaby Lake-S desktop processors will use only Intel HD Graphics 630 (codenamed Kaby Lake-GT2).
The Intel Core i7 family will consist of three processors: 7700K, 7700 and 7700T. All models in this family have 4 cores, support simultaneous processing of up to 8 threads (Hyper-Threading technology) and have an 8 MB L3 cache. The difference between the two lies in power consumption and clock frequency. In addition, the top-end Core i7-7700K has an unlocked multiplier. A summary of the 7th Gen Intel Core i7 processor family is shown below.
The Intel Core i5 family will comprise seven processors: 7600K, 7600, 7500, 7400, 7600T, 7500T, and 7400T. All models in this family have 4 cores, but do not support Hyper-Threading technology. Their L3 cache size is 6MB. The top model, the Core i5-7600K, has an unlocked clock multiplier and a TDP of 91W. “T” models have a TDP of 35W, while regular models have a TDP of 65W. The 7th Gen Intel Core i5 processor family briefs are listed below.
| CPU | Core i5-7600K | Core i5-7600 | Core i5-7500 | Core i5-7600T | Core i5-7500T | Core i5-7400 | Core i5-7400T |
| Process technology, nm | 14 | ||||||
| Connector | LGA 1151 | ||||||
| Number of Cores | 4 | ||||||
| Number of threads | 4 | ||||||
| L3 cache, MB | 6 | ||||||
| Nominal frequency, GHz | 3,8 | 3,5 | 3,4 | 2,8 | 2,7 | 3,0 | 2,4 |
| Maximum frequency, GHz | 4,2 | 4,1 | 3,8 | 3,7 | 3,3 | 3,5 | 3,0 |
| TDP, W | 91 | 65 | 65 | 35 | 35 | 65 | 35 |
| DDR4 / DDR3L memory frequency, MHz | 2400/1600 | ||||||
| Graphics core | HD Graphics 630 | ||||||
| Recommended cost | $242 | $213 | $192 | $213 | $192 | $182 | $182 |
The Intel Core i3 family will consist of six processors: 7350K, 7320, 7300, 7100, 7300T and 7100T. All models in this family have 2 cores and support Hyper-Threading technology. The "T" in the model name indicates that its TDP is 35 watts. Now in the Intel Core i3 family there is also a model (Core i3-7350K) with an unlocked multiplier factor, the TDP of which is 60 W. A summary of the 7th Gen Intel Core i3 processor family is listed below.
Intel Chipsets 200 Series
Along with the Kaby Lake-S processors, Intel has announced new Intel 200-series chipsets. More precisely, so far only the top-end Intel Z270 chipset has been presented, and the rest will be announced a little later. All in all, the Intel 200 series chipset family will include five options (Q270, Q250, B250, H270, Z270) for desktop processors and three solutions (CM238, HM175, QM175) for mobile processors.
If we compare the family of new chipsets with the family of 100-series chipsets, then everything is obvious: Z270 is a new version of Z170, H270 is replacing H170, Q270 is replacing Q170, and Q250 and B250 chipsets are replacing Q150 and B150, respectively. The only chipset that hasn't been replaced is the H110. There is no H210 chipset or similar in the 200 series. The positioning of the 200-series chipsets is exactly the same as of the 100-series chipsets: the Q270 and Q250 are targeted at the enterprise market, the Z270 and H270 are targeted at consumer PCs, and the B250 is targeted at the SMB sector of the market. However, this positioning is very arbitrary, and motherboard manufacturers often have their own vision of chipset positioning.
So what's new in the Intel 200-series chipsets and how are they better than the Intel 100-series chipsets? The question is not idle, because Kaby Lake-S processors are compatible with Intel 100-series chipsets. So is it worth buying a motherboard based on Intel Z270 if, for example, a motherboard based on Intel Z170 chipset turns out to be cheaper (all other things being equal)? Alas, there is no need to say that the Intel 200 series chipsets have serious advantages. Almost the only difference between the new chipsets and the old ones is the slightly increased number of HSIO ports (high-speed input / output ports) due to the addition of several PCIe 3.0 ports.
Next, we will take a closer look at what and how much is added in each chipset, but for now we will briefly consider the features of the Intel 200 series chipsets as a whole, focusing on the top-end options, in which everything is implemented to the maximum.
To begin with, like the Intel 100-series chipsets, the new chipsets allow 16 PCIe 3.0 processor ports (PEG ports) to be combined to implement various PCIe slot options. For example, Intel Z270 and Q270 chipsets (like their counterparts Intel Z170 and Q170) allow you to combine 16 PEG processor ports in the following combinations: x16, x8 / x8 or x8 / x4 / x4. The rest of the chipsets (H270, B250 and Q250) only allow one possible combination of PEG port allocation: x16. Also, Intel 200-series chipsets support dual-channel DDR4 or DDR3L memory operation. In addition, Intel 200-series chipsets support the ability to simultaneously connect up to three monitors to the processor graphics core (just like in the case of 100-series chipsets).
As for the SATA and USB ports, nothing has changed here. The integrated SATA controller provides up to six SATA 6Gb / s ports. Naturally, Intel RST (Rapid Storage Technology) technology is supported, which allows you to configure a SATA controller in RAID controller mode (albeit not on all chipsets) with support for levels 0, 1, 5, and 10. Intel RST technology is supported not only for SATA -port, but also for drives with PCIe interface (x4 / x2, M.2 and SATA Express connectors). Perhaps, speaking of Intel RST technology, it makes sense to mention the new technology for creating Intel Optane drives, but in practice there is nothing to talk about yet, there are no ready-made solutions yet. The top models of Intel 200 series chipsets support up to 14 USB ports, of which up to 10 ports can be USB 3.0, and the rest - USB 2.0.
Like the Intel 100 series chipsets, the Intel 200 series chipsets support Flexible I / O technology, which allows you to configure High Speed Input / Output (HSIO) PCIe, SATA, and USB 3.0 ports. Flexible I / O technology allows some HSIO ports to be configured as PCIe or USB 3.0 ports, and some HSIO ports as PCIe or SATA ports. In total, Intel 200 series chipsets can implement 30 high-speed I / O ports (Intel 100 series chipsets had 26 HSIO ports).
The first six high-speed ports (Port # 1 - Port # 6) are strictly fixed: these are USB 3.0 ports. The next four high-speed ports on the chipset (Port # 7 - Port # 10) can be configured as either USB 3.0 or PCIe ports. Port # 10 can also be used as a GbE network port, that is, the GbE MAC controller is built into the chipset itself, and the PHY controller (the MAC controller in conjunction with the PHY controller forms a full-fledged network controller) can only be connected to specific high-speed ports on the chipset. In particular, these can be ports Port # 10, Port # 11, Port # 15, Port # 18 and Port # 19. Another 12 HSIO ports (Port # 11 - Port # 14, Port # 17, Port # 18, Port # 25 - Port # 30) are assigned to PCIe ports. Four more ports (Port # 21 - Port # 24) are configured as either PCIe or SATA 6Gb / s ports. Ports Port # 15, Port # 16 and Port # 19, Port # 20 have a feature. They can be configured as either PCIe ports or SATA 6Gb / s ports. The peculiarity is that one SATA 6 Gb / s port can be configured either on Port # 15 or on Port # 19 (that is, this is the same SATA port # 0, which can be brought out either on Port # 15 , or at Port # 19). Likewise, another SATA 6Gb / s port (SATA # 1) is routed to either Port # 16 or Port # 20.
As a result, we find that the chipset can accommodate up to 10 USB 3.0 ports, up to 24 PCIe ports and up to 6 SATA 6 Gb / s ports. However, one more circumstance should be noted here. A maximum of 16 PCIe devices can be connected to these 20 PCIe ports at the same time. Devices in this case refers to controllers, connectors and slots. One PCIe device may require one, two, or four PCIe ports to connect. For example, if we are talking about a PCI Express 3.0 x4 slot, then this is one PCIe device, which requires 4 PCIe 3.0 ports to connect.
The diagram of the distribution of high-speed I / O ports for the Intel 200-series chipsets is shown in the figure.
Compared to what was in the Intel 100 series chipsets, there are very few changes: we added four strictly fixed PCIe ports (HSIO ports of the Port # 27 - Port # 30 chipset), which can be used to combine Intel RST for PCIe Storage ... Everything else, including the numbering of the HSIO ports, remained unchanged. The diagram of the distribution of high-speed I / O ports for the Intel 100-series chipsets is shown in the figure.
Until now, we have considered the functionality of the new chipsets in general, without being tied to specific models. Further, in the summary table, we present brief characteristics of each Intel 200 series chipset.
And for comparison, here are the brief characteristics of the Intel 100 series chipsets.
A diagram of the distribution of high-speed I / O ports for five Intel 200-series chipsets is shown in the figure.
And for comparison, a similar diagram for five Intel 100-series chipsets:
And the last thing worth noting when talking about the Intel 200 series chipsets: only the Intel Z270 chipset has support for overclocking the processor and memory.
Now, after our quick review of the new Kaby Lake-S processors and Intel 200-series chipsets, let's move on to testing new products.
Performance research
We were able to test two new items: the top-end Intel Core i7-7700K processor with an unlocked multiplier factor and the Intel Core i7-7700 processor. For testing, we used a stand with the following configuration:
In addition, in order to evaluate the performance of the new processors in relation to the performance of the previous generations, we also tested the Intel Core i7-6700K processor on the described stand.
Brief specifications of the tested processors are given in the table.
To evaluate performance, we used our new methodology using the iXBT Application Benchmark 2017. The Intel Core i7-7700K processor was tested two times: with default settings and in a state of overclocking to 5 GHz. Overclocking was carried out by changing the multiplication factor.
Results were calculated for five runs of each test with a 95% confidence level. Please note that the integral results in this case are normalized relative to the reference system, which also uses an Intel Core i7-6700K processor. However, the configuration of the reference system differs from the configuration of the bench for testing: the reference system uses the Asus Z170-WS motherboard on the Intel Z170 chipset.
The test results are presented in the table and in the diagram.
| Logical group of tests | Core i7-6700K (ref. System) | Core i7-6700K | Core i7-7700 | Core i7-7700K | Core i7-7700K @ 5 GHz |
| Video conversion, points | 100 | 104.5 ± 0.3 | 99.6 ± 0.3 | 109.0 ± 0.4 | 122.0 ± 0.4 |
| MediaCoder x64 0.8.45.5852, s | 106 ± 2 | 101.0 ± 0.5 | 106.0 ± 0.5 | 97.0 ± 0.5 | 87.0 ± 0.5 |
| HandBrake 0.10.5, s | 103 ± 2 | 98.7 ± 0.1 | 103.5 ± 0.1 | 94.5 ± 0.4 | 84.1 ± 0.3 |
| Rendering, points | 100 | 104.8 ± 0.3 | 99.8 ± 0.3 | 109.5 ± 0.2 | 123.2 ± 0.4 |
| POV-Ray 3.7, s | 138.1 ± 0.3 | 131.6 ± 0.2 | 138.3 ± 0.1 | 125.7 ± 0.3 | 111.0 ± 0.3 |
| LuxRender 1.6 x64 OpenCL, with | 253 ± 2 | 241.5 ± 0.4 | 253.2 ± 0.6 | 231.2 ± 0.5 | 207 ± 2 |
| Вlender 2.77a, with | 220.7 ± 0.9 | 210 ± 2 | 222 ± 3 | 202 ± 2 | 180 ± 2 |
| Video editing and video content creation, points | 100 | 105.3 ± 0.4 | 100.4 ± 0.2 | 109.0 ± 0.1 | 121.8 ± 0.6 |
| Adobe Premiere Pro CC 2015.4, with | 186.9 ± 0.5 | 178.1 ± 0.2 | 187.2 ± 0.5 | 170.66 ± 0.3 | 151.3 ± 0.3 |
| Magix Vegas Pro 13, with | 366.0 ± 0.5 | 351.0 ± 0.5 | 370.0 ± 0.5 | 344 ± 2 | 312 ± 3 |
| Magix Movie Edit Pro 2016 Premium v.15.0.0.102, s | 187.1 ± 0.4 | 175 ± 3 | 181 ± 2 | 169.1 ± 0.6 | 152 ± 3 |
| Adobe After Effects CC 2015.3, c | 288.0 ± 0.5 | 237.7 ± 0.8 | 288.4 ± 0.8 | 263.2 ± 0.7 | 231 ± 3 |
| Photodex ProShow Producer 8.0.3648, with | 254.0 ± 0.5 | 241.3 ± 4 | 254 ± 1 | 233.6 ± 0.7 | 210.0 ± 0.5 |
| Digital photo processing, points | 100 | 104.4 ± 0.8 | 100 ± 2 | 108 ± 2 | 113 ± 3 |
| Adobe Photoshop CC 2015.5, s | 521 ± 2 | 491 ± 2 | 522 ± 2 | 492 ± 3 | 450 ± 6 |
| Adobe Photoshop Lightroom CC 2015.6.1, c | 182 ± 3 | 180 ± 2 | 190 ± 10 | 174 ± 8 | 176 ± 7 |
| PhaseOne Capture One Pro 9.2.0.118, s | 318 ± 7 | 300 ± 6 | 308 ± 6 | 283.0 ± 0.5 | 270 ± 20 |
| OCR, points | 100 | 104.9 ± 0.3 | 100.6 ± 0.3 | 109.0 ± 0.9 | 122 ± 2 |
| Abbyy FineReader 12 Professional, with | 442 ± 2 | 421.9 ± 0.9 | 442.1 ± 0.2 | 406 ± 3 | 362 ± 5 |
| Archiving, points | 100 | 101.0 ± 0.2 | 98.2 ± 0.6 | 96.1 ± 0.4 | 105.8 ± 0.6 |
| WinRAR 5.40 СPU, s | 91.6 ± 0.05 | 90.7 ± 0.2 | 93.3 ± 0.5 | 95.3 ± 0.4 | 86.6 ± 0.5 |
| Scientific calculations, points | 100 | 102.8 ± 0.7 | 99.7 ± 0.8 | 106.3 ± 0.9 | 115 ± 3 |
| LAMMPS 64-bit 20160516, s | 397 ± 2 | 384 ± 3 | 399 ± 3 | 374 ± 4 | 340 ± 2 |
| NAMD 2.11, s | 234 ± 1 | 223.3 ± 0.5 | 236 ± 4 | 215 ± 2 | 190.5 ± 0.7 |
| FFTW 3.3.5, ms | 32.8 ± 0.6 | 33 ± 2 | 32.7 ± 0.9 | 33 ± 2 | 34 ± 4 |
| Mathworks Matlab 2016a, with | 117.9 ± 0.6 | 111.0 ± 0.5 | 118 ± 2 | 107 ± 1 | 94 ± 3 |
| Dassault SolidWorks 2016 SP0 Flow Simulation, with | 253 ± 2 | 244 ± 2 | 254 ± 4 | 236 ± 3 | 218 ± 3 |
| File operations speed, points | 100 | 105.5 ± 0.7 | 102 ± 1 | 102 ± 1 | 106 ± 2 |
| WinRAR 5.40 Storage, s | 81.9 ± 0.5 | 78.9 ± 0.7 | 81 ± 2 | 80.4 ± 0.8 | 79 ± 2 |
| UltraISO Premium Edition 9.6.5.3237, s | 54.2 ± 0.6 | 49.2 ± 0.7 | 53 ± 2 | 52 ± 2 | 48 ± 3 |
| Data copying speed, s | 41.5 ± 0.3 | 40.4 ± 0.3 | 40.8 ± 0.5 | 40.8 ± 0.5 | 40.2 ± 0.1 |
| Integral CPU result, points | 100 | 104.0 ± 0.2 | 99.7 ± 0.3 | 106.5 ± 0.3 | 117.4 ± 0.7 |
| Integral result Storage, points | 100 | 105.5 ± 0.7 | 102 ± 1 | 102 ± 1 | 106 ± 2 |
| Integral performance result, points | 100 | 104.4 ± 0.2 | 100.3 ± 0.4 | 105.3 ± 0.4 | 113.9 ± 0.8 |
If we compare the test results of processors obtained at the same bench, then everything is very predictable. The Core i7-7700K processor at default settings (no overclocking) is slightly faster (by 7%) than the Core i7-7700, which is explained by the difference in their clock frequency. Overclocking the Core i7-7700K to 5GHz allows you to achieve up to 10% better performance than this processor without overclocking. The Core i7-6700K processor (without overclocking) is slightly more efficient (4% more) than the Core i7-7700 processor, which is also explained by the difference in their clock frequency. At the same time, the Core i7-7700K model is 2.5% more productive than the previous generation Core i7-6700K model.
As you can see, the new 7th generation Intel Core processors do not provide any performance jump. In fact, these are the same 6th generation Intel Core processors, but with slightly higher clock speeds. The only advantage of the new processors is that they run better (of course, we are talking about K-series processors with an unlocked multiplier). In particular, our copy of the Core i7-7700K processor, which we did not choose on purpose, overclocked to 5.0 GHz without any problems and worked absolutely stable when using air cooling. It was possible to run this processor at 5.1 GHz, but in the stress test mode of the processor, the system freezes. Of course, it is incorrect to draw conclusions on a single processor instance, but the information of our colleagues confirms that most Kaby Lake K-series processors run better than Skylake processors. Note that our sample of the Core i7-6700K processor overclocked at best to 4.9 GHz, but only stably worked at 4.5 GHz.
Now let's look at the power consumption of the processors. Recall that we connect the measuring unit in the break of the power supply circuits between the power supply and the motherboard - to the 24-pin (ATX) and 8-pin (EPS12V) connectors of the power supply. Our measuring unit is capable of measuring voltage and current on the 12V, 5V and 3.3V buses of the ATX connector, as well as the supply voltage and current on the 12V bus of the EPS12V connector.
The total power consumption during the test is understood as the power transmitted over the 12 V, 5 V and 3.3 V buses of the ATX connector and the 12 V bus of the EPS12V connector. The power consumed by the processor during the test is the power transmitted through the 12 V bus of the EPS12V connector (this connector is used only for powering the processor). However, it should be borne in mind that in this case we are talking about the power consumption of the processor together with the converter of its supply voltage on the board. Naturally, the processor supply voltage regulator has a certain efficiency (obviously below 100%), so that part of the electrical energy is consumed by the regulator itself, and the real power consumed by the processor is slightly lower than the values we measure.
The measurement results for the total power consumption in all tests, except for the drive performance tests, are presented below:
Similar results of measuring the power consumption of the processor are as follows:
Of interest is, first of all, a comparison of the power consumption of the Core i7-6700K and Core i7-7700K processors in the operating mode without overclocking. The Core i7-6700K processor has lower power consumption, that is, the Core i7-7700K processor is slightly more productive, but it also has a higher power consumption. Moreover, if the integrated performance of the Core i7-7700K processor is 2.5% higher in comparison with the performance of the Core i7-6700K, then the average power consumption of the Core i7-7700K processor is already 17% higher!
And if we introduce such an indicator as energy efficiency, determined by the ratio of the integral performance indicator to the average power consumption (in fact, performance per watt of energy consumed), then for the Core i7-7700K processor this figure will be 1.67 W -1, and for the processor Core i7-6700K - 1.91 W -1.
However, such results are obtained only if we compare the power consumption over the 12 V bus of the EPS12V connector. But if we consider the full capacity (which is more logical from the user's point of view), then the situation is somewhat different. Then the energy efficiency of a system with a Core i7-7700K processor will be 1.28 W -1, and with a Core i7-6700K processor - 1.24 W -1. Thus, the energy efficiency of the systems is practically the same.
conclusions
We have no disappointments about the new processors. Nobody promised what is called. Let us remind once again that we are not talking about a new microarchitecture or a new technical process, but only about optimizing the microarchitecture and technical process, that is, about optimizing Skylake processors. Of course, there is no reason to expect that such an optimization can give a serious performance gain. The only observed optimization result is that we managed to slightly increase the clock speeds. In addition, the K-series processors in the Kaby Lake family have better overclocking than their Skylake counterparts.
If we talk about the new generation of Intel 200-series chipsets, then the only thing that distinguishes them from the Intel 100-series chipsets is the addition of four PCIe 3.0 ports. What does this mean for the user? And it doesn't mean anything at all. There is no need to wait for an increase in the number of connectors and ports on motherboards, since there are already too many of them. As a result, the functionality of the boards will not change, except that they will be able to simplify a little during design: you will have to come up with less sophisticated separation schemes to ensure the operation of all connectors, slots and controllers in conditions of a shortage of PCIe 3.0 lines / ports. It would be logical to assume that this will lead to a decrease in the cost of motherboards based on 200 series chipsets, but it's hard to believe in it.
And in conclusion, a few words about whether it makes sense to change the awl for soap. There is no point in changing a computer based on a Skylake processor and a motherboard with a 100-series chipset to a new system with a Kaby Lake processor and a motherboard with a 200-series chipset. It's just throwing money down the drain. But if the time has come to change the computer due to the moral obsolescence of the hardware, then, of course, it makes sense to pay attention to Kaby Lake and a motherboard with a 200 series chipset, and you should look first of all at the prices. If the system on Kaby Lake turns out to be comparable (with equal functionality) in cost to the system on Skylake (and a board with the Intel 100 series chipset), then it makes sense. If such a system turns out to be more expensive, then it makes no sense.
Previously, when choosing a processor for their computer, users mainly paid attention to the brand and the clock speed. Today the situation has changed a bit. No, even today you will need to make a choice between two manufacturers - Intel and AMD, but this will not end there. Times have changed and both companies produce a good quality product that can satisfy the needs of almost any demanding user.
However, each manufacturer's product has its own strengths and weaknesses, which are manifested in the performance of various software applications, as well as in the range of prices and performance. Plus, today a processor with a much lower clock frequency can easily bypass its faster brother, and a multi-core processor may turn out to be slower than a processor based on the old architecture, with a certain load on the system.
We will tell you how modern processors differ from each other, and the choice is yours.
Characteristics of modern processors
1. CPU clock speed
This indicator, which determines the number of clock cycles (operations) that the processor can do per second of time. Previously, this indicator was decisive when choosing a computer and a subjective assessment of processor performance.
Now, the times have come when this figure is sufficient for the vast majority of modern processors to perform standard tasks, therefore, when working with many applications, there will not be a significant increase in performance due to a higher clock frequency. Performance is now determined by other parameters.
2. Number of Cores
Most modern computer processors have two or more cores, the exception can be made only by the most budget models. Everything seems to be logical here - more cores, higher performance, but in reality it turns out that everything is not so simple. In some applications, the performance gain may indeed be due to the number of cores, but in other applications the multi-core processor may be inferior to its predecessor with fewer cores.
3 The amount of cache memory for processors
In order to increase the speed of data exchange with the computer's RAM, additional high-speed memory blocks are installed on the manufactured processors (the so-called caches of the first, second, third levels, or LI, L2, L3 cache). Again, everything seems logical - the larger the cache memory in the processor, the higher its performance.
But here again different processor models emerge, which, as a rule, differ from each other by several technical parameters at once, so it is practically impossible to reveal the direct dependence of performance on the size of the chip's cache memory.
Moreover, a lot also depends on the specifics of the software application code. Some applications, with a large cache, give a noticeable increase, while others, on the contrary, start to work worse because of the program code.
4 Core
The core is the basis of any processor, from which other characteristics are based. You can find two processors with at first glance similar technical characteristics (number of cores, clock frequency), but with different architectures and they will show completely different results in performance tests and software applications.
Traditionally, processors based on newer cores are much better at handling various programs and therefore perform better than models based on outdated technologies (even if the clock speeds are the same).
5 Technical process
This is the scale of modern technologies, which actually determine the size of the semiconductor elements that serve in the internal circuits of the processor. The smaller these elements are, the more perfect the applied technology. This does not mean at all that a modern processor, created on the basis of a modern technical process, will be faster than a representative of the old series. It's just that he can, for example, heat up less, and therefore work more efficiently.
6 Front Side Bus (FSB)
The system bus frequency is the rate at which the processor core communicates with the RAM, discrete graphics card, and peripheral controllers on the computer's motherboard. Everything is simple here. The higher the bandwidth, the correspondingly higher the performance of the computer (all other things being equal technical characteristics of the computers in question).
Deciphering the names of Intel processors
Learning to navigate the huge range of different names of Intel processors is quite simple. First you need to figure out the positioning of the processors themselves:
Core i7- currently the top line of the company
Core i5- are distinguished by high performance
Core i3- low price, high / medium performance
All Core i series processors are built on the Sandy Bridge core and belong to the second generation of Intel Core processors. Most models start with 2, while more recent modifications based on the latest Ivy Bridge core are marked with 3.
Now it is very easy to determine what generation this or that processor, and on the basis of which core it was created. For example, the Core i5-3450 belongs to the third generation based on the Ivy Bridge core, and the Core i5-2310 is, respectively, the second generation based on the Sandy Bridge core.
When you know the type of processor core, you can already roughly judge not only its capabilities, but also about the potential heat release during loading. Representatives of the third generation heat up much less than their predecessors thanks to a more modern technical process.
In addition to numbers, suffixes are sometimes used in processor names:
TO- for processors with an unlocked multiplier (this allows experienced computer users to overclock the processor themselves)
S- for products with increased energy efficiency, T - for the most economical processors.
Intel Core 2 Quad
The line of popular four-core processors based on the outdated Yorkfield core (45 nm process technology), due to the attractive low price and fairly high performance, the line of these processors is relevant today.
Intel Pentium and Celeron
When labeling budget Pentium and Celeron processors, they use the designations G860, G620 and some others. The higher the number after the letter, the correspondingly the processor is more productive. If the marking numbers differ insignificantly, then, most likely, we are talking about various modifications of chips in the same production line, usually they are small and consists of only a few hundred megahertz of the core clock frequency. Sometimes the size of the cache memory, and even the number of cores, differ, and this already has a much stronger effect on the differences in power and performance. Therefore, it will be better if you do not rely on the marking of chips, but check all the technical specifications on the official website of the seller or manufacturer, because it will take little time, but it will help save nerves and money.
An illustrative example is that the Celeron G440 and Celeron G530 processors, differing in price by only 200 rubles, actually have a different number of cores (Celeron G440 - one, Celeron G530 - two), different clock frequency of the core (the G530 has 800 MHz more ), the G530 also has twice the cache. However, the heat dissipation of the latter processor is almost twice as much, although both processors are based on the same Sandy Bridge core.
Intel processor technologies
Intel processors are considered the most productive today thanks to the Core i7 Extreme Edition family. Depending on the model, they can have up to 6 cores simultaneously, clock speeds up to 3300 MHz and up to 15 MB L3 cache. The most popular cores in the desktop processor segment are based on Intel - Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge.
Just like the competitor, Intel processors use proprietary technologies of their own design to improve system efficiency.
1. Hyper Threading- Due to this technology, each physical core of the processor is capable of processing two threads of calculations simultaneously, it turns out that the number of logical cores actually doubles.
2. Turbo Boost- Allows the user to automatically overclock the processor, while not exceeding the maximum allowable operating temperature of the cores.
3. Intel QuickPath Interconnect (QPI)- The QPI ring bus connects all components of the processor, due to this, all possible delays in the exchange of information are minimized.
4. Visualization Technology- Hardware support for virtualization solutions.
5. Intel Execute Disable Bit- In practice, it provides hardware protection against possible virus attacks, which are based on buffer overflow technology.
6. Intel SpeedStep-A tool that allows you to change the voltage level and frequency depending on the load on the processor.
Deciphering the names of AMD processors
AMD FX
The top line of multi-core computer processors with a specially removed multiplier limit (for the sake of self-overclocking) to ensure high performance when working with demanding applications. Based on the first digit of the name, we can say how many cores are installed in the processor: FX-4100 has four cores, FX-6100 has six cores, and FX-8150 has eight cores. In the line of these processors, there are also several modifications with slightly different clock speeds (the FX-8150 processor has it 500 MHz higher than that of the FX-8120 processor). AMD A
A line with a graphics core built into the processor. The number designation in the name indicates that it belongs to a specific performance class: AC - performance sufficient for the vast majority of standard daily tasks, A6 - performance sufficient for creating HD video conferencing, A8 - performance sufficient for confident viewing of Blu-ray movies with the effect of 3D or launching modern 3D games in multi-display mode (with the ability to simultaneously connect four monitors).
AMD Phenom II and Athlon II
The earliest processors from the AMD Phenom II line were officially released back in 2010, but due to their low price and rather high performance, they still enjoy some popularity today.
The number of cores in the processor is indicated by the number in the name immediately after the X. For example, the marking of the AMD Phenom II X4 Deneb processor tells us that it belongs to the Phenom II processor family, has four cores and is based on the Deneb core. Completely similar marking rules can be seen in the Athlon series.
AMD Sempron
Under this name, the manufacturer produces budget processors designed for desktop office computers.
AMD processor technologies
The top-of-the-line AMD FX processors, based on the new Zambezi core, can offer the discerning user eight cores, 8MB L3 cache and a processor clock speed of up to 4200MHz.
Most modern processors made by AMD support the following technologies by default:
1. AMD Turbo CORE- This technology is designed to automatically adjust the performance of all processor cores through controlled overclocking (Intel has a similar technology called TurboBoost).
2.AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions), ХОР and FMA4- A tool that has an extended set of commands specifically designed for working with floating point numbers. Definitely a toolkit.
3. AES (Advanced Encryption Standard)- In software applications using data encryption, improves performance.
4. AMD Visualization (AMD-V)- This virtualization technology helps to share the resources of one computer among several virtual machines.
5. AMD PowcrNow!- Power management technology. They help the user achieve performance gains by dynamically activating and deactivating a portion of the processor.
6. NX Bit- Unique anti-virus technology that helps prevent infection of a personal computer with certain types of malware.
Comparison of processor performance
Looking through price lists with prices and characteristics of modern processors, you can come to real confusion. Surprisingly, a processor with more cores on board and with a higher clock speed can cost less than copies with fewer cores and lower clock speeds. The thing is that the real performance of the processor depends not only on the main characteristics, but also on the efficiency of the core itself, the support of modern technologies and, of course, on the capabilities of the platform itself for which the processor was created (you can recall the logic of the motherboard, the capabilities of the video system, about bus bandwidth and much more).
That is why, one cannot judge the performance of a processor based only on the characteristics written on paper, you need to have data on the results of independent performance tests (preferably with those applications with which you plan to constantly work). Depending on the type of workload created, similar processors can produce completely different results when working with the same programs. How can an untrained person figure out which type of processor is right for him? Let's try to figure it out by conducting a comparative test of processors with the same retail price in various software applications.
1. Working with office software. When using familiar office applications and browsers, the performance gain can be achieved due to the higher clock speed of the processor. A large amount of cache memory or a large number of cores will not give the expected performance gain for this type of application. For example, the AMD Sempron 145 processor, which is cheaper compared to the Intel Celeron G440, based on the 45nm Sargas core, shows better performance in benchmarks with office applications, while the Intel product is based on the more modern 32nm Sandy Bridge core. The clock speed is the key to success when working with office applications.
2. Computer games. Modern 3D games with settings set to maximum are some of the most demanding for computer components. Processors show performance gains in modern computer games as the number of cores grows and the amount of cache memory increases (of course, if at the same time, the RAM and video system meet all modern requirements)... Take the AMD FX-8150 processor with 8 cores and 8 megabytes of L3 cache. When tested, it gives a better result in computer games than the almost identical Phenom II X6 Black Thuban 1100T with 6 cores, but with 6 megabytes of L3 cache. As noted above, when testing office programs, the performance picture is exactly the opposite.
If you start testing the performance in modern games of two similarly priced processors brands FX-8150 and Core i5-2550K, it turns out that the latter demonstrates better results, despite the fact that it has fewer cores and has a lower clock speed and even volume it has less cache memory. Most likely, here, in terms of efficiency, the more successful architecture of the kernel itself played the main role.
3. Raster graphics. Popular graphics applications such as Adobe Photoshop, ACDSee and Image-Magick were originally created by developers with excellent multi-threaded optimization, which means that with constant work with these programs, additional kernels will not be superfluous. There are also a large number of software packages that do not use multicore at all (Painishop or GIMP). It turns out that it is impossible to say unequivocally which technical parameter of modern processors more than others affects the increase in the speed of raster editors.... Different programs working with raster graphics are demanding on a variety of parameters, such as clock speed, number of cores (especially related to the real performance of one core), and even the amount of cache memory. Nevertheless, the inexpensive Core 13-2100 in tests shows much better performance in this kind of applications than, for example, the same FX-6100, and this even despite the fact that Intel's basic characteristics are slightly inferior.
4. Vector graphics. Nowadays, processors show themselves in a very strange way when working with such popular software packages as CorelDraw and Illustrator. The total number of processor cores has practically no effect on application performance, which indicates that this type of software does not have multi-threaded optimization. In theory, there will even be a lot of dual-core processor for normal work with vector editors, since here the clock frequency comes to the fore.
An example is AMD Ab-3650, which with four cores, but with a low clock speed cannot compete in vector editors with the budget dual-core Pentium G860, which has a slightly higher clock speed (while the cost of processors is practically the same).
5. Audio encoding. When working with audio data, you can observe completely opposite results. When encoding audio files, performance improves as the number of processor cores increases and as the clock frequency increases. In general, even 512 megabytes of cache memory is quite enough to perform operations of this kind, since this type of memory is practically not used when processing streaming data. A good example is the eight-core FX-8150 processor, which, when converting audio files into different formats, shows the result much better than the more expensive quad-core Core 15-2500K, thanks to the larger number of cores.
6. Video encoding. The kernel architecture plays a big role in software packages such as Premier, Expression Encoder or Vegas Pro. Here, the emphasis is on fast ALU / FPU - these are the hardware computational units of the kernel responsible for logical and arithmetic operations in data processing. Kernels with different architectures (even if these are different lines of the same manufacturer), depending on the type of load, provide a different level of performance
Intel's Sandy Bridge Core i3-2120 processor, with a lower clock speed, less cache and fewer cores, outperforms the AMD FX-4100 processor based on the Zambezi core, which costs almost the same money. This unusual result can be explained by differences in kernel architecture and better optimization for specific software applications.
7. Archiving. If you are often involved in archiving and unpacking large files at your computer in programs such as WinRAR or 7-Zip, then pay attention to the amount of cache memory of your processor. In such cases, the cache memory has a direct proportion: the larger it is, the more computer performance when working with archivers... The indicator is the AMD FX-6100 processor with 8 MB of level 3 cache installed on board. It manages the archiving task much faster than comparable processors Core i3-2120 with 3 MB of L3 cache and Core 2 Quad Q8400 with 4 megabytes of L2 cache.
8. Extreme multitasking mode. Some users work with several resource-intensive software applications at once with background operations activated in parallel. Just think, you are unpacking a huge RAR archive on your computer, simultaneously listening to music, editing several documents and spreadsheets, while you are running Skype and an Internet browser with several open tabs. With such active use of the computer, the ability of the processor to perform several threads of operations in parallel plays a very important role. It turns out that the number of cores of the processor is of paramount importance for this use.
Multitasking is handled by the AMD Phenom II Xb and FX-8xxx multi-core processors. It is worth noting here that the AMD FX-8150 with eight cores on board, while running several applications at the same time, has a slightly larger performance margin than, for example, the more expensive Core i5-2500K processor with only four cores. Of course, if maximum speed is required, then it is better to look towards the Core i7 processors, which can easily overtake the FX-8150.
Conclusion
In conclusion, we can say that a huge number of different factors affect the overall performance of the system. Of course, it is good to have a processor with a high clock speed, a large number of cores and a large cache memory, plus it would be nice to have the most modern architecture, but all these parameters have different meanings for different types of tasks.
The conclusion suggests itself: if you want to invest money sensibly in upgrading your computer, then identify the highest priority tasks and imagine scenarios for everyday use. Knowing the specific goals and objectives, you can easily choose the optimal model that best suits your needs, work and, most importantly, budget.
Once one great sage in captain's uniform said that without a processor, a computer would not be able to work. Since then, everyone has considered it their duty to find the very processor, thanks to which his system will fly like a fighter.
In this article, you will learn:
Since we simply cannot cover all the known science chips, we want to focus on one interesting family of the Intelovich family - Core i5. They have very interesting characteristics and good performance.
Why this particular series and not the i3 or i7? It's simple: great potential without overpaying for unnecessary instructions that the seventh line suffers from. And there are more cores than Core i3. You will naturally begin to argue about support and you will be partially right, but 4 physical cores can do much more than 2 + 2 virtual ones.
Series history
Today on the agenda we have a comparison of Intel Core i5 processors of different generations. Here I would like to touch upon such pressing topics as the heat pack and the presence of solder under the lid. And if there is a mood, then we will also bump our heads against each other especially interesting stones. So let's go.
I want to start with the fact that only desktop processors will be considered, and not options for a laptop. Comparison of mobile chips will be, but another time.
The periodicity table is as follows:
| Generation | Year of issue | Architecture | Series | Socket | Number of cores / threads | 3rd level cache |
| 1 | 2009 (2010) | Hehalem (Westmere) | i5-7xx (i5-6xx) | LGA 1156 | 4/4 (2/4) | 8 MB (4 MB) |
| 2 | 2011 | Sandy bridge | i5-2xxx | LGA 1155 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 3 | 2012 | Ivy bridge | i5-3xxx | LGA 1155 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 4 | 2013 | Haswell | i5-4xxx | LGA 1150 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 5 | 2015 | Broadwell | i5-5xxx | LGA 1150 | 4/4 | 4 MB |
| 6 | 2015 | Skylake | i5-6xxx | LGA 1151 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 7 | 2017 | Kaby lake | i5-7xxx | LGA 1151 | 4/4 | 6 MB |
| 8 | 2018 | Coffee lake | i5-8xxx | LGA 1151 v2 | 6/6 | 9 MB |
2009
The first representatives of the series were released back in 2009. They were built on 2 different architectures: Nehalem (45 nm) and Westmere (32 nm). The brightest representatives of the line are the i5-750 (4 × 2.8 GHz) and i5-655K (3.2 GHz). The latter additionally had an unlocked multiplier and overclocking capability, which indicated its high performance in games and not only.
The differences between the architectures lie in the fact that Westmare are built according to the 32 nm process technology and have 2 generation gates. And they have less energy consumption.
2011
This year saw the light of the second generation of processors - Sandy Bridge. Their distinctive feature is the presence of an integrated Intel HD 2000 video core.
Among the abundance of i5-2xxx models, I would like to highlight the CPU with the 2500K index. At one time, it made a splash among gamers and enthusiasts, combining a high frequency of 3.2 GHz with Turbo Boost support and low cost. And yes, there was solder under the lid, not thermal paste, which additionally contributed to the high-quality dispersal of the stone without consequences.
2012
The debut of Ivy Bridge brought 22nm process technology, higher frequencies, new DDR3, DDR3L and PCI-E 3.0 controllers, and USB 3.0 support (but only for the i7).
The integrated graphics have evolved to Intel HD 4000.
The most interesting solution on this platform was the Core i5-3570K with an unlocked multiplier and a boost frequency of up to 3.8 GHz.
2013
The Haswell generation didn’t bring anything supernatural other than the new LGA 1150 socket, AVX 2.0 instruction set and the new HD 4600 graphics. In fact, all the emphasis was on energy efficiency, which the company managed to achieve.
But as a fly in the ointment is the replacement of solder with a thermal interface, which greatly reduced the overclocking potential of the top i5-4670K (and its updated version 4690K from the Haswell Refresh line).
2015
In fact, this is the same Haswell, ported to the 14 nm architecture.
2016
The sixth iteration, named Skylake, brought an updated LGA 1151 socket, support for DDR4 RAM, 9th Gen IGP, AVX 3.2 instructions, and SATA Express.
Among the processors, it is worth highlighting the i5-6600K and 6400T. The first was loved for its high frequencies and an unlocked multiplier, and the second for its low cost and extremely low heat dissipation of 35W despite the support for Turbo Boost.
2017
The era of Kaby Lake is the most controversial, as it brought absolutely nothing new to the segment of desktop processors other than native support for USB 3.1. also, these stones completely refuse to run on Windows 7, 8 and 8.1, let alone older versions.
The socket has remained the same - LGA 1151. And the set of interesting processors has not changed - 7600K and 7400T. The reasons for popular love are the same as for Skylake.
2018
Goffee Lake processors are fundamentally different from their predecessors. Four cores were replaced by 6, which previously only top-end versions of the X-series i7 could afford. The size of the L3 cache was increased to 9 MB, and the thermal package in most cases does not exceed 65 W.
Of the entire collection, the most interesting is the i5-8600K model for its overclocking capability up to 4.3 GHz (though only 1 core). However, the public prefers the i5-8400 as the cheapest "entry" ticket.
Instead of totals
If we were asked what we would offer the lion's share of gamers, we would say without hesitation that the i5-8400. The advantages are obvious:
- cost below 190 $
- 6 full physical cores;
- frequency up to 4 GHz in Turbo Boost
- heat package 65 W
- complete fan.
Additionally, you do not have to select a "specific" RAM, as for the Ryzen 1600 (the main competitor, by the way), and the cores themselves in Intel. You lose additional virtual streams, but practice shows that in games they only reduce FPS, without introducing certain adjustments to the gameplay.
By the way, if you don't know where to buy, I recommend paying attention to some very popular and serious online store- at the same time you will be able to navigate there on prices for i5 8400, from time to time I buy different gadgets here myself.
In any case, it's up to you to decide. Until next time, do not forget to subscribe to the blog.
And more news for those who follow (solid state drives) - this rarely happens.
Posted on October 30 2017
We chose the HQ and U series Core i7 and Core i5 processors. These four models are used in most of the notebooks on the market. As you may have noticed above, the two U-series processors are faster than the Core i5-7300HQ and are generally offered at a lower price point.Is this enough to win?
The short answer is NO. Full-fledged HQ series processors are still cooler.
Cinebench R15
Let's start with one of the iconic Cinebench CPU benchmarks. We chose the multi-core scenario, not only because most applications (including games) use multiple cores at once, but also to see how the result will be affected by the presence of additional processing cores on the processor (or the ability to execute more threads of instructions).We are seeing the same picture: the HQ-series processors are tearing their U-series rivals to shreds. Moreover, the Core i5-7300HQ model is not only ahead of the i5-7200U by as much as 40%, but also leaves behind the Core i7-7500U - by 22%!
X264 Benchmark
If the term "computing performance" sounds too vague for you, the X264 benchmark will help to clarify the picture, which simulates video transcoding by the CPU. The higher the result, the faster the processor can convert videos from one format to another.
 |
conclusions
If you expect decent performance from your computer, go for the HQ series processor.Don't be confused by the name "i7". Even the i5-HQ processor will be faster than the i7-U! In addition to the number of cores and execution threads, HQ processors have other advantages, such as larger cache sizes, and therefore are better suited for high-performance laptops, including gaming models.
This does not mean that U-series processors are worse. They are simply intended for other purposes. Their destiny is ultrabooks, for which mobility and low power consumption are priorities. When speed is paramount, the HQ series should always be your choice.
This article will take a closer look at the latest generations of Intel processors based on the Cor architecture. This company occupies a leading position in the computer systems market, and most PCs are currently assembled on its semiconductor chips.
Intel development strategy
All previous generations of Intel processors were subject to a two-year cycle. A similar strategy for releasing updates from this company was called "Tik-Tak". The first stage, called "Tick", was the transfer of the CPU to a new technological process. For example, in terms of architecture, the Sandy Bridge (2nd generation) and Eevee Bridge (3rd generation) generations were virtually identical. But the production technology of the former was based on 32 nm, and the latter - 22 nm. The same can be said about Haswell (4th generation, 22 nm) and Broadwell (5th generation, 14 nm). In turn, the "So" stage means a radical change in the architecture of semiconductor crystals and a significant increase in performance. An example is the following transitions:
1st generation Westmere and 2nd generation Sandy Bridge. The technological process in this case was identical - 32 nm, but the changes in terms of the chip architecture are significant - the north bridge of the motherboard and the integrated graphics accelerator were transferred to the CPU.
3rd generation Ivy Bridge and 4th generation Haswell. The power consumption of the computer system has been optimized, the clock frequencies of the chips have been increased.
5th generation Broadwell and 6th generation SkyLike. The frequency has been increased again, the power consumption has been further improved, and several new instructions have been added to improve performance.
Segmentation of processor solutions based on the Cor architecture
Intel central processing units are positioned as follows:
The most affordable solutions are Celeron chips. They are suitable for assembling office computers that are designed to solve the most simple tasks.
The CPU of the Pentium series is one step higher. In architectural terms, they are almost completely identical to the junior models of "Celeron". But the increased cache of the 3rd level and higher frequencies give them a certain advantage in terms of performance. The niche of this CPU is entry-level gaming PCs.
The middle segment of Intel CPUs is occupied by solutions based on Cor I3. The previous two types of processors, as a rule, have only 2 computing units. The same can be said about Kor Ay3. But the first two families of chips lack support for the HyperTrading technology, while Cor Ay3 does. As a result, at the software level, 2 physical modules are converted into 4 program processing threads. This provides a significant increase in performance. On the basis of such products, it is already possible to assemble a mid-level gaming PC, or even an entry-level server.
The niche of solutions above the average level, but below the premium segment is filled with chips, occupied by solutions based on "Kor Ay5". This semiconductor crystal boasts 4 physical cores at once. It is this architectural nuance that provides an advantage in terms of performance over Kor Ay3. More recent generations of Intel i5 processors have higher clock speeds and this allows for continuous performance gains.
The niche of the premium segment is occupied by products based on Kor Ay7. The number of computing units they have is exactly the same as that of "Kor Ay5". But they, just like Cor Ay3, have support for the technology code-named Hyper Trading. Therefore, at the software level, 4 cores are converted into 8 processed threads. It is precisely this nuance that provides a phenomenal level of performance that any one can boast of. The price of these chips is appropriate.
Processor connectors
Generations are installed on different types of sockets. Therefore, it will not be possible to install the first chips on this architecture into a motherboard for a 6th generation CPU. Or, on the contrary, the chip with the code name "SkyLike" physically cannot be put into the motherboard for the 1st or 2nd generation processors. The first processor socket was called Socket H, or LGA 1156 (1156 is the number of pins). It was released in 2009 for the first CPUs manufactured to 45 nm (2008) and 32 nm (2009) tolerances based on this architecture. Today it is outdated both morally and physically. In 2010, LGA 1155 comes to replace, or "Socket H1". Motherboards of this series support 2nd and 3rd generation Cor chips. Their codenames are, respectively, "Sandy Bridge" and "Ivy Bridge". 2013 was marked by the release of the third socket for chips based on the Cor architecture - LGA 1150, or Socket H2. This socket could accommodate 4th and 5th generation CPUs. Well, in September 2015, the LGA 1150 was replaced by the last actual socket - LGA 1151.
The first generation of chips
The most affordable processor products on this platform were the Celeron G1101 (2.27 GHz), the Pentium G6950 (2.8 GHz) and the Pentium G6990 (2.9 GHz). All of them had only 2 cores. The niche of middle-level solutions was occupied by "Kor Ay3" with the designation 5XX (2 cores / 4 logical flows of information processing). “Kor Ay5” marked 6XX (their parameters are identical to “Kor Ay3”, but the frequencies are higher) and 7XX with 4 real cores were one step higher. The most productive computer systems were assembled on the basis of "Kor Ay7". Their models were designated 8XX. The fastest chip in this case was labeled 875K. Due to the unlocked multiplier, it was possible to overclock the same price, he had a corresponding one. Accordingly, it was possible to get an impressive increase in performance. By the way, the presence of the "K" prefix in the designation of the CPU model meant that the multiplier was unlocked and this model could be overclocked. Well, the prefix "S" was added in the designation of energy efficient chips.
Planned renovation of architecture and "Sandy Bridge"
The first generation of chips based on the Cor architecture was replaced in 2010 by solutions codenamed Sandy Bridge. Their key "chips" were the transfer of the north bridge and the integrated graphics accelerator to the silicon die of the silicon processor. The niche of the most budgetary solutions was occupied by the Celerons of the G4XX and G5XX series. In the first case, the L3 cache was cut and only one core was present. The second series, in turn, could boast of having two computing units at once. The Pentiums of the G6XX and G8XX are one step higher. In this case, the difference in performance was provided by the higher frequencies. It was the G8XX that looked preferable in the eyes of the end user because of this important characteristic. The Kor Ay3 line was represented by the 21XX models (the number 2 indicates that the chip belongs to the second generation of the Kor architecture). Some of them had a "T" at the end - more energy efficient solutions with reduced performance.
In turn, the Kor Ay5 solutions were designated 23XX, 24XX and 25XX. The higher the model mark, the higher the level of CPU performance. The “T” at the end is the most energy efficient solution. If the letter "S" is added at the end of the name - an intermediate version in terms of power consumption between the "T" - the version of the chip and the standard crystal. Index "P" - the graphics accelerator is disabled in the chip. Well, the chips with the letter "K" had an unlocked multiplier. This marking is also relevant for the 3rd generation of this architecture.
The emergence of a new, more progressive technological process
In 2013, the 3rd generation of CPUs based on this architecture was released. Its key innovation is an updated technical process. For the rest, no significant innovations were introduced into them. They were physically compatible with the previous generation of CPUs and could fit into the same motherboards. Their designation structure remained identical. The Celerons were designated G12XX and the Pentiums were designated G22XX. Only at the beginning, instead of "2" was already "3", which indicated belonging to the 3rd generation. The Kor Ay3 line had 32XX indexes. More advanced "Kor Ay5" were designated 33XX, 34XX and 35XX. Well, the flagship solutions "Kor Ay7" were marked 37XX.
The fourth revision of the architecture "Cor"
The next stage was the 4th generation of Intel processors based on the Cor architecture. The marking in this case was as follows:
The Celerons economy class CPUs were designated G18XX.
Pentiums had the G32XX and G34XX indexes.
The following designations were assigned to "Kor Ay3" - 41XX and 43XX.
“Kor Ay5” could be recognized by the abbreviations 44XX, 45XX and 46XX.
Well, for the designation "Kor Ay7" 47XX were allocated.
Fifth generation of chips
based on this architecture, it was mainly focused on use in mobile devices. For desktop PCs, only chips of the Ay 5 and Ay 7 lines were released. And only a very limited number of models. The first of them were designated 56XX, and the second - 57XX.The most recent and promising solutions
The 6th generation of Intel processors debuted in early fall 2015. This is the most current processor architecture at the moment. Entry-level chips are designated in this case G39XX ("Celeron"), G44XX and G45XX (this is how Pentiums are labeled). The Kor Ay3 processors are designated 61XX and 63XX. In turn, "Kor Ay5" is 64XX, 65XX and 66XX. Well, only the 67XX marking is allocated for the designation of flagship solutions. The new generation of Intel processors is only at the beginning of its life cycle, and such chips will be relevant for quite a long time.
Overclocking features
Almost all chips based on this architecture have a locked multiplier. Therefore, overclocking in this case is possible only by increasing the frequency. In the last, 6th generation, even this possibility of increasing the speed will have to be disabled in the BIOS by motherboard manufacturers. The exception in this regard are the Kor Ay5 and Kor Ay7 series processors with the K index. Their multiplier is unlocked and this allows you to significantly increase the performance of computer systems based on such semiconductor products.
Owners opinion
All generations of Intel processors listed in this material have a high degree of energy efficiency and a phenomenal level of performance. Their only drawback is their high cost. But the reason here is that Intel's direct competitor, AMD, cannot oppose it with more or less worthwhile solutions. Therefore, Intel is already proceeding from its own considerations and sets a price tag for its products.
Outcomes
This article took a closer look at Intel desktop-only processor generations. Even this list is enough to get lost in designations and names. Apart from this, there are also options for the computer enthusiast (platform 2011) and various mobile sockets. All this is done only so that the end user can choose the most optimal one for solving his problems. Well, the most relevant now from the considered options are chips of the 6th generation. These are the ones to look out for when buying or assembling a new PC.
