By: default (no.delete@this.thanks.com), April 24, 2013 9:29 am
Room: Moderated Discussions
> I am surprised that this part is too power hungry to go into Ultrabooks. Once you
> bring the DRAM close by, shouldn't it decrease the IO power? Any thoughts why?
>
It's probably due to the fact that the chip would never be able to fully utilize the eDRAM and still keep the 17w TDP. There are already cases of IVB Ultrabooks throttling when you fully-load the GPU and CPU (i.e. games), and that's just HD 4000. Powering something with 2.5x the computational throughput on the exact same process node would be impossible (or wasted if you truly caged it inside 17w).
The entire stated purpose of GT3 on Ultrabooks is to improve the performance/watt of the GPU by going wider. You can be sure that it won't be clocked anywhere near the speed of the GT3e parts - performance will be faster than HD 4000, but not top-end.
> bring the DRAM close by, shouldn't it decrease the IO power? Any thoughts why?
>
It's probably due to the fact that the chip would never be able to fully utilize the eDRAM and still keep the 17w TDP. There are already cases of IVB Ultrabooks throttling when you fully-load the GPU and CPU (i.e. games), and that's just HD 4000. Powering something with 2.5x the computational throughput on the exact same process node would be impossible (or wasted if you truly caged it inside 17w).
The entire stated purpose of GT3 on Ultrabooks is to improve the performance/watt of the GPU by going wider. You can be sure that it won't be clocked anywhere near the speed of the GT3e parts - performance will be faster than HD 4000, but not top-end.