Since Computex, there has been a lot of talk around Intel’s Broadwell-Y / Core-M CPU line. In August Intel treated us to a breakdown of the 14nm process and the Broadwell architecture including all the improvements therein, followed by a more succinct breakdown of the CPUs we should expect. These initial CPUs should be properly available to the public in Q4 in devices such as the Lenovo Yoga 3 Pro using the Core M-5Y70.

The news this week revolves around more Core M CPUs being pushed through the system. This is most likely as a result of Intel binning the CPUs in sufficient quantities to satisfy customers. The specifications are available at ark.intel.com, but the Core M line now stands at seven different SKUs:

Intel Core M Specifications
  5Y71
(New)
5Y70 5Y51
(New)
​5Y31
(New)
5Y10c
(New)
5Y10a 5Y10
Cores / Threads 2 / 4 2 / 4 2 / 4 2 / 4 2 / 4 2 / 4 2 / 4
Base Frequency / MHz 1200 1100 1100 900 800 800 800
Turbo Frequency / MHz 2900 2600 2600 2400 2000 2000 2000
Processor Graphics HD 5300 HD 5300 HD 5300 HD 5300 HD
5300
HD
5300
HD 5300
IGP Base Frequency / MHz 300 100 300 300 300 100 100
IGP Turbo Frequency / MHz 900 850 900 850 800 800 800
L3 Cache 4 MB 4 MB 4 MB 4 MB 4 MB 4 MB 4 MB
TDP 4.5 W 4.5 W 4.5 W 4.5 W 4.5 W 4.5 W 4.5 W
LPDDR3/DDR3L 
Support
1600 MHz 1600 MHz 1600 MHz 1600 MHz 1600 MHz 1600 MHz 1600 MHz
Intel vPro Yes Yes No No No No No
Intel TXT Yes Yes No No No No No
Intel VT-d/VT-x Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Intel AES-NI Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes

The new high end model is the 5Y71, offering a 2.9 GHz frequency mode and vPro features. The 5Y51 has slightly better specifications than the higher numbered 5Y70, but loses vPro compatibility. Both the 5Y31 and 5Y51  fill in the large gap between the 5Y10a and 5Y70 in the initial launch. All four new processors all have an improved base GPU frequency, up to 300 MHz, and are slated to work at a cTDP Up of 6W or cTDP Down of 3.5W, depending on the customer’s needs.

All new CPUs are slated for a Q4 launch, which would mean that they might become available for end users in products on the shelf sometime in Q1 2015.

Source: CPU-World

POST A COMMENT

42 Comments

View All Comments

  • Samus - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link

    Laziest trollin' attempt ever. Reply
  • 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). Reply
  • 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. Reply
  • 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.
    Reply
  • chizow - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link

    I'm sure Chipworks will have exposed die shots in 1-4 weeks from retail availability.... Reply
  • 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.
    Reply
  • 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. Reply
  • 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.
    Reply
  • 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. Reply
  • lilmoe - Monday, November 3, 2014 - link

    +1 Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now