5 ms·

I wonder if this was designed for an Apple product? Maybe a new iMac or Mac mini?

hjnilsson 9y ago
Makes sense for a Mac mini definitely. Would be an attractive performance/TDP offering. This opens up for integrated GPUs on laptops as well, which would be very interesting.
- watmough 9y ago
  Speaking from bitter experience of the most beautiful, but also expensive and unreliable Mac Book Pro 17" ($3500 USD), now both the GPU and CPU will de-solder themselves from the motherboard!
pmjordan 9y ago
100W is quite a bit higher TDP than any previous Mac Mini. The highest-power Minis I'm aware of are: - The Quad-Core Mac Minis from 2011 & 2012 with 45W TDP. (e.g. i7-3720QM) - The 2011 Mac Mini with dGPU with 35+26=61W TDP. (i7-2620M + Radeon HD 6630M) Mind you, we can always dream that Apple will care about those of us who have wanted a Mac without a built-in display that fits between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro.
quantummkv 9y ago
Looks like a perfect fit for the next MacBook Pro.
- JBorrow 9y ago
  Unlikely. A 100W TDP would mean that it would not be possible to run the laptop for any more than an hour at full load (on battery) or it would draw from both the wall and battery with their current power designs at full load. Also, That would be insane to cool in a MBP format (that's about 2x the thermal output of the current 15").
  - dragontamer 9y ago
    The Surface Book has a full-bore NVidia GTX 1060 in it. It cannot charge while the 1060 is going 100% in a modern AAA video game (yes: it uses up so much power, that if you plug it into the wall-outlet and game, you are LOSING power). GPUs use up tons of power, but 99% of the time they sit around and are "off". There's no need to turn on the GPU when browsing Facebook, and modern Win10 can keep the graphics card off. Anyway, 100W TDP is perfectly acceptable for laptops, as long as this is a "worst case" TDP. Besides, gamers do want to game, and many are willing to accept bad battery life for the ability to run Witcher 3 or Tomb Raider on the go.
  - quantummkv 9y ago
    No one will push a laptop to full load on a battery. Apple can pretty much throttle power on battery mode and no one will complain. As for the wall charger, the design can be changed. Alienwares with gtx 1070 can go upto 115w tdp with AC adapters without any problem. As for cooling, Asus ROG Zephyrus cools a gtx 1080 with a size comparable to macbook pro.
    - JBorrow 9y ago
      Yeah sure, this chip makes sense for other laptops, just not the mbp.
  - nickflood 9y ago
    This statement is incorrect, 15" designs handle the 100W TDP just fine. Look at the Dell XPS 15 - it has an Intel H-series CPU (45W) plus a 1050 GPU (55W). While having all this power, it's slim and the cooling solution works OK under load (less reports about thermal throttling than latest MBP has) and with a 130W power brick it can be powered no problem unxer full load.
Shivetya 9y ago
I hope it isn't bound for the next iMac. There are rumors of a new chassis for the next model but those are suspect in the face of the recent iMac Pro; namely why would Apple want the Pro version to be on an older chassis and therefor appear obsolete? However if a new chassis is in the works and space is a premium it could lead to an iMac with chips similar to this but that would be disappointing as many are waiting for six core processors. For an Mini, wouldn't that TDP be too high? Apple has an odd relationship with its desktop models. With the iMac Pro and "promise" of a new mini and Mac Pro there is a lot of hope for a resurgence however short it might be.
baldfat 9y ago
This isn't a mobile chip and with 100 watts thermal solution would be challenging in anything but a desktop enclosure. We need to wait and see if there is a mobile version coming and also the benchmarks. Is the watts worth it?
ksec 9y ago
Mac Mini - TDP too high. iMac - Lots of space for CPU + GPU. We all thought the whole reason of sticking a dGPU close to CPU was because of space, hence a Notebook type machine. But if anyone could enlighten me why I want a desktop with Integrated dGPU rather then CPU+GPU combo which is likely cheaper, and easier to cool down. Not to mention you are stuck with KabyLake 4 Core instead of the newer Coffee Lake with 6 Core.
- deafcalculus 9y ago
  For the same reason companies make SoCs. It saves money. Intel's idea with EMIB (multiple dies in one package) is to save money by using older semiconductor process for things such as the southbridge (ex: USB) that don't need the latest and most expensive process. This way, they'll also get more value from their investment in previous process nodes. Routing HBM to the GPU using PCB traces is expensive, and in the low-to-mid end, saving money on PCB and cooling matters. If EMIB is going to be used anyway, why not have the GPU in there as well. With 1024-bit 4GB HBM on package, memory bandwidth won't be a problem, and the i7-8809G will likely be faster than a PS4, which means it'll be good enough for 1080p gaming. KabyLake was probably chosen because this design was finalized before Coffee Lake. The next iteration will likely have more cores.
  - ksec 9y ago
    It only saves money If 1. It will only make sense if Intel were actually manufacturing the GPU themselves as well. In this case they dont. And EMIB is an Intel specific technology, AMD doesn't use it when they package HBM with their dGPU. 2. AMD makes a profit before selling it to Intel, and Intel has to make a profits for integrating it with EMIB, i doubt the cost saving of using EMIB together with HBM, if that was true, out done the profits margin of both companies.

Makes sense for a Mac mini definitely. Would be an attractive performance/TDP offering. This opens up for integrated GPUs on laptops as well, which would be very interesting.

watmough 9y ago
Speaking from bitter experience of the most beautiful, but also expensive and unreliable Mac Book Pro 17" ($3500 USD), now both the GPU and CPU will de-solder themselves from the motherboard!

pmjordan 9y ago

100W is quite a bit higher TDP than any previous Mac Mini. The highest-power Minis I'm aware of are: - The Quad-Core Mac Minis from 2011 & 2012 with 45W TDP. (e.g. i7-3720QM) - The 2011 Mac Mini with dGPU with 35+26=61W TDP. (i7-2620M + Radeon HD 6630M) Mind you, we can always dream that Apple will care about those of us who have wanted a Mac without a built-in display that fits between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro.

quantummkv 9y ago

Looks like a perfect fit for the next MacBook Pro.

JBorrow 9y ago
Unlikely. A 100W TDP would mean that it would not be possible to run the laptop for any more than an hour at full load (on battery) or it would draw from both the wall and battery with their current power designs at full load. Also, That would be insane to cool in a MBP format (that's about 2x the thermal output of the current 15").
- dragontamer 9y ago
  The Surface Book has a full-bore NVidia GTX 1060 in it. It cannot charge while the 1060 is going 100% in a modern AAA video game (yes: it uses up so much power, that if you plug it into the wall-outlet and game, you are LOSING power). GPUs use up tons of power, but 99% of the time they sit around and are "off". There's no need to turn on the GPU when browsing Facebook, and modern Win10 can keep the graphics card off. Anyway, 100W TDP is perfectly acceptable for laptops, as long as this is a "worst case" TDP. Besides, gamers do want to game, and many are willing to accept bad battery life for the ability to run Witcher 3 or Tomb Raider on the go.
- quantummkv 9y ago
  No one will push a laptop to full load on a battery. Apple can pretty much throttle power on battery mode and no one will complain. As for the wall charger, the design can be changed. Alienwares with gtx 1070 can go upto 115w tdp with AC adapters without any problem. As for cooling, Asus ROG Zephyrus cools a gtx 1080 with a size comparable to macbook pro.
  - JBorrow 9y ago
    Yeah sure, this chip makes sense for other laptops, just not the mbp.
- nickflood 9y ago
  This statement is incorrect, 15" designs handle the 100W TDP just fine. Look at the Dell XPS 15 - it has an Intel H-series CPU (45W) plus a 1050 GPU (55W). While having all this power, it's slim and the cooling solution works OK under load (less reports about thermal throttling than latest MBP has) and with a 130W power brick it can be powered no problem unxer full load.

Shivetya 9y ago

I hope it isn't bound for the next iMac. There are rumors of a new chassis for the next model but those are suspect in the face of the recent iMac Pro; namely why would Apple want the Pro version to be on an older chassis and therefor appear obsolete? However if a new chassis is in the works and space is a premium it could lead to an iMac with chips similar to this but that would be disappointing as many are waiting for six core processors. For an Mini, wouldn't that TDP be too high? Apple has an odd relationship with its desktop models. With the iMac Pro and "promise" of a new mini and Mac Pro there is a lot of hope for a resurgence however short it might be.

baldfat 9y ago

This isn't a mobile chip and with 100 watts thermal solution would be challenging in anything but a desktop enclosure. We need to wait and see if there is a mobile version coming and also the benchmarks. Is the watts worth it?

ksec 9y ago

Mac Mini - TDP too high. iMac - Lots of space for CPU + GPU. We all thought the whole reason of sticking a dGPU close to CPU was because of space, hence a Notebook type machine. But if anyone could enlighten me why I want a desktop with Integrated dGPU rather then CPU+GPU combo which is likely cheaper, and easier to cool down. Not to mention you are stuck with KabyLake 4 Core instead of the newer Coffee Lake with 6 Core.

deafcalculus 9y ago
For the same reason companies make SoCs. It saves money. Intel's idea with EMIB (multiple dies in one package) is to save money by using older semiconductor process for things such as the southbridge (ex: USB) that don't need the latest and most expensive process. This way, they'll also get more value from their investment in previous process nodes. Routing HBM to the GPU using PCB traces is expensive, and in the low-to-mid end, saving money on PCB and cooling matters. If EMIB is going to be used anyway, why not have the GPU in there as well. With 1024-bit 4GB HBM on package, memory bandwidth won't be a problem, and the i7-8809G will likely be faster than a PS4, which means it'll be good enough for 1080p gaming. KabyLake was probably chosen because this design was finalized before Coffee Lake. The next iteration will likely have more cores.
- ksec 9y ago
  It only saves money If 1. It will only make sense if Intel were actually manufacturing the GPU themselves as well. In this case they dont. And EMIB is an Intel specific technology, AMD doesn't use it when they package HBM with their dGPU. 2. AMD makes a profit before selling it to Intel, and Intel has to make a profits for integrating it with EMIB, i doubt the cost saving of using EMIB together with HBM, if that was true, out done the profits margin of both companies.