Intel's 32nm processors show off power efficiency in informal preview
By Vlad Savov 
posted September 28th 2009 10:19AM
posted September 28th 2009 10:19AM
posted September 28th 2009 10:19AM
A look back on popular stories from today in a specific year.
Now that we've thrown 'em off the trail, use the form below to get in touch with the people at Engadget. Please fill in all of the required fields because they're required.
There's a typo in the title.
"32mn" should be "32nm" unless there is is some kind of new unit I'm not familiar with that has the abbreviation "n."
Stour yupid.
Mano neters, silly!
FreshJulius, did you mean to say, "Stou're Yupid"? If not, I'm not sure what you're getting at.
#dontcallpeoplestupidifyoudontknowproperenglishgrammar
32 Minnesotas? That's not smaller. In fact, that's not very small at all! Lies!
It probably only uses 70 watts because it has awful integrated graphics. I wish intel would up their graphics technology to perform at a half-decent level.
In all honesty, Intel couldn't care less about their GMA and XMA's. They leave that up to ATI and Nvidia because if that wasn't the case, they would of done it YEARS ago.
For them, it's processor speed, voltage, and runtime; not constantly pooping out graphics cards that can run Crysis and up.
According to Anandtech the GPU should be a 'substantially improved' GN45 - limited in 3D gaming, but "decent" for other uses. Larrabee should come some time after.
it would be nice to have one of these processors + a dedicated graphics card, and be able to switch between them on the fly.
Video of this demo and the media features of the integrated graphics here: http://www.pcper.com/article.php?aid=787
@darbear5610 The problem is that with the 32 nm processors, Intel is building their graphics into the chip itself. This makes it hard to replace with another brand.
Very true. I have an Acer EZ4630 with 2.4 Ghz Dual-Core, 160GB, etc. But for the love of God GMA4500M makes me want to punch someone. It takes no effect on my computing life whatsoever. It's running 7 amazingly of course. Hell it's good for games 2006 and under, but sometimes people want more.
On the other hand, I'm not that much of a hardcore gamer, and I watched that video on the 32nm. It was fantastic.
Considering current Intel mobile chips have a TDP of anywhere from 15 to 25 watts, how is a chip that goes up to 70 watts more desirable? I mean for anyone besides laptop battery manufacturers.
That is 70w for an Entire system, processor, ram, storage, chipset (most of which is integrated into the processor anyway). 15-25w is for intels lowest power mobile chips (not counting atom). Their normal mobile chips use more than that, and have everything else in the system to power as well
its 32 meter nanos... duh
MANONETER?
This isn't an intel Mobile chip. The current i5 and i7 CPUs have a TDP of about 95w as I remember. Plus the 70w power usage is coming from the entire system, not just the CPU. A mobile version of this 32nm CPU would use less power than the current intel mobile processors. In addition, better graphics!!!
I actually dont want this chip to succeed. It would actually mean laptop manufacturers will just go with everything Intel and that means any laptop with discrete graphics will be more expensive now as lesser and lesser manufacturers will create them. Intel graphics options suck big time and they choke even rendering 1080p compressed video files let alone some ok looking game. I think that 1080p video rendering should be a bare minimum for today's graphic chipsets, in any form.
or it will force intel's competitors to make their offerings even better than intel at a lower price.
You know, kind of how the whole 'competition' thing works.
@something clever
Competition means jack squat when you don't have the resources and manpower to invest in R&D. Intel has it in spades and that's why competitors like AMD are unlikely to catch up to Intel anytime soon (or the foreseeable future for that matter).
Anyone know what case they are using for that build??? I LIKE
I think it's a Shuttle... at least it looks like one.
Pretty sure it's a Travla C138:
http://www.travla.com/product_d.php?id=0000000009
I have a very similar model and haven't had any problems with it :)
I think it's the Travla C-138 Mini Itx Case. I was looking into building an ion system and I fell in love with it too, although I put the project on hold so I can't give you any impressions. The link that I found priced the case along with a 90W power brick at 137$ USD. You can definitely go cheaper, but from what I read it has a reputation for being fairly sturdy. IMO most of the mini-itx cases out there look a little too cheap. I also like the M-350 Universal Mini Itx Enclosure, but that's only if your going for the smallest system you can make (no disk drive, limited fans, one 2.5 in. hard drive,external psu only, etc.).
I never use 1080p... Do you? I find 720p to be very suitable for my 1280x800 display.
Yes because I have a decent monitor
Yes, my 1920x1200 monitor suits 1080p content just fine.
Ha! I'm actually eating a croissant this morning! Well done, Mr. Savov, well done!
now thats my kind of form factor!
What keyboard is that?
Its an Enermax Aurora. I have one in black, one of the best keyboards I've used