Intel launches new CULV chips

Intel launches new CULV chips

The new Core i3, i5, and i7 CULV processors from Intel have a TDP of just 17W - and could be heading for slate-factor devices in the near future.

Intel appears to be serious about its commitment to ultra-thin laptops, having just announced a line of ultra-low voltage i3, i5,and i7 processors.

According to the announcement - via Engadget - the new 32nm process chips offer the ability for manufacturers to shrink the thickness of their designs by 32 percent while offering 32 percent better performance than previous editions - and each with a TDP of a mere 17W.

All the major new technologies found in the mainstream lines - including Turbo Boost Technology, which overclocks some cores and disables others when multiprocessing isn't a requirement, and integrated Intel HD graphics for the portable device that won't be playing the latest games - feature in the new range, while the power draw has been dropped by a pretty impressive 15 percent - although it's a shame they couldn't have managed 32 percent to keep the theme going.

While the new CULV chips are planned for ultra-slim notebooks from manufacturers including Acer, Asus, Lenovo, and MSI, there is another possible venue for the processors: a slate PC.

The guys over at CNet are claiming that Intel is looking to take on the iPad with a tablet reference design of its own - likely to use the new CULV 32nm chips. The claims come courtesy of Intel's vice president Mooly Eden, who stated that the company is "serious about trying to participate in the tablet market," and advised investors to keep their eyes peeled at Computex 2010 next month to see precisely what the company has planned.

While it's a toss-up as to whether Intel would be looking to use its latest Atom processors or the CULV i3, i5, or i7 ranges, Mooly's comments that "performance is relevant even in this [slate] category" combined with his declaration that people want their slate devices to multitask indicate that Intel could be looking to use their more powerful mobile chips to beat Apple's iPad in the performance game.

Whichever processors end up in an Intel slate, one thing is for certain: Apple is going to have a serious fight on its hands for the newly-formed slate market.

Are you pleased to see Intel coming out with new high-performance low-power chips, or should the company be concentrating on its Atom range for the low-power devices while ramping up the performance of its Core i3, i5, and i7 processors for the speed freaks? Share your thoughts over in the forums.


Discuss in the forums Reply
mi1ez 25th May 2010, 13:02 Quote
Sod the Atom, this is what we want to see!
Elton 25th May 2010, 13:04 Quote
Now if we can get rid of the Atom and ensure that all ultraportables have CULVs...

Once we fix that pricing issue, we're golden, these things are much faster.
tristanperry 25th May 2010, 13:20 Quote
Sounds a good move :) I think new, lower power chips would do well compared to the atom.
shadows 25th May 2010, 13:26 Quote
I was planning on getting a netbook before I go back to University, think I'll wait until the first CULV powered netbooks start hitting the shelves!

They are much quicker then the atom processor! Might even make a small nettop server worth while.
carajp 25th May 2010, 13:31 Quote
I loved my Netbook... it was so cute, so dinky. It was great! Well, at least until I switched it on.....

I put up with its agonising slowness for a year (and learned in the process that I never ever only do one thing at a time in front of a PC - when did that happen?? ;)) And then I traded it in for an Asus CULV. This was the best computing decision I made for some time. It's a whole infinity better than a netbook, even if the benchmarks only say 2x - 3x as fast.

..but it's still not perfect. It's 1/2kg heavier than the Netbook and I wish it wasn't. It's a little slower than my old "ordinary" laptop and I wish it wasn't. So I'll be watching closely what comes from these new chips!

tank_rider 25th May 2010, 13:31 Quote
Excellent news, although I guess the price will be a step up from the current i range of mobile cpu's that I'm currently looking at. Would be nice to get a netbook size device based on one of these, the integrated graphics would probably be enough to run one of the dual screen netbooks that have been banded around recently.
rickysio 25th May 2010, 13:59 Quote
I always found CULV to be a much more value solution than Atom.

It's only a tad heavier - I find it feels more solid and expensive that way - instead of the current generation of plasticky netbooks (I still have a soft spot for HP's 2140 Mini - that guy was solid!) and as long as I knew that I was using a CULV, I never felt that it was too slow, and too weak. If I wanted more grunt I should have gone for the M11x.
CowBlazed 25th May 2010, 21:43 Quote
Atom on an XP equipped netbook feels alot faster then it really is when doing regular desktop usage. Its only when you start running any CPU heavy applications that it shows its true nature and you're left waiting, alot.

Unless you're using Vista or loading up your machine with too many apps/services, I don't see why anyone would complain about Atom performance for regular netbook usage.

Now if you're using this as your main PC and trying to do various CPU intensive tasks, CULV or better is a must but then you never should have bought a netbook to begin with.
Elton 26th May 2010, 00:13 Quote
Well on Atom, you are seriously limited to 1 task.
general22 26th May 2010, 02:02 Quote
Aren't the power draws of these chips a little high for slates? I think current Atom platform still has a lower power draw as well. That said this will still be awesome for CULV notebooks.
Goty 26th May 2010, 06:30 Quote
These will be great, but I think I'll go with my Turion II K625 when Dell finally brings the M301z stateside.
Abdul Hadi 26th May 2010, 08:42 Quote
Intel always proportional in benefits. E.g.

Core2duo 40% faster, 40%energy efficient,

and now precisely 32% advantages?????????????? There marketing department sure looks Proportional to the advantages. Like they count the % of profit gains from last year.

Anyone thought about that??????????????
Faiakes 26th May 2010, 20:01 Quote
Hmmmm...where did you get the 17W figure from?

The Intel pages clearly say 18W (at least):

Core i3-330UM

Core i5-430UM

Core i5-540UM

Core i7-660UM
l3v1ck 27th May 2010, 03:03 Quote
Originally Posted by mi1ez
Sod the Atom, this is what we want to see!
Why have a hideously under powerd Atom when you can have one of these? (apart from the price obviously :( )
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.

Discuss in the forums