In a press release today, Intel gave some more details about its upcoming processor, codenamed "Westmere" – the world's first 32 nanometre microprocessor. The processor is set for release in early 2010, and is a 32nm shrink of the Intel Nehalem micro architecture. Intel also announced that it would be investing $7 billion into new fabrication plants that will use their 32nm manufacturing technology, used to make Westmere and the 32nm processor families that follow.The processors will be available for desktops, laptops and servers, and will, as the previous families have done, be available in several models (one of which, Intel plans, will feature 6 cores). As mentioned earlier last year, Intel is following a "tick-tock" scheme – first they release a new architecture (which is the "tock"), and then later on they release a smaller, faster version of that, which is "the tick". In this case, Nehalem was the "tock", and Westmere will be the "tick".
However, unlike the previous processor shrinks, where no changes were made to the processor architecture, and the only change was the size, Westmere will add new microcode which Intel claims will enhance encrypting and decrypting capabilities of the processor, and more importantly, Westmere will integrate the graphics controller, which would normally be part of the chipset. This will "increase performance and simplify system manufacturing", according to Intel.
The new processors will be compatible with a new chipset – the Intel 5 Series – due for release in the second half of this year. The processors themselves will be in production by the end of the year, although will be available in early 2010.
















Steve Smith presenting the new Westmere processor
Intel Westmere Whitepapers
Intel Westmere Fact Sheet
It is probably just to allow some more calculations to be done in the processor without having a video card and improve overall performance. If you want gaming or high end video processing, you'll always need the video card.
Just my view.
Isn't that an integrated graphics adapter which you do not want? The graphics controller should be the part which controls the adapter, i.e. video card... if I'm not mistaken.
It's pretty much the same idea as what they did with the memory controller in their i7 range.
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.