Report: Intel won't bring Broadwell CPU design to the desktop PC

Intel CEO Brian Krzanich shows off a future Windows 8.1 notebook from HP at IDF that used the Broadwell design.

Intel showed off a notebook PC, running on Windows 8.1, that was using the company's Broadwell design at IDF last week. Broadwell uses a 14nm-based process and is expected to go into full production by the end of 2013. However, a new report now claims that Broadwell will be a mobile CPU design only and won't be coming to the desktop market.

The report from Fudzilla, using unnamed sources, says that Intel's new plan is to release an all-new processor design for the desktop market every two years. In 2014, the report claims that Intel will offer a slightly improved and optimized Haswell CPU for desktop PCs. The next major new design won't come until 2015, when Intel plans to launch Skylake, which like Broadwell will use a 14-nm manufacturing process.

This slow down in all new desktop processors from Intel, if true, is not unexpected as the demand for the desktop PC itself in both consumer and business markets has gone down in favor of new notebooks, tablets and convertibles.

Source: Fudzilla | Image via HP

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Grand Theft Auto V hits $1 billion in sales faster than any entertainment release

Next Story

Microsoft Surface team to host Reddit AMA Monday

17 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Frankly even without the shrinking desktop market (which I don't believe is as drastic as Gartner wants us to believe) with current software needs I don't think anyone needs to upgrade CPU every year - even hardcore geeks. Personally I don't plan to move away from my i3770k until 2015 at the earliest.

This is a perfectly OK idea to me. I mean 99% of people dont actually USE a CPU for anything anymore - they are just so quick. I'm rocking a Q9450 and its more than enough. It's not as quick at encoding MKV files...but hey, how often do i really do that?!

The mobile front is a great place to focus efforts - slim down processors, bulk up speed, and drop power consumption - major gains to be had there

UseLess said,
This is a perfectly OK idea to me. I mean 99% of people dont actually USE a CPU for anything anymore - they are just so quick. I'm rocking a Q9450 and its more than enough. It's not as quick at encoding MKV files...but hey, how often do i really do that?!
I'm still using an E6700 Core2Duo and find it is more than enough for my needs. Paired with 8GB of DDR3 and a Radeon HD 6570 GPU it serves me well.

Good strategy for my wallet. Every two years is enough for today's games and applications. Now I need something to stop my yearly GPU upgrades. Hmm, I'll take violin classes with my daughter.

JHBrown said,
Good strategy for my wallet. Every two years is enough for today's games and applications. Now I need something to stop my yearly GPU upgrades. Hmm, I'll take violin classes with my daughter.

Why did you upgrade? I got a Sandy Bridge for my desktop because it was a huge improvement. I had just gotten excited again about my desktop and computer hardware but it was pretty obvious that Ivy Bridge wasn't worth the money to upgrade to. Now Haswell barely brought anything new to the desktop and I'm still using my i5-2500K.

On the laptop/tablet front though I've bought a new computer with every new CPU. They are making actual improvements there.

mrp04 said,
Why did you upgrade?

He seems to complain quite a lot about spending money on buying everything that's newly released every year, a bit strange if you ask me... But yeah, the last big jump was the 2500/2600, looks like I'll be using one of those until 2015 and while some GPUs are absurdly powerful and expensive (Titan), they are overkill for 99% of games and setups (multimonitor gaming being one of the exceptions). The need to upgrade even every two or three years isn't there anymore even for gamers and I don't think nextgen consoles will change that.

dr_crabman said,

The need to upgrade even every two or three years isn't there anymore even for gamers and I don't think nextgen consoles will change that.

Yeah, it's the consoles which made it so you don't need to upgrade much. Most games are developed for them and then maybe ported to PC. The new consoles still are weak compared to even most graphics cards gamers already have.

dr_crabman said,

He seems to complain quite a lot about spending money on buying everything that's newly released every year, a bit strange if you ask me... But yeah, the last big jump was the 2500/2600, looks like I'll be using one of those until 2015 and while some GPUs are absurdly powerful and expensive (Titan), they are overkill for 99% of games and setups (multimonitor gaming being one of the exceptions). The need to upgrade even every two or three years isn't there anymore even for gamers and I don't think nextgen consoles will change that.

Where the hell do you see me complaining? I have the income to upgrade every 6 months if I wanted to.

Draconian Guppy said,
Isn't this two year cycle the same tick tock strategy?

Tick new gen - year 1
tock new process same gen -year2
tick new gen year 3

Tick tick strategy was redundant the moment it was announced. It was just some marketing fodder given to tech websites like anandtech to constantly ruminate over every Intel's processor release.