Intel CPU archiect does AmA on Reddit


Recommended Posts

http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/15iaet/iama_cpu_architect_and_designer_at_intel_ama/

For us as architects, we have a team dedicated to putting in overclocking features into the designs and tests in place to cherry pick those parts to box and sell as such. So you are getting parts on the good side of the normal when you buy K CPUs.

Well worth the read if you're interested in hardware.

Outstanding! Thanks for posting that.

Surprised no-one asked about intel removing sockets :p

EDIT: Oh no wait someone did;

'This rumor is likely misinterpreting facts or based on really incomplete information. Many of the variants will be BGA packages for certain form factors but not all. In my mind, if you lose customers by offering less choice, we did not save anything. But I'm not in sales or marketing.'

interesting

If there was any realistic thing you could change about your job, what would you change?

We need faster computers to build faster computers.

What is the hardest part of your job?

Making our ideas reality. You can have the greatest idea in the world, but the physical world does not like to cooperate.

:)

Yeah I found that part interesting too, so if you have a K series you have a cherry picked better than average CPU

Good to know

Yes I'm sure the Intel engineers hand pick them and seal them in the box with a kiss like the Keebler Elves.. lol what a load of bull.

You guys are welcome! :)

Yes I'm sure the Intel engineers hand pick them and seal them in the box with a kiss like the Keebler Elves.. lol what a load of bull.

I believe him. Remember the Core 2 days, when you could buy a 45 watt quad core? Those were hand picked to handle the lower wattage at a lower clock speed.

This isn't new. I7, I5, I3 are all the same CPU (xeon might be in there also). They go for the best and if it fails they see how much can be disabled from testing to make it a lower grade that meets X specs. If it can fit into one of the categories then it will become it. That's why I'll never buy a low end cpu. I don't want a defective cpu in some form (cache, cores, etc).

Same goes with Video Cards.

  • Like 1

Yes I'm sure the Intel engineers hand pick them and seal them in the box with a kiss like the Keebler Elves.. lol what a load of bull.

Not hand picked like that no, go look at the intel confidential probe cards on ebay and various forums for testing CPU dies.

They test them, and those that work better will get the 'k' mark.

This isn't new. I7, I5, I3 are all the same CPU (xeon might be in there also). They go for the best and if it fails they see how much can be disabled from testing to make it a lower grade that meets X specs. If it can fit into one of the categories then it will become it. That's why I'll never buy a low end cpu. I don't want a defective cpu in some form (cache, cores, etc).

Same goes with Video Cards.

That might have been true in days of the original celeron and pentium but I doubt that is true now.

6 months is putting it mildly. I would say a year or two personally.

I don't think they're that far behind. Bulldozer/Piledriver CPUs aren't up there with the i7's, but on a price/performance scale they're punching their weight. The top end Bulldozer/Piledriver competes with an equivalent price high-end Core i5, and they're very quick in parallel tasks. They just suck at single-threaded tasks. Steamroller was supposed to be their saviour next year, with rumours like a 25% speed bump in single-thread performance, but that's been pushed back to 2014, which could be a fatal mistake.

AMD's problem is that they bet on high parallelism being a hot thing, and they bet wrong. That and the ATI purchase, and the Intel antitrust thing.

That might have been true in days of the original celeron and pentium but I doubt that is true now.

Every single chip will be tested for their capabilities. Those that pass every test at the highest clock speed are branded as a high end processors. Similarly, those that fail to reach the clock speed will be branded at as lower end products. If any of the cores don't work, then they are branded dual core i3/i5 processors or lower end quad core i5 processors. So while they may be "defective" from the standpoint of the perfect silicon chip, to the end user who expects everything as advertised, the resulting chip is perfect. For instance all Sandy Bridge-E processor dies have 8 cores but the number of cores to be 'enabled' will depend on the chips which make it through all the tests, the most robust ones (mainly those which are more thermal resistant) will have 6 cores enabled and will be branded in higher spec'd series (i.e Core i7-39xx) while some will have only 4 cores enabled (Core i7-38xx) but so far there are no i7 SB-E chips with 8 core enabled because of power/thermal issues. It's called product binning.

  • Like 2

I7/I5/I3 are different, they're not just one bunch and they blow fuses to select which model it is.

I3's have those 'upgrade cards' you can buy for example, to produce even just a million CPUs with that in that didn't need it would cost a lot of money.

And in terms of AMD vs Intel; AMD go by clock speed... Clock speed isn't everything, it really isn't. E.g. intel has TXT and an embedded AES function on their newer chips along with a load of other functions that AMD CPUs don't have, so these functions can be used to greatly speed up things. (As the guy said in the questions, intel own the fabs so they can put extra things in that fabless companies can't do)

AMD might have better clock speeds but they certainly are not ahead of intel, and in terms of being 6 months behind, I'd put it more than that unfortunately.

The top end Bulldozer/Piledriver competes with an equivalent price high-end Core i5, and they're very quick in parallel tasks. They just suck at single-threaded tasks.
Well single-threaded performance is still what matters in most use cases. Perhaps if the only thing I was doing with a PC was video encoding, or such inherently parallel task, I'd consider an AMD, but for a general-purpose machine, forget it.

I7/I5/I3 are different, they're not just one bunch and they blow fuses to select which model it is.

I3's have those 'upgrade cards' you can buy for example, to produce even just a million CPUs with that in that didn't need it would cost a lot of money.

And in terms of AMD vs Intel; AMD go by clock speed... Clock speed isn't everything, it really isn't. E.g. intel has TXT and an embedded AES function on their newer chips along with a load of other functions that AMD CPUs don't have, so these functions can be used to greatly speed up things. (As the guy said in the questions, intel own the fabs so they can put extra things in that fabless companies can't do)

AMD might have better clock speeds but they certainly are not ahead of intel, and in terms of being 6 months behind, I'd put it more than that unfortunately.

Only two models of the i3 are "upgrade card" capable, and one is mobile chip.

Why wouldn't it still be true? It's a fantastic business model to be able to use/sell stuff like that.

I don't disagree. But if you look at any of the dual core chips Intel makes..does that mean they're chopping off 2 cores? I can't imagine they have such poor yields that they have enough wafers to mass produce the i3, the pentium and the celeron just solely on bad i7s.

...

I don't disagree. But if you look at any of the dual core chips Intel makes..does that mean they're chopping off 2 cores? I can't imagine they have such poor yields that they have enough wafers to mass produce the i3, the pentium and the celeron just solely on bad i7s.

Nah, the i3 and so would be separate designs, but they'd all share a common base, so that if a quad core chip has issues in 2 cores, they can just disable them and have a resulting CPU functionally identical to a plain dual core design.

It's similar to the K/non-k issue, they build the CPUs around a common aim, and the ones that don't perform as well fall into a lower bracket (I know my 2500K performs better than other 2500K CPUs I've seen, etc.)

Nah, the i3 and so would be separate designs, but they'd all share a common base, so that if a quad core chip has issues in 2 cores, they can just disable them and have a resulting CPU functionally identical to a plain dual core design.

It's similar to the K/non-k issue, they build the CPUs around a common aim, and the ones that don't perform as well fall into a lower bracket (I know my 2500K performs better than other 2500K CPUs I've seen, etc.)

That's what I'm saying basically. The i3 and i5 are based on the reject quad core chips which to me given how well it (and the other dual cores) sell, they must have a lot of reject i7s.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Posts

    • Promoting is fine - advertising, informing, whatever.  But interrupting your PAID OS experience is not.
    • Why does a PDF software need an audio player inside it. What is this bloat.
    • Sadly, that is the state of things. It's basically considered acceptable for any random app running on your computer to use 1+ GB of RAM, and install space, lol, no one even seems to consider that.
    • EU Commission explains why Siri AI isn't launching in the EU, and Apple is to blame by Hamid Ganji Image via Apple This week at Apple’s 2026 developers conference, the iPhone maker unveiled the upgraded Siri after more than a year of delays. The new Siri is now called Siri AI, and it's powered by Google Gemini models. While Siri AI is preparing to roll out to Apple users worldwide, the company’s EU customers might need to wait much longer before getting their hands on the new assistant. Shortly after announcing iOS 27, Apple said in a blog post that Siri AI is not coming to the EU anytime soon due to hurdles posed by the Digital Markets Act (DMA) and other regulatory requirements. To comply with the DMA in the EU, Apple apparently needs to open Siri AI to rival assistants on iOS 27 and iPadOS 27. Apple has refused to do so, which has resulted in Siri AI being delayed for its EU users. The company argues that such a move would put users’ privacy at risk. In a statement to Neowin, a European Commission spokesperson provided more details about why Siri AI will not be rolled out to Apple customers in the region. The statement first noted that the DMA does not prohibit Apple from launching its services in the EU and that the company is simply required to comply with the law. The European Commission spokesperson added that, since Apple is considered a gatekeeper under the DMA, it is “obliged to give third parties access to equivalent features as they give to its own products. Because the DMA is precisely about giving users the choice to use the product they find best suits their needs.” Moreover, the spokesperson said the Commission has been in contact with Apple, though the company “did not develop proposals for DMA compliant interoperability solutions.” The statement also clarified that companies designated as gatekeepers cannot leverage their status and products, such as operating systems, to favor their own AI services. The first public beta of iOS 27 will roll out next month, while the stable version is expected to launch this fall following the release of the iPhone 18 series. It remains unclear when Apple will be able to resolve its DMA-related compliance issues with the European Commission and bring Siri AI to its European customers.
  • Recent Achievements

    • One Month Later
      pinnclepd earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • First Post
      X-No-file earned a badge
      First Post
    • One Month Later
      johnjacobb40 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Year In
      Primer1st earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Experienced
      JayZJay went up a rank
      Experienced
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      510
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      214
    3. 3
      +Edouard
      145
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      88
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      83
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!