Talk:Ice Lake (microprocessor)

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Mid-importance).

Electronics Low‑importance

	Electronics portal This article is part of WikiProject Electronics, an attempt to provide a standard approach to writing articles about electronics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can choose to edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. Leave messages at the project talk pageElectronicsWikipedia:WikiProject ElectronicsTemplate:WikiProject Electronicselectronic articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Replace Cannonlake in 2018?[edit]

How is this supposed to replace Cannonlake in 2018? Intel got issues with 10nm and is pushing an extra round of optimization of 14nm, Coffee Lake, before the release of Cannonlake. Coffee Lake is supposed to be 2018, so Cannonlake is obviously pushed further forth, so at least not before late 2018, and then Icelake is supposed to replace Cannonlake after late 2018, but still in 2018? =P Hopefully that made sense. Article needs to be updated with new information when that is given, but I think it's fair to say Icelake will not replace Cannonlake in 2018, which is pretty much all the article is currently saying will happen. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.167.35.20 (talk) 16:17, 10 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move discussion in progress[edit]

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:Haswell (CPU) which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 05:32, 11 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Requested move 10 September 2017[edit]

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Moved to Ice Lake (microarchitecture). No such user (talk) 09:20, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Icelake → Ice Lake – All sources in the article use Intel's spelling. In the case of The Motley Fool an older article uses one word, while a newer article uses two words. Pizzahut2 (talk) 20:33, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, instead move to Ice Lake (microarchitecture), we also have Ice Lake (Oregon), Ice Lake, Ontario, Ice Lake Silverton, Colorado, the Pleistocene Baltic Ice Lake, Ice Lake Rebels, Ice Lake novel by Trevor Ferguson, there's no primary and the target should be a dab page. In ictu oculi (talk) 21:41, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally Ice Lake is currently mis-linking from List of lakes in the Alpine Lakes Wilderness, List of lakes of New Zealand In ictu oculi (talk)

Would agree with that move then.--Pizzahut2 (talk) 22:09, 10 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Comment I also moved Tigerlake to Tiger Lake (microarchitecture) based on the same reasoning and prevalence in sources. I did not retarget Icelake and Tigerlake (and it's questionable if they should be retargeted), since it is difficult to sort out the links at the moment – most of them come via {{Intel processors}}, which I edited to point directly to new targets, but "what links here" needs time to catch up. No such user (talk) 09:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comment User:In ictu oculi User:Pizzahut2 User:No such user I agree, and changed Ice Lake to a dab including the entries above, regards Widefox; talk 22:07, 23 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Microarchitecture vs CPU[edit]

I'm not super knowledgeable about these things, but isn't Ice Lake the name of the CPU, not the microarchitecture? The microarch is Sunny Cove. The first line of the article states this, and seems to be supported by Intel's own marketing (source Intel slides from 2018 Architecture Day: https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-10th-generation-core-10nm-ice-lake-gen11-graphics-sunny-cove-thunderbolt-3-usb-c,39477.html). Marquismark79 (talk) 20:01, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Right. If you consider the CPU one part of the whole processor, then technically Ice Lake is the code name for the whole processor. I'd suggest renaming the article to "Ice Lake (microprocessor)". "Sunny Cove" currently redirects here, but if it ever needs its own article or disambiguation, we'd call it "Sunny Cove (microarchitecture)". --Vossanova ^o< 20:35, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Then this applies to the successor as well, i.e. Tiger Lake (microarchitecture) isn't really a microarchitecture as currently described in the article, but Willow Cove is, which Tiger Lake supposedly will use for the CPU cores. Pizzahut2 (talk) 13:02, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Found an Intel slide saying Ice Lake is a "major architecture": [1] taken from [2]. So I guess both can be considered architectures, Ice Lake as the whole chip (design), Sunny Cove as the CPU core (design) and [[X^e]] as the graphics engine. If you look at the whole chip, you see there's a lot more to it than just CPU cores and GPU: [3] image taken from [4]. Pizzahut2 (talk) 13:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm seeing some sites like Tom's Hardware call Ice Lake an "architecture" (probably based on that slide) and some sites like Anandtech call it a "processor" or a "platform". But I'm seeing very few sites call it a "microarchitecture" (strangely, one of Anandtech's articles has "ice-lake-microarchitecture" in the URL but nowhere in the article itself). So, it should still be renamed, but to what is apparently up for debate. If we go with "architecture", we'd at least need to make clear what the difference between that and a microarchitecture is. --Vossanova ^o< 14:41, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Also, there's this Intel page calling Ice Lake a "processor family". --Vossanova ^o< 14:44, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ice Lake is the family, Sunny Cove is the microarchitecture. I will update Template:Intel processor roadmap. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 21:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead. Pizzahut2 (talk) 10:36, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 20:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@ Pizzahut2 In the image that you link, the first item, on the left, is Merom @ 65nm, which is not a microarchitecture but a family. The items are:

Merom @ 65nm (Core microarch)
Nehalem @ 45nm (Nehalem microarch)
Sandy Bridge @ 32nm (Sandy Bridge microarch)
Haswell @ 22nm (Haswell microarch)
Skylake @ 14nm (Skylake microarch)
Ice Lake @ 10nm (Sunny Cove microarch)

Those are actualy the first family using each microarch, since Core. The above "architecture" text in the image is misleading. Visite fortuitement prolongée (talk) 21:47, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my take. Why don't we replace all the instances of uArch and uProcessor with just the word "Intel"? E.g. "Intel Ice Lake", "Intel Skylake", etc. where necessary (I mean where there's a need to use a word in cases when an article without a word is a disambiguation page). The rationale is that neither average people, nor Intel particularly cares about these monikers. They are just made up names with no special meaning. I presume pretty much no one will Google for Ice Lake Processor Family or anything like that. Most likely it will be just Ice Lake or ... Intel Ice Lake. Artem S. Tashkinov (talk) 12:40, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

'N' CPUs[edit]

There's a bit of an edit war regarding a section on the 'N' CPUs, which appear to be Apple-exclusive. Currently, they're just listed with no further info, which seems like too little.

I contend that:

it's absolutely "noteworthy" that the highest-end 1068G7 (the only 28W CPU, and one with a significantly higher clock) was first delayed, then apparently quietly canceled.
it's also noteworthy that Apple (apparently) gets various special SKUs, and _does_ get a variant of the 1068G7.

Perhaps the table should include a footer that states the above two:

A 1068G7 was first announced, but appears to have been canceled.
SKUs prefixed 'N' such as the 1068NG7 are only available to specific customers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chucker (talk • contribs) 08:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The only thing that has changed regarding the status of the i7-1068G7 chip is that Intel changed its name in their database. Anything else regarding its supposed cancellation, including that NotebookCheck article, is just speculation based on unreliable information and is not worthy of inclusion on this page, just like similar information has never been included on other pages about Intel chips. Just like there is no official information regarding the i7-1068G7 chip's status, there is also no official information regarding the "Apple exclusivity" of the i7-1068NG7 chip. Once again, anything about that is (so far) just speculation, based on unreliable information and "leaks". There is a reason this sort of cruft is not present on the other pages about Intel chips. It's useless to include, not noteworthy, and will just be forgotten about when Tiger Lake arrives. That being said, if someone can dig up an official source stating that any of the chips listed in the table were "cancelled" or "exclusive", then I would be fine with that information being included as a note on the page. Hungariantoast (talk) 19:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Correction necessary to naming convention[edit]

The line, "thus, a 1035G7 would be a 10th generation Core i3" doesn't match the table below (where that chip is an i5). I'm unsure of the exact convention, so instead of making an edit myself, wanted to just call attention to it here. OutOfBand (talk) 04:13, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

List of Intel Ice Lake-based Xeon microprocessors redundancy?[edit]

We have list of Intel Ice Lake-based Xeon microprocessors page, could this be a redundancy? Rjluna2 (talk) 15:00, 31 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Intel Launches Xeon D Processor Built for the Network and Edge[edit]

Intel Launches Xeon D Processor Built for the Network and Edge which was formerly known as Ice Lake D. Rjluna2 (talk) 16:46, 25 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]