Surface Pro 4 - Intel Core M
- Thread starter Wiidesire
- Start date
You can't until or if Microsoft enables NFC.... just that the Marvell Wireless is equipped with the technology.
i read the news it said that 2015 spring, it will use broadwell 14nm.
As I stated in a different yet similar thread. The surface pro will or at least shouldn't use a broadwell M chip. The 'm' chip is made for extreme mobile, good battery life, and limited performance. Which has never been the surface pro. The surface has always used a 'u' series, and should continue with that.
Theoretic gains with the broadwell m show close to similar performance with the haswell u series. With lower stock speeds making lower tdp, and higher boost clocks. So this AT BEST would be a side grade for benefit/gain of a few hours of battery, tops. At worst, leads to lower performance and similar battery life.
Take a look at the Lenovo yoga 3 pro. Still has a fan, gets the same if not worse battery, and i5 pro 2 vs pro 3 shows pro 2 with slightly higher performance, and the i7 pro 2 blowing the pro 3 away. The yoga pro three still has a fan, which is on constantly and the broadwell chip thermally throttles worse than the haswell.
Which is why I say, the surface pro 4, should go with broadwell u chips. Which aren't supposed to start launching until mid 2015. Which would make a early to late fall SP4 release. Which makes all the sense in the world for Microsoft. The surface pro 3 is great, selling faster than any before, and doesn't really have any gripes (that broadwell would 'fix'). Yes broadwell m would/might give slightly higher battery, but at lower performance and only a possibility at higher battery. Broadwell u might not even increase battery but solely increase performance. Which to me is still a win. If broadwell u i5 increased performance to say around a haswell i7, yet still gives the haswell i5 battery life, win. And if broadwell u i7 gives even higher performance than the haswell i7, I say about time. As the i5 i7 haswell, really isn't a difference. i5 thermal throttles, i7 tdp throttles and worse. Performance are really close. Hopefuly broadwell u can give some major gains in performance, and at the very least keep the 7 hours of battery I get now with the sp3
Theoretic gains with the broadwell m show close to similar performance with the haswell u series. With lower stock speeds making lower tdp, and higher boost clocks. So this AT BEST would be a side grade for benefit/gain of a few hours of battery, tops. At worst, leads to lower performance and similar battery life.
Take a look at the Lenovo yoga 3 pro. Still has a fan, gets the same if not worse battery, and i5 pro 2 vs pro 3 shows pro 2 with slightly higher performance, and the i7 pro 2 blowing the pro 3 away. The yoga pro three still has a fan, which is on constantly and the broadwell chip thermally throttles worse than the haswell.
Which is why I say, the surface pro 4, should go with broadwell u chips. Which aren't supposed to start launching until mid 2015. Which would make a early to late fall SP4 release. Which makes all the sense in the world for Microsoft. The surface pro 3 is great, selling faster than any before, and doesn't really have any gripes (that broadwell would 'fix'). Yes broadwell m would/might give slightly higher battery, but at lower performance and only a possibility at higher battery. Broadwell u might not even increase battery but solely increase performance. Which to me is still a win. If broadwell u i5 increased performance to say around a haswell i7, yet still gives the haswell i5 battery life, win. And if broadwell u i7 gives even higher performance than the haswell i7, I say about time. As the i5 i7 haswell, really isn't a difference. i5 thermal throttles, i7 tdp throttles and worse. Performance are really close. Hopefuly broadwell u can give some major gains in performance, and at the very least keep the 7 hours of battery I get now with the sp3
InspectHerGadget
Active Member
I think while Broadwell will most definitely be a worthwhile upgrade, it isn't going to be earth shaking, a bit more performance and a bit more battery life and a bit more of a wait until it happens.
This is taken from a wpcentral article
http://www.windowscentral.com/skip-lenovo-yoga-3-pro-and-go-surface-pro-3-instead
It is a review done on the Lenovo yoga 3 pro, with the top end BROADWELL core M.
Processor
The Surface Pro 3 ships with an Intel Core i3, Core i5, or Core i7 Haswell processor. The Yoga 3 Pro, on the other hand, has a brand new Core M-70 Broadwell.
Putting aside benchmarks and raw speeds for now, I can easily state that the Core i5 (and especially Core i7) are much faster in performance. The Core M so far has uneven performance for applications, especially in Chrome browser (IE 11 fares much better). The Core M does well with Windows 8.1 Modern apps, which bodes well for the chip when it heads to tablets later this year, but for desktop apps it is not very impressive.
To give you a real-world reference, the Core M so far feels like an Atom processor to me. Of course, you may be thinking 'Well, at least the battery life is better with the Core M and Lenovo, right?' Wrong.
Battery
Lenovo claims "up to 9 hours" with the Yoga 3 Pro. Now, I am always skeptical of those numbers, as they are usually under ideal conditions with many aspects of the hardware tuned down. The Yoga 3 Pro though can maybe get five or six hours tops from standard usage. This battery life is, of course, with the processor tuned down using the battery-saver mode and the display substantially dimmed.
Is the battery life terrible? Not when you remember that this is a 2.6-pound Ultrabook. Nevertheless, this number is well below what Lenovo is advertising, and when you combine it with an uneven performance, there is no benefit. Indeed, I am quite positive my Surface Pro 3 with a powerful Core i7 will last longer, and that processor obliterates the Core M for performance.
There are also several reviews on the Lenovo which give real life benchmarks, which show that each following benchmark the score drops substantially. I know this is the Lenovo and not the surface. But for now this is the only BROADWELL chip actual hands on review and testing to compare with. I'll try and find the site with actual benchmark numbers and compare.
http://www.windowscentral.com/skip-lenovo-yoga-3-pro-and-go-surface-pro-3-instead
It is a review done on the Lenovo yoga 3 pro, with the top end BROADWELL core M.
Processor
The Surface Pro 3 ships with an Intel Core i3, Core i5, or Core i7 Haswell processor. The Yoga 3 Pro, on the other hand, has a brand new Core M-70 Broadwell.
Putting aside benchmarks and raw speeds for now, I can easily state that the Core i5 (and especially Core i7) are much faster in performance. The Core M so far has uneven performance for applications, especially in Chrome browser (IE 11 fares much better). The Core M does well with Windows 8.1 Modern apps, which bodes well for the chip when it heads to tablets later this year, but for desktop apps it is not very impressive.
To give you a real-world reference, the Core M so far feels like an Atom processor to me. Of course, you may be thinking 'Well, at least the battery life is better with the Core M and Lenovo, right?' Wrong.
Battery
Lenovo claims "up to 9 hours" with the Yoga 3 Pro. Now, I am always skeptical of those numbers, as they are usually under ideal conditions with many aspects of the hardware tuned down. The Yoga 3 Pro though can maybe get five or six hours tops from standard usage. This battery life is, of course, with the processor tuned down using the battery-saver mode and the display substantially dimmed.
Is the battery life terrible? Not when you remember that this is a 2.6-pound Ultrabook. Nevertheless, this number is well below what Lenovo is advertising, and when you combine it with an uneven performance, there is no benefit. Indeed, I am quite positive my Surface Pro 3 with a powerful Core i7 will last longer, and that processor obliterates the Core M for performance.
There are also several reviews on the Lenovo which give real life benchmarks, which show that each following benchmark the score drops substantially. I know this is the Lenovo and not the surface. But for now this is the only BROADWELL chip actual hands on review and testing to compare with. I'll try and find the site with actual benchmark numbers and compare.
True, but how could lenovo butcher cpu performane AND battery? With a fan included, which apparently isnt needed, yet still thermally throttle? Core m, is just that. It will never be a core u. Which is why sp4 will include core u broadwell
Edit:
I say how could Lenovo butcher 'both' CPU performance AND battery?
By that, I mean that CPU low/medium/high performance is pretty much set on the CPU die itself. Manufactures like Intel make these chips, and the exact chip is only capable of so much. Then computer manufactures, can take that chip and severely limit performance to gain best battery (like battery saver mode), slightly limit performance to gain slight better battery (balanced), or give top performance with limit to battery (high performance). With that said, Lenovo as a company, cannot limit performance and while providing horrible battery. That's the chipset itself.
If you look up all the Lenovo yoga 3 pro reviews, its been found that the core m Y3P offers a good sized performance hit compared to even the i5 u. And reviewers found that the Y2P with i5/i7 actually offered better battery. Other than a few tweaks and improving the panel (which is still 3k in both), the move (other than cosmetic) from Y2P with HASWELL to Y3P with BROADWELL decreased performance and battery. Other than being slimmer, lighter, and less yellow accuracy issues with the screen, the Y3P offers downgrades in every actual category in regards to chipset.
I really hope that Microsoft wasn't planning this BROADWELL 'upgrade' to M. And if so, I hope they learned quick what Lenovo showed to the world, that BROADWELL M is an upgrade to HASWELL M, it isn't any sort of a upgrade to HASWELL U, and is actually a downgrade.
Both CPU and GPU are severely limited in stock clocks, but 'promised' higher/similar turbo clocks. Yet even fan cooled, is thermally throttled worse than HASWELL, and never sustains turbo clocks for any significant period of time. Thus operating at the drastically lower stock clocks for the majority of the time.
The above sentence makes a huge statement towards BROADWELL M being put into a surface pro. As thermal throttling is HUGE with current HASWELL in surface pro. While with other manufactures not so much as SP 3 went slim while others are thicker and allow better cooling. And if a still thicker laptop with a fan has horrible thermal throttling with a BROADWELL M, I can't imagine AT ALL, that not being a problem if put into a surface pro.
Thus, my main point and main thought. Is that if surface pro 4 was released with a BROADWELL M, it wouldn't be an upgrade or offer anything more than I have now with a surface pro 3. And, from what we know about BROADWELL M now, it wouldn't even be a side grade. It'd be a honest downright downgrade to the surface pro 3. With surface pro 3 selling so well, and finally getting Microsoft some numbers on the board, I really REALLY hope they don't make the move to m. If so, it could easily and sadly, turn out to be the nail in the coffin for surface pro. I don't think Microsoft can take any more hits on the surface line, and if BROADWELL M turns out to be for the surface pro 4 what it is/was for the Yoga 3 Pro, it would flat line surface pro sales, ruin what momentum the surface pro 3 gave Microsoft, and cripple trust/expectations of the surface pro line and easily kill it off.
Edit:
I say how could Lenovo butcher 'both' CPU performance AND battery?
By that, I mean that CPU low/medium/high performance is pretty much set on the CPU die itself. Manufactures like Intel make these chips, and the exact chip is only capable of so much. Then computer manufactures, can take that chip and severely limit performance to gain best battery (like battery saver mode), slightly limit performance to gain slight better battery (balanced), or give top performance with limit to battery (high performance). With that said, Lenovo as a company, cannot limit performance and while providing horrible battery. That's the chipset itself.
If you look up all the Lenovo yoga 3 pro reviews, its been found that the core m Y3P offers a good sized performance hit compared to even the i5 u. And reviewers found that the Y2P with i5/i7 actually offered better battery. Other than a few tweaks and improving the panel (which is still 3k in both), the move (other than cosmetic) from Y2P with HASWELL to Y3P with BROADWELL decreased performance and battery. Other than being slimmer, lighter, and less yellow accuracy issues with the screen, the Y3P offers downgrades in every actual category in regards to chipset.
I really hope that Microsoft wasn't planning this BROADWELL 'upgrade' to M. And if so, I hope they learned quick what Lenovo showed to the world, that BROADWELL M is an upgrade to HASWELL M, it isn't any sort of a upgrade to HASWELL U, and is actually a downgrade.
Both CPU and GPU are severely limited in stock clocks, but 'promised' higher/similar turbo clocks. Yet even fan cooled, is thermally throttled worse than HASWELL, and never sustains turbo clocks for any significant period of time. Thus operating at the drastically lower stock clocks for the majority of the time.
The above sentence makes a huge statement towards BROADWELL M being put into a surface pro. As thermal throttling is HUGE with current HASWELL in surface pro. While with other manufactures not so much as SP 3 went slim while others are thicker and allow better cooling. And if a still thicker laptop with a fan has horrible thermal throttling with a BROADWELL M, I can't imagine AT ALL, that not being a problem if put into a surface pro.
Thus, my main point and main thought. Is that if surface pro 4 was released with a BROADWELL M, it wouldn't be an upgrade or offer anything more than I have now with a surface pro 3. And, from what we know about BROADWELL M now, it wouldn't even be a side grade. It'd be a honest downright downgrade to the surface pro 3. With surface pro 3 selling so well, and finally getting Microsoft some numbers on the board, I really REALLY hope they don't make the move to m. If so, it could easily and sadly, turn out to be the nail in the coffin for surface pro. I don't think Microsoft can take any more hits on the surface line, and if BROADWELL M turns out to be for the surface pro 4 what it is/was for the Yoga 3 Pro, it would flat line surface pro sales, ruin what momentum the surface pro 3 gave Microsoft, and cripple trust/expectations of the surface pro line and easily kill it off.
Last edited:
dstrauss
Active Member
I think we are looking more at an April-May release of the Surface Pro 4 in conjunction with the release of Windows 10. My bet is the exact same chassis (no 9mm specials - they've already declared it will work with the existing SPr0 3 dock), hopefully with USB 3.1 reversible cables, and 512GB/1TB SSD options, and a "no more throttling" Broadwell i7. How about a little Iris Pro Graphics love too while your at it Mr. Panay?
AND ABOVE ALL ELSE - get rid of that POS Marvell network adapter - all three generations of the SPro have been plagued with wireless network connection problems that take MONTHS to even get stable - enough already!
Hey dstrauss!!!
It looks like many of the issues with the Marvell WLAN adapter were caused by Intel PCIe Controller (which was updated in the last firmware update).
RE Throttling: There's a bit of a physics problem to be solved which you cannot avoid.
Given the same form factor which fits the Dock (unless they include spacers to fit a smaller device into the dock).
Given BU (Broadwell U series) has the same 15w TDP as Haswell U (HU)
You have the same amount of heat to dissipate. Therefore throttling is virtually guaranteed barring some miraculous new cooling technology. Granted the CPU component it smaller so you could use that extra space for heat sink/bigger fan but that's still short of the reference design.
BM (Broadwell Core-M) at best would perform on par to slightly better (optimistically) with HU although clearly Lenovo failed to achieve that.
Maybe in this scenario throttling can be avoided, that remains to be seen as the reference tablet contained a large heat sink in the back panel... again miraculous new cooling system may still be required just not quite as miraculous as for BU.
Last edited:
I agree, Marvell is no good. Took my SP3 into an RF shield room last week, it couldn't connect on channel 36 at all. Switched AP to channel 157, it would take 5 times as long to find the network but able to connect. Other Broadcom- or Qualcomm/Atheros- or Intel-based devices all work without effort.
Similar threads
