Talk:Cannon Lake (microprocessor)

Use of old codename

edit
I made the edits to Skylake and moved this article to Cannonlake. Skymont is wrong and there are many Intel employees at this point who know Cannonlake is the correct code name. Just a matter of time until someone leaks it to SemiAccurate MrCrackers (talk) 13:39, 31 July 2013 (UTC)Reply

This article should be deleted.

edit

  This article seems to be unconstructive and offended WP:BALL. May I delete this article? See what I do? Talk to me? This is 113.253.22.52. Posted 10:07 UTC.

This seems to offend WP:BALL

edit

I think this article have no relevant information to prove that Cannonlake is going to announced. WIKIPEDIA IS NOT A COLLECTION OF PRODUCT ANNOUNCEMENT AND RUMORS. Please consider delete this article, or redirect it to something else. Windows 9 was once like this article, full of rumors. Intel's job list only mentioned CPU engineer. If you think I am wrong, leave a message on 113.253.16.154's talk page. (Posting as 113.253.22.52, My home have more than one IP addresses)113.253.16.154 (talk) 01:40, 24 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

EDIT: Posting as 113.253.16.154 and 113.253.22.52, Now the two IP's has intergrated into one account - CloudComputation. Last time, 113.253.22.52 requested a deletion of page but it is keeped. Now, the power performance engineer job list has no the name "CANNONLAKE". Tom's hardware and apc are just rumors. CloudComputation (talk) 01:56, 25 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

As of right now, Cannonlake is probably only 2 years away, which is not really that long time for a microprocessor design. Many sources say Intel is working on a 10nm shrink, and all information agree that the code name for it will be Cannonlake. This acticle basically only says such a fabrication node is planned, as well as what the leaked code names are. I agree that rumor-aggregation-pages are bad for Wikipedia, but IMO the current page is about something arguably announced, and is quite constrained in what rumored details are included.
Also, IMO we should have a Windows 9 page, as long as the amount of speculation and unconfirmed rumors could be kept down, as it is real and notable. It is quite obvious that Microsoft is working on a successor to Windows 8, we even know the codename (Threshold), and there are 12 million Google hits for "Windows 9". Thue (talk) 09:52, 21 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ice Lake?

edit

Take a look at the following news article: http://www.game-debate.com/news/?news=17466&game=None&title=Intel%20Ditches%20Cannonlake%20And%20Replaces%20It%20With%20Ice%20Lake%20CPUs — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:647:102:129D:6844:584B:CBC:402A (talk) 03:24, 15 July 2015 (UTC)Reply

CannonLake cancelled, to be replaced by Ice Lake (10nm architecture) and pushed back to 2017 due to production difficulties, and re-introduces FIVR for the new 10nm chips, but requires brand-new chipsets and motherboards for them. Kabylake would be considered a "refresh" of Skylake with improved Integrated GPU chips (possibly full Intel Iris Pro GPU integration). Kinda confirmed here: http://news.softpedia.com/news/the-new-intel-ice-lake-cpu-will-come-with-integrated-voltage-regulator-486702.shtml — Preceding unsigned comment added by 42.60.52.136 (talk) 08:26, 20 September 2015 (UTC)Reply

This October 2015 article seems to disagree, sounds fairly authoritative since it apparently has a direct quote from Intel: "To address this cadence, in the second half of 2016 we plan to introduce a third 14-nanometer product, code named Kaby Lake, built on the foundations of the Skylake micro-architecture but with key performance enhancements. Then in the second half of 2017, we expect to launch our first 10-nanometer product, code named Cannonlake. We expect that this addition to the roadmap will deliver new features and improved performance and pave the way for a smooth transition to 10-nanometers." Thue (talk) 10:35, 17 January 2016 (UTC)Reply

Watts make no sense

edit

"Due to low 10nm yields, Cannonlake will be limited to 15 Watt U and 5.2 Watt Y system-on-chip parts with GT2" and then " Thermal design power (TDP) up to 95 W (LGA 1151)". You can't have both! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.85.68.15 (talk) 02:36, 1 November 2016 (UTC)Reply

Requested move 10 February 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: not moved. Wikipedia does title its articles by using official names, it uses the most common name in reliable sources regardless of the official name. Good evidence has been provided that the current title is the common name. I will also be move protecting this article because some people seem very keen to keep moving it without a consensus. Jenks24 (talk) 05:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)Reply



CannonlakeCannon Lake (CPU) – Intel calls this CPU architecture this way, so "Cannonlake" is a misnomer https://newsroom.intel.com/news/brian-krzanich-2017-ces-news-conference Artem-S-Tashkinov (talk) 13:14, 10 February 2017 (UTC) --Relisting. SkyWarrior 04:02, 18 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

I've appended " (CPU)" on the end, as that seems to be the intent. Laurdecl talk 04:32, 11 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
The only authoritative source in this matter is Intel. And Intel calls this CPU architecture "Cannon Lake", not "Cannonlake". Your comment is absolutely without substance and factually incorrect. Artem-S-Tashkinov (talk) 14:22, 11 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
I took the courage to rename this article regardless. If you wanna argue with Intel and with how they call their own CPUs architectures - go, rename it back. It will look totally idiotic, wrong and unreasonable but why would I care if you believe that some random journalists on the Internet know what happens inside Intel better than Intel itself. Besides most (if not all) of the mentioned articles are either rumors, predictions or speculations. Artem-S-Tashkinov (talk) 14:27, 11 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
(Personal attack removed)?
Stop lying about naming conventions in WP. Articles in WP always follow trademarks (sans lower case/caps in certain cases due to WP limitations). Artem-S-Tashkinov (talk) 23:57, 11 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Please reread MOS:TM.  ONR  (talk)  02:28, 12 February 2017 (UTC)Reply
Also all these names are architectures, not CPUs. When you let idiots edit WP, bad things happen.

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.

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 05:31, 11 February 2017 (UTC)Reply

Two dates in the article, which is it.

edit

"initially expected to be released late in the first half of 2018" or "The company expects Cannon Lake based products to be available at the end of 2017." Perhaps this statement was in regards to Coffee Lak being available end of '17? Definite confusion. Also if Cannon Lake will ever have higher performance CPUs or if that will be a future codename. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.240.136.164 (talk) 18:43, 24 March 2017 (UTC)Reply

AVX-512 in the i3-8121U

edit

@Pizzahut2: it looks like AVX-512 in the i3-8121U is not clear. The sources cited don't definitively state it is absent, and a new source [9] is more affirmative that it is included. I am going to change the table to "unknown" based on this information, but we should keep an eye out for a solid source one way or the other. Dbsseven (talk) 14:18, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply

Yes, it looks like a bug in Intel's ARK database atm. — Pizzahut2 (talk) 16:40, 16 May 2018 (UTC)Reply


Requested move 16 July 2023

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 after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Participants were unconvinced that the article subject was its own distinct microarchitecture. (closed by non-admin page mover) ModernDayTrilobite (talkcontribs) 14:47, 24 July 2023 (UTC)Reply


Cannon Lake (microprocessor)Cannon Lake (microarchitecture) – Other microarchitectures have "(microarchitecture)" in their title not a "(microprocessor)" Maxim Masiutin (talk) 01:14, 16 July 2023 (UTC)Reply

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

"Skymont" listed at Redirects for discussion

edit

  The redirect Skymont has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2024 June 29 § Skymont until a consensus is reached. Jay 💬 01:29, 29 June 2024 (UTC)Reply