Intel plans to launch its 6th-gen Core processors based on the “Skylake” platform later this year. They’ll replace the 5th-gen “Broadwell” chips that are already shipping in laptop, desktop, and convertible PCs.

But what about Intel’s lower-power chips for tablets and entry-level notebook and desktop computers? We already know that the company’s next-gen Atom chips are code-named “Willow Trail,” and that they’ll replace the Cherry Trail chips which are just starting to hit the streets.

Now Benchlife.info reports that Intel is also planning to replace this year’s “Braswell” chips with new chips that are part of the “Apollo Lake” family.

intel logo

OK, that’s an awful lot of code names. So what does it all mean? Details are a bit scarce at the moment, but here are some highlights:

  • Braswell chips are based on the same architecture as Atom processors, but offer higher performance (and consume more power).
  • Likewise, Apollo Lake chips will be based on the same “Goldmont” architecture as Willow Trail, but they’ll offer higher performance, while still offering a low-cost, low-power alternative to Skylake platform (and its successor, “Cannonlake,” which is also due to launch in 2016).
  • Apollo Lake chips are 14nm processors with Intel HD graphics based on Skylake graphics technology.
  • Among other things, they’ll be able to support 4K displays, eMMC 5.0 solid state storage, and devices with USB Type-C ports.

According to the report, Intel will begin mass production of Apollo Lake chips in June, 2016 which means these chips might show up in computers that will ship next fall.

via AndroidPC.es

Support Liliputing

Liliputing's primary sources of revenue are advertising and affiliate links (if you click the "Shop" button at the top of the page and buy something on Amazon, for example, we'll get a small commission).

But there are several ways you can support the site directly even if you're using an ad blocker* and hate online shopping.

Contribute to our Patreon campaign

or...

Contribute via PayPal

* If you are using an ad blocker like uBlock Origin and seeing a pop-up message at the bottom of the screen, we have a guide that may help you disable it.

6 replies on “Intel Apollo Lake chips to replace Braswell in 2016?”

  1. Only 10nm products are planned for full c-type cable support. If c-type ever comes to 14nm it will be the basic version (no 2 lane tbt3 or 4 lane DP). Goldmont is an improvement, but arm a72 has identical performance and has big-little architecture which makes it superior for tablets. Goldmont is good news for low-cost windows, but is irrelevant for Android.

    1. big little architecture hardly helps for many of the javascript and webgl workloadss.., it is just not necessary…, goldmont is the right one as it has great dual core performance.

  2. I don’t get why a leaked code name is in the news? What the information value of it? Yes, we know that Braswell will have a followup, and yes, we know there is an internal code name for the program. Now we know the codename, but does it change anything?

    1. It’s the next step before we start seeing actual model numbers and then actual benchmarks start showing up… It’s just the process and tells us we’re getting closer to release and some real data we can look at to compare with previous generation but we’re still talking months to over half a year from now…

      So in that respect, yeah… still got a long way to go but it’s also usually when we may start seeing some early prototypes being shown off and the timing of the trade tech shows are still good to get some early looks before the final long wait for final products…

      For some, it can mean the difference between deciding to wait or just getting what is available now…

      Mind, the Goldmont based updates are expected to be a big “Toc” update that could be even more significant than the Skylake update was for the Core series…

      It’ll be the first major architecture update since Bay Trail, it’ll get the 9th Gen GPU for another big graphical boost, it’ll support the latest specs with LP-DDR4 RAM, eMMC 5.0, USB-C, etc… It’ll come out just in time to capitalize on Windows 10… It’ll offer scalable and customizable architecture that can finally compete with ARM in ways it could never before and allow a final push to making all Intel SoCs 100% Intel instead of ARM/Intel hybrids like SoFIA (x3)…

      If all promises turn out to be true, it’ll basically make the Core M obsolete… but still cover the full range ATOM covers now for the lower end and more mobile devices… Though, the Skylake update to the Core M has yet to be seen to be compared but it highlights why people are paying so much attention to this update…

    1. It’s not about using the ATOM name… they’re all still considered ATOMs but rather it’s to show what range they’re optimized for…

      There is still no such thing as one platform that covers every possible device range and so the code names cover what range the SoC has been optimized for…

      Namely… there’s the Internet Of Things (think Kiosks, Arduino like sensor devices, Internet aware appliances, etc)… then there’s phones and similar mobile specific devices that have to compete heavily with ARM SoCs… then there’s the tablet PC range that starts to overlap the low end laptop range with 2 in 1’s, etc but still need to compete with ARM for power efficiency and low costs… then there’s the low end laptop range that starts to move away from mobile but starts to overlap with Intel’s other low range offerings and thus get sold under the same Celeron/Pentium branding but the code name lets you know whether it is ATOM based or Core based… and finally the custom Server range…

      ATOM covers them all but to know which range they belong to the code names help differentiate, as well as help tell apart one gen from another… otherwise there’s nothing to really tell us whether a particular SoC is the latest offering or a much older model…

      But if you want really confusing, many ARM SoCs have multiple configuration options but can still use the same model name that only the OEM will know which they used but under the Specs of the device the end buyer won’t be able to know until they check out the benchmarks which version they’re getting… So it could definitely be worse…

Comments are closed.