You are on page 1of 63

1

Exploring Next Generation


Wireless (5G): Transforming
the User Experience

David Ott Research Director, Intel Corporation
Shilpa Talwar Principle Engineer, Intel Corporation
ACAS002

2
Not a specific technology under development or being debated in standards.

Looking at the broad space of advancements beyond current 4G/IMT-
Advanced standards.

Deployment not until 2020 or later. (Projected, given 10-year deployment
cycles.)

No current definition.

No current requirements definition.
What do we mean by 5G?
This Session asks:

What are the requirements for future 5G technologies?

What candidate technologies might define 5G?

3
URO facts:
Collaborative university research on future technologies
Provides grants to academic researchers selected through an
semi-open RFP process
Often works with industry partners and other organizations

Program facts:
Name: 5G: Transforming the Wireless User Experience
Key organizers:
David Ott, Research Director (Intel Labs)
Shilpa Talwar, Research Champion (Intel Labs)
Collaborative University Research
4
Cellular Evolution
The Bigger Picture
Technology Peak Rate Protocols Network Technology Focus Applications
3G
2000
Mobile: 144 Kbps
Fixed: 2 Mbps
14.4 Mbps
(IMT-2000 Req)
UMTS,
EVDO,
HSPA
(Rel 6)
WAN Peak Rate & Spectral
efficiency: Adaptive
modulation, scheduling ,
code clustering,
CDMA based
Voice and data
3.5G 100+ Mbps
(2x2 MIMO)
LTE Rel 8 Peak Rate: OFDM, MIMO
4G
2010
Mobile: 100 Mbps
(700x)
Fixed: 1Gbps
(500x)
(IMT-Adv Req)
LTE Rel 10,
802.16m
WAN
+
Integration
of LAN
Spectral Efficiency: Multi-
user MIMO, Universal
frequency reuse
[Carrier aggregation, 8x8
MIMO to meet 4G peak
req]
Mobile Internet
(web browsing)
4.5G
(Current work)
HetNets/Offload
Device-to-device
LTE Rel 10+ Maturing of
HetNets
Introduce
D2D
Network Efficiency:
Interference mitigation,
interworking with WiFi,
device discovery
Ubiquitous rate
(indoor,
hotspot), Video
Public safety
5G
2020?

1Gbps Mobile
10 Gbps Fixed
(10x?)
? ? ? ?
5
Why do we need 5G anyway?
6
Global Trends
Global mobile data traffic will increase 13-fold between 2012 and 2017. Mobile data
traffic will grow at a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 66 percent from 2012 to 2017,
reaching 11.2 exabytes per month by 2017.

By the end of 2013, the number of mobile-connected devices will exceed the
number of people on earth, and by 2017 there will be nearly 1.4 mobile devices per
capita. There will be over 10 billion mobile-connected devices in 2017, including machine-to-
machine (M2M) modulesexceeding the worlds population at that time (7.6 billion).

Two-thirds of the worlds mobile data traffic will be video by 2017. Mobile video will
increase 16-fold between 2012 and 2017, accounting for over 66 percent of total mobile data
traffic by the end of the forecast period.

The average smartphone will generate 2.7 GB of traffic per month in 2017, an 8-fold
increase over the 2012 average of 342 MB per month. Aggregate smartphone traffic in
2017 will be 19 times greater than it is today, with a CAGR of 81 percent.
Cisco, Cisco Visual Networking Index: Global Mobile Data
Traffic Forecast Update, 20122017, February 6, 2013.
Source:
7
Mobile Data Traffic Trends
CAGR 80%
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
T
o
t
a
l

T
r
a
f
f
i
c

(
P
B
/
m
o
n
t
h
)

Cisco
ABI
Analysis Mason
Average
2020 Demand Projection = 640x demand in 2009
8
Trends in Cellular
Innovation Drivers
Applications
Video more than 2/3 of total mobile traffic by 2015
Everything will be connected (50B machines by 2020)
Network
Mobile traffic growth 1.7x to 2.6x every 18 months
Wireless QoS still not uniform (cell-edge users suffer)
Spectrum/
Air Interface
Device
Wireless peak rates have doubled every 18 months
Spectrum shortage in order to meet targeted 10 to
100 Gbps by 2020
Need to support for multiple bands, multiple protocols
Potential for seamless connectivity amongst devices
9

Requirements
Technologies
Case Studies

Agenda
Session ACAS002: Exploring Next Generation Wireless (5G):
Transforming the User Experience
10

Requirements
Technologies
Case Studies

Agenda
Session ACAS002: Exploring Next Generation Wireless (5G):
Transforming the User Experience
11
What Users Want

To the internet, to the cloud, to
their devices
With their phone, PC, tablet, TV,
car

Regardless of where they are
At home, around the office,
outdoors
To be connected all the time...
To access a rich set of services...
Ultimately, its all about the user experience!
12
High Service Quality
Service and context-specific optimizations
Uniform Connectivity Experience
Consistent and reliable wireless throughout network
Disruptive Growth in Network Capacity
High data rate per user, and support high density of users

Rate
Rate
QOE
5G Technical Requirements (Objectives)
More than peak service rate!
13
5G Metrics
Quantifying Technical Objectives
High Network Capacity
More than 10x enhancement in peak data rates
(bits/s)
More than 10x enhancement in area spectral
efficiency (bits/s/Hz/meters
2
)
Overall, more than 100x improvement in network
capacity (bits/s/meters
2
)
Uniform Connectivity Experience
High Service Quality and User Experience
14
5G Metrics
Quantifying Technical Objectives
Uniform Connectivity Experience
Greater than 10x reduction in data rate
variability between cell-edge and cell-center
users (lowest 1% to highest 99%)
Greater or equal spectral efficiency and energy
efficiency
High Network Capacity
High Service Quality and User Experience
15
5G Metrics
Quantifying Technical Objectives
High Network Capacity
Uniform Connectivity Experience
High Service Quality and User
Experience
More than 10x increase in number of users
achieving target service quality
More than 10x reduction in device power
consumption
More than 10x reduction in the overall data rate
(bits/s) while maintaining the same information
rate required to satisfy target service quality
16
5G Metrics
Quantifying Technical Objectives
High Network Capacity
More than 10x enhancement in peak data rates (bits/s)
More than 10x enhancement in area spectral efficiency (bits/s/Hz/meters
2
)
Overall, more than 100x improvement in network capacity (bits/s/meters
2
)
Uniform Connectivity Experience
Greater than 10x reduction in data rate variability between cell-edge and
cell-center users (lowest 1% to highest 99%)
Greater or equal spectral efficiency and energy efficiency
High Service Quality and User Experience
More than 10x increase in number of users achieving target service quality
More than 10x reduction in device power consumption
More than 10x reduction in the overall data rate (bits/s) while maintaining
the same information rate required to satisfy target service quality
User- centric metrics for evaluating candidate technologies
17

Requirements
Technologies
Case Studies

Agenda
Session ACAS002: Exploring Next Generation Wireless (5G):
Transforming the User Experience
18
5G Candidate Technologies
Approach Candidate Technology
Enabling New Spectrum
Increase network capacity
Increasing Spectral Efficiency
Increase capacity and improve connectivity
Exploiting Multiple RATs
Increase capacity and improve connectivity
Exploiting Context Awareness
Improve service quality

High frequency spectrum
Spectrum sharing
Large-scale MIMO
Advanced interference mitigation
Full-Duplex
Spectrum aggregation
Multi-radio HetNets
Intelligent network selection
Application awareness
Cross-layer optimization
Device-context, power efficiency
Device sharing
19
Enabling New Spectrum
Who wouldnt
want more
spectrum?
Straightforward
increase in peak
capacity
Spectrum is often
underutilized (e.g.,
public safety bands)




But, more spectrum is hard
Heavily allocated with current incumbents
Regulatory process is slow and difficult




Source: National Telecommunications
& Information Administration (NTIA),
U.S. Department of Commerce
20
High Frequency Spectrum
Approach: Enabling New Spectrum
High frequency spectrum
30 to 300 GHz
Millimeter wavelengths
30GHz ~= 10 mm
Good for short distances
(attenuation issue)
Line-of-sight (easily blocked)
Small antennas, highly directed

Research challenges:
Feasible network architectures
given constraints (mobility)
Air interface design
Practical device
implementations
28+38 GHz bands 3.4GHz
28 GHz (LMDS) 1.3GHz
60 GHz unlicensed 7GHz available
Source: T. S. Rappaport, NYU WIRELESS
Area of each square shows relative bandwidth
available. (Cellular today: all bands from 700
MHz 2.6 GHz provides at most 150- 200
MHz frequency band per operator.)
21
Spectrum Sharing
Approach: Enabling New Spectrum
Motivation:
Low frequency bands for wide-area
coverage (below 6 GHz)
Densely allocated but often highly
underutilized
Framework:
Licensed Shared Access (LSA)
Issues:
Brokering schemes
E.g., Cloud Spectrum Services (CSS)
framework
Optimal time scales for sharing
Interference to spectrum
incumbent
Device/RF implementations for
highly dynamic spectrum usage
Regulatory issues


Source: DIGITALEUROPE Position Paper on Licensed Shared
Access (LSA) Common Understanding and Next Steps.
February 2013.
22
Underutilization of Global Spectrum
~ 4 GHz of underutilized spectrum globally under 6GHz
23
Increasing Spectral Efficiency
Multi-cell cooperation
Dense cell deployment
Backhaul, topology both important
constraints
Device-to-device cooperation
Clients communicate with one another
directly
Local context of communication
(avoids network infrastructure)
Goal: Linear scaling of system capacity
with number of devices
Bad News: Good News:
No low-hanging fruit in the mature
field of point-to-point cellular
communications technologies
Much more can be done
with spectral reuse
Source: IEEE C80216-10_0016
24
Interference Management
Approach: Increasing Spectral Efficiency

Interference:
Especially important in dense
cell deployments, and D2D
Fundamentally new paradigm
with full-duplex



Device implementation challenge
Analog/digital domains
Self-interference cancellation
Network benefits/applications
Doubles spectral efficiency for p2p
Hidden node problem in WiFi
Device discovery benefits in D2D
Full Duplex Communication
Intra-link
Interference Co-ordination
Linear capacity scaling with nodes
Interference Alignment
Align interference in a small subspace
Interference-canceling receivers
Cancel increasing number of interferers
in HetNets
Advanced Mitigation
Inter-cell
MU-MIMO Multi-user MIMO
Multiple users served simultaneously
VLM Very Large MIMO
Increasing transmit array size
Improves coverage, intra-cell
interference control, power budget

Large-scale MIMO
Intra-cell
25
Spectrum Aggregation
Approach: Multi-RAT
Multiple RATs
Simultaneous use multiple
Radio Access Technologies
(RATs)
E.g., 3G, 4G, Wi-Fi, Bluetooth

Addresses capacity and
connectivity limitations
Looking for beyond-handover
(simultaneous use) solutions


Motivations and Trends

Exploits both licensed and unlicensed
spectrum

Future spectrum allocations are likely to
be fragmented and could require different
transmission technologies (air interface
descriptions)

As cell-sizes shrink, the footprints of
cellular WANs, LANs, and PANs will
increasingly overlap. Opportunity for
simultaneously use of multi-tier cells.

Emerging Internet of Things (IoT) will
require networks to connect a diverse
range of devices requiring connectivity at
different scales

BB#1 BB#2
RF#1 RF#2
Multiple radios integrated on
wireless device
RAT = Radio Access Technology
RAN = Radio Access Network
26
Tomorrows Wireless Networks
Emerging Cellular Network Topology




WiFi-AP Femto-AP
Relay Station
M2M
Hotspot
Integrated-AP
Pico-BS
Multi-tier
Multi-radio
Distributed
Antennas/CR
AN
Wireless backhaul
Wireless Access
Wired backhaul
Distributed
Antennas
Client Relay
S
e
l
f
-
O
r
g
a
n
i
z
i
n
g

N
e
t
w
o
r
k

Source: IEEE C80216-10_0016
Device-to-Device
CRAN
Fiber
27
Multi-radio HetNets
Approach: Multi-RAT
Overlay of multiple cell tiers potentially sharing common spectrum
Macro
Micro
Pico
Femto
Relay
Heterogeneous
Networks or
HetNets

As cell-sizes shrink,
the footprints of
cellular WANs, LANs,
and PANs will
increasingly overlap.

Opportunity for
simultaneous use.

28
Multiple RANs between information source and user.
Devices chooses among RATs depending on context and capabilities.
Intelligent Network Selection
Approach: Multi-RAT

GPS/Satellite

Wireless WAN
(2G/3G/4G)
Wireless PAN
(Bluetooth/WiFi-
Direct/D2D)
Wireless LAN
(WiFi/Small cells)
29
Context Awareness
Improving Application Service Quality
Network is aware of
application and
device context

Communication link
Type, quality
Surroundings
Location
Nearby users and devices
Available RAT
Device
Capabilities (CPU, storage, radios)
Battery state
Application
Data and format
User preferences
Context Information
Video
Streaming, real-time, fast download
Cloud-based applications
Interactive, partitioned computation
Diverse data applications
E.g., video conferencing, gaming
Clustered applications
Machine-to-machine (M2M)
Device-to-device (D2D)
Key Application Types
Application is aware
of device and
network context
30
Leveraging Context for Quality of Experience
Approach: Context Awareness
Network and devices jointly optimized
to deliver best possible QoE while
conserving network resources.

?
Example: Digital video
Network uses scheduling to differentiate
forwarding behavior based on application
type
Source and channel coding based on
wireless channel and device capability
constraints
Adapt video compression parameters to
wireless channel and user viewing
environment
Device uses multiple RATs if available
Device leverage proximity of alternate
content sources
31
Device battery longevity is closely tied to
user satisfaction of wireless device.

Demanding power requirements:
Rich multimedia apps and services
Simultaneous use of multiple radios
IoT usages - long-functioning,
unattended


Leveraging Context for Power Efficiency
Approach: Context Awareness
Use of Context
Information

User
Selects device power mode
(performance-oriented vs. battery-
conserving).
RAT
Available RATs may have different
radio power requirements.
Device
Understands compute vs.
communication tradeoffs with cloud.
Location
Cell selection within dense network.
Application
Prioritization of data, requirements
and maximizing idle periods.
5G Goal:
Network and devices jointly
optimized to deliver best
possible power efficiency while
conserving network resources.

32
5G Candidate Technologies
Approach Candidate Technology
Enabling New Spectrum
Increase network capacity
Increasing Spectral Efficiency
Increase capacity and improve connectivity
Exploiting Multiple RATs
Increase capacity and improve connectivity
Exploiting Context Awareness
Improve service quality

High frequency spectrum
Spectrum sharing
Large-scale MIMO
Advanced interference mitigation
Full-Duplex
Spectrum aggregation
Multi-radio HetNets
Intelligent network selection
Application awareness
Cross-layer optimization
Device-context, power efficiency
Device sharing
Debate: Single Technology or Combination?
33

Requirements
Technologies
Case Studies

Agenda
Session ACAS002: Exploring Next Generation Wireless (5G):
Transforming the User Experience
34
University Research Case Study 1
Recent Channel Models and Measurement Results:
Millimeter wave mobile communications for 5G cellular: It will work! (IEEE
Access 2013)
28 GHz Outdoor Propagation Measurements Using Steerable Beam
Antennas (ICC 2013)
28 GHz Reflection and Penetration Loss Measurements in and around
Buildings (ICC 2013)
28 GHz Angle of Arrival and Angle of Departure Analysis for Outdoor
Cellular Communications (VTC 2013)
5G Millimeter Wave Propagation Path Loss Models in Urban Microcells
(GLOBECOM 2013)
Multi-beam Antenna Combining for 28 GHz Cellular Link Improvements
in Urban Environments (GLOBECOM 2013)
28 GHz Millimeter Wave Propagation
Statistical Spatial Channel Model

Source: T.S. Rappaport, NYU-Poly. Used by permission.
Manhattan Environment Dense
Urban
3 TX sites
25 RX sites

Pedestrian and
vehicular traffic
High rise-buildings,
trees, shrubs

TX sites and heights:
TX-COL1 7 m
TX -COL2 7 m
TX-KAU 16 m

RX sites:
Randomly selected
near AC outlets
Located outdoors
on or near
sidewalks
T.S. Rappaport 2013
Source: T.S. Rappaport, NYU-Poly. Used by permission.
28 GHz Channel Sounder
T.S. Rappaport 2013
RX Hardware

TX Hardware

Source: T.S. Rappaport, NYU-Poly. Used by permission.
Signal Outage in Manhattan
3-Dimensional view of downtown Manhattan.
Sectorized view of cellular coverage.
Signal acquired up to 200 m TX-RX
separation
For outage: total path loss > 170 dB
57% of all locations found to be outages
(up to 500 m)
Only 16% of locations within 200 m were
found to be outages (massive building)
T.S. Rappaport 2013
Y. Azar, G. N. Wong, T. S. Rappaport, et al, 28 GHz
Propagation Measurements for Outdoor Cellular
Communications Using Steerable Beam Antennas in
New York City, submitted to IEEE International
Conference on Communications (ICC), June 913 2013.

Source: T.S. Rappaport, NYU-Poly. Used by permission.
28 GHz Path Loss Exponent
Measured path loss values relative to 5 m free space in Manhattan.
T.S. Rappaport 2013
Y. Azar, G. N. Wong, T. S. Rappaport,
et al, 28 GHz Propagation
Measurements for Outdoor Cellular
Communications Using Steerable
Beam Antennas in New York City,
IEEE International Conference on
Communications (ICC), June 913
2013.
Source: T.S. Rappaport, NYU-Poly. Used by permission.
40
University Research Case Study 2
It is generally not possible for radios to receive and transmit
on the same frequency band because of the interference that
results.
- Andrea Goldsmith, Wireless Communications, Cambridge Press, 2005.
Why are radios half duplex?
41
TX
RX
RX
TX
Radio 1 Radio 2
Self-Interference is a hundred billion
times (110dB+) stronger than the
received signal


Source: Sachin Katti, Stanford University. Used by permission.
Full Duplex Radios
42
Signal Sent Signal Sent
T
x

PA
DAC
T
X
Centered
at
Carrier
Freq
(2.45GHz)
Mixer
Do we know what we are transmitting?
Source: Sachin Katti, Stanford University. Used by permission.
If you were to cancel, how much do we need?
Transmitted Signal
P
o
w
e
r

i
n

d
B
m

-10 dBm Harmonics
-90 dBm Receiver Noise floor
Cancel residual
in digital to
reach noise
floor
20 dBm Average Power
-20 dBm Transmit noise
43
Cancel entire
110 dB to
reach noise
floor`
Cancel 70 dB in
Analog in such a
way to eliminate
TX noise
-80 dBm Harmonics
Cancelled Signal
Takeaways: Require 110dB of total cancellation, of which at
least 70dB has to eliminate transmitter noise in analog.
Source: Sachin Katti, Stanford University. Used by permission.
Note:
Cancellation
requirements
shown are for
WiFi-like
systems. LTE
numbers
would be
slightly
different.
Cancel 70 dB
Tx noise to
reach noise
floor

Commodity
transceiver

Tunes to
environmental
changes within
8us, needs to be
re-tuned every
100ms
Digital
~40dB +
Total
>110dB =
Analog
>70dB
44
Evaluation Q1: Does it work with commodity radios?
Source: Sachin Katti, Stanford University. Used by permission.
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
C
D
F

Gain vs Half Duplex
Balun Cancellation Extra Transmitter Our Design
Worse than standard
Half Duplex
1.97x median
gain
Evaluation Q2: Does it translate to doubling of
throughput in practice?
Our design achieves the theoretical throughput doubling,
prior designs worse than half duplex 90% of the time


Source: Sachin Katti, Stanford University. Used by permission.
45
46
University Research Case Study 3
Trends In Wireless
1. Low mobility access has risen considerably
Smartphoneing while waiting (e.g., traffic
lights, pedestrians)
Impact: Clusters of users is commonplace (with
no-WiFi)
2. Smartphones can access large swaths of
spectrum
Cellular Band: 800, 850, 900, 1800, 1900, 2100
MHz
Wi-Fi: 2.4GHz and 5GHz
Impact: Smartphones can access more
spectrum than infrastructure in many cases
3. Infrastructure is getting more antennas each
generation
Impact: Good trend since complexity resides in
base-stations
iPhone
*
5
Source: Ashu Sabharwal, Rice University. Used by permission.
47
LAWS Large Arrays Wide Spectrum
Leverage all three trends
Base-stations with 10-100 antennas
Increase spectral efficiency up to 10X to each mobile
Support 10s of mobile in each time-slot for another
10X gain

Wide spectrum on mobile
Create D2D side channels in ISM bands
Use it to manage interference in clustered scenarios
Turns congestion into an asset
10X reduced variability for clustered urban scenarios

Source: Ashu Sabharwal, Rice University. Used by permission.
48
Large Arrays Gains For Single-Antenna
Mobiles
Spectral efficiency for each user increases log
2
M
bits/s/Hz
K simultaneous users lead to Klog
2
M bits/s/Hz
M=64, K=16 implies 96X increase in spectral efficiency
M antennas
K users
Source: Ashu Sabharwal, Rice University. Used by permission.
49
Challenges in MU-MIMO
Channel information measure does not scale
Large K and M mean more channels have to be
measured
Low channel estimation error needed, else
beamforming errors add up to increased inter-user
interference
User clusters (e.g., clusters C
1
and C
2
)
Conjugate beamforming performs
poorly for clustered users
Transmissions cause inter-user
interference
Source: Ashu Sabharwal, Rice University. Used by permission.
50
ISM-in-Cellular Side Channels
Use ISM bands to boost cellular rates
Not traffic offloading but D2D cooperation
Side channel is used to resolve inter-flow interference
Now clustering becomes an advantage since ISM is low
range & best used in clustered environment
Source: Ashu Sabharwal, Rice University. Used by permission.
51
Leverage Rice Unique Testbed:
Argos
Argos is a 64-element antenna array built using Rice
WARP
Completely programmable at PHY, Argos can
simultaneously communicate with 15 MIMO mobile nodes
Source: Ashu Sabharwal, Rice University. Used by permission.
52
53
University Research Case Study 4
Delivery of Digital Video Over Wireless Networks
Research Opportunities
1. Exploit knowledge of future wireless capacity
variations.
2. Optimize video delivery for human perception of
quality.
3. Learn users preferences to better manage video
delivery.
Source: Gustavo de Veciana, UT Austin. Used by permission. 54
1. Exploiting Knowledge of Future Capacity Variations
Poor
coverage
C
a
p
a
c
i
t
y

Time
o Opportunistic scheduling given current capacity variations
o Opportunistic video delivery exploits knowledge of future capacity
variations and increased storage on mobile devices


Wireless coverage/capacity landscape
Predictable
mobility
patterns
Source: Gustavo de Veciana, UT Austin. Used by permission.
55
Stored Video Delivery Over Wireless Networks
Leverage playback buffer to smooth slow capacity
variations and reduce system utilization.
Wired
network
Video Server
Base Station
Mobile
Device
playback
buffer
wireless capacity variation:
fast fading (msec)
slow changes (secs+)

stored
video
Source: Gustavo de Veciana, UT Austin. Used by permission. 56
Mathematical Model
Problem: Given known/predicted capacity variations
and playback constraints first minimize rebuffering time
and then system utilization.
Source: Gustavo de Veciana, UT Austin. Used by permission.
57
Optimal Anticipative Delivery
Theorem: If no rebuffering is required a piecewise
constant thresholding strategy (PCT) policy minimizes
utilization..
Theorem: If rebuffering is required a generalized
piecewise constant thresholding strategy (GPCT)
minimizes rebuffering and then utilization.
Transmit only when channel exceeds threshold

4

time
capacity

1

Source: Gustavo de Veciana, UT Austin. Used by permission.
58
2. Optimizing Video Delivery for Humans
Quality of Experience
Size/rate

video
quality
aversion
to variability
in quality
+
Perceptual aspects
of video quality.
Behavioral aspects of
video quality, e.g., memory.
Source: Gustavo de Veciana, UT Austin. Used by permission. 59
3. Learning Users Preferences to Better
Manage Video Delivery
Classes of video content
cost
quality
rebuffering
Putting video delivery intelligence in mobile (or network).
Individualized content
specific preferences
*Source: Gustavo de Veciana, UT Austin. Used by permission.
60
61
Summary
Reflections on 5G Requirements
Devices jointly optimized with surrounding network
Deliver best possible QoE while conserving network resources
Its all about the wireless user experience!
I.e., connectivity and rich application services
Can be used to drive 5G requirements
It not just about peak capacity
Area spectral efficiency, uniform connectivity and data rates,
context-awareness and power efficiency
62
Legal Disclaimer
INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT IS PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH INTEL PRODUCTS. NO LICENSE, EXPRESS OR
IMPLIED, BY ESTOPPEL OR OTHERWISE, TO ANY INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS IS GRANTED BY THIS DOCUMENT. EXCEPT
AS PROVIDED IN INTEL'S TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF SALE FOR SUCH PRODUCTS, INTEL ASSUMES NO LIABILITY
WHATSOEVER AND INTEL DISCLAIMS ANY EXPRESS OR IMPLIED WARRANTY, RELATING TO SALE AND/OR USE OF INTEL
PRODUCTS INCLUDING LIABILITY OR WARRANTIES RELATING TO FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, MERCHANTABILITY,
OR INFRINGEMENT OF ANY PATENT, COPYRIGHT OR OTHER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHT.
A "Mission Critical Application" is any application in which failure of the Intel Product could result, directly or indirectly, in
personal injury or death. SHOULD YOU PURCHASE OR USE INTEL'S PRODUCTS FOR ANY SUCH MISSION CRITICAL
APPLICATION, YOU SHALL INDEMNIFY AND HOLD INTEL AND ITS SUBSIDIARIES, SUBCONTRACTORS AND AFFILIATES, AND
THE DIRECTORS, OFFICERS, AND EMPLOYEES OF EACH, HARMLESS AGAINST ALL CLAIMS COSTS, DAMAGES, AND EXPENSES
AND REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES ARISING OUT OF, DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY, ANY CLAIM OF PRODUCT LIABILITY,
PERSONAL INJURY, OR DEATH ARISING IN ANY WAY OUT OF SUCH MISSION CRITICAL APPLICATION, WHETHER OR NOT INTEL
OR ITS SUBCONTRACTOR WAS NEGLIGENT IN THE DESIGN, MANUFACTURE, OR WARNING OF THE INTEL PRODUCT OR ANY OF
ITS PARTS.
Intel may make changes to specifications and product descriptions at any time, without notice. Designers must not rely on the
absence or characteristics of any features or instructions marked "reserved" or "undefined". Intel reserves these for future
definition and shall have no responsibility whatsoever for conflicts or incompatibilities arising from future changes to them. The
information here is subject to change without notice. Do not finalize a design with this information.
The products described in this document may contain design defects or errors known as errata which may cause the product to
deviate from published specifications. Current characterized errata are available on request.
Contact your local Intel sales office or your distributor to obtain the latest specifications and before placing your product order.
Copies of documents which have an order number and are referenced in this document, or other Intel literature, may be
obtained by calling 1-800-548-4725, or go to: http://www.intel.com/design/literature.htm

Intel, Look Inside and the Intel logo are trademarks of Intel Corporation in the United States and other countries.

Bluetooth is a trademark owned by its proprietor and used by Intel Corporation under license.

*Other names and brands may be claimed as the property of others.
Copyright 2013 Intel Corporation.
63
Risk Factors
The above statements and any others in this document that refer to plans and expectations for the third quarter, the year and
the future are forward-looking statements that involve a number of risks and uncertainties. Words such as anticipates,
expects, intends, plans, believes, seeks, estimates, may, will, should and their variations identify forward-looking
statements. Statements that refer to or are based on projections, uncertain events or assumptions also identify forward-looking
statements. Many factors could affect Intels actual results, and variances from Intels current expectations regarding such factors
could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in these forward-looking statements. Intel presently considers
the following to be the important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from the companys expectations.
Demand could be different from Intel's expectations due to factors including changes in business and economic conditions;
customer acceptance of Intels and competitors products; supply constraints and other disruptions affecting customers; changes
in customer order patterns including order cancellations; and changes in the level of inventory at customers. Uncertainty in global
economic and financial conditions poses a risk that consumers and businesses may defer purchases in response to negative
financial events, which could negatively affect product demand and other related matters. Intel operates in intensely competitive
industries that are characterized by a high percentage of costs that are fixed or difficult to reduce in the short term and product
demand that is highly variable and difficult to forecast. Revenue and the gross margin percentage are affected by the timing of
Intel product introductions and the demand for and market acceptance of Intel's products; actions taken by Intel's competitors,
including product offerings and introductions, marketing programs and pricing pressures and Intels response to such actions; and
Intels ability to respond quickly to technological developments and to incorporate new features into its products. The gross
margin percentage could vary significantly from expectations based on capacity utilization; variations in inventory valuation,
including variations related to the timing of qualifying products for sale; changes in revenue levels; segment product mix; the
timing and execution of the manufacturing ramp and associated costs; start-up costs; excess or obsolete inventory; changes in
unit costs; defects or disruptions in the supply of materials or resources; product manufacturing quality/yields; and impairments
of long-lived assets, including manufacturing, assembly/test and intangible assets. Intel's results could be affected by adverse
economic, social, political and physical/infrastructure conditions in countries where Intel, its customers or its suppliers operate,
including military conflict and other security risks, natural disasters, infrastructure disruptions, health concerns and fluctuations in
currency exchange rates. Expenses, particularly certain marketing and compensation expenses, as well as restructuring and asset
impairment charges, vary depending on the level of demand for Intel's products and the level of revenue and profits. Intels
results could be affected by the timing of closing of acquisitions and divestitures. Intel's results could be affected by adverse
effects associated with product defects and errata (deviations from published specifications), and by litigation or regulatory
matters involving intellectual property, stockholder, consumer, antitrust, disclosure and other issues, such as the litigation and
regulatory matters described in Intel's SEC reports. An unfavorable ruling could include monetary damages or an injunction
prohibiting Intel from manufacturing or selling one or more products, precluding particular business practices, impacting Intels
ability to design its products, or requiring other remedies such as compulsory licensing of intellectual property. A detailed
discussion of these and other factors that could affect Intels results is included in Intels SEC filings, including the companys
most recent reports on Form 10-Q, Form 10-K and earnings release.
Rev. 7/17/13