Which upcoming Intel desktop CPU revs your motor?

Ok, folks, we know Intel is planning to release four new types of CPUs that are directly targeted at PC enthusiasts. The tough question here, in my view, is which one is most exciting. So we’ll put it out there for you to answer. You can only choose one. What’s your pick?

Comments closed
    • ronch
    • 6 years ago

    What I’m REALLY waiting for is AMD’s next announcement, an [u<]official[/u<] announcement of either what's coming after their Excavator CPU core, or if there will be a refresh of their FX lineup using Excavator CPU cores, or their official word that there will be NO big x86 core after Excavator. So what's it gonna be, AMD? I'd like to think you guys still have some hope to stay in the big core x86 market and I'm sure I'm not alone, but please stop making us guess. If you guys really don't wanna do big x86 cores anymore then just go right out and say it so we can stop half-expecting anything from you guys and just accept that Intel will be our only option from hereon.

      • chuckula
      • 6 years ago

      It’s 100% technologically possible for AMD to put 4 Steamroller or Excavator modules [for 8 coars] on a chip, ditch the graphics to keep the size reasonable, and slot it into the socket FM2+ boards.

      However, just because that is technologically possible doesn’t mean that AMD is going to produce that product.

        • ronch
        • 6 years ago

        Well, imagine the surprised look on people’s faces who were led to believe that FM2+ boards automatically mean no separate graphics card is needed when they use one of those 8-core FM2+ chips and plug in their monitors through the board’s I/O port cluster. But seriously, yeah, AMD could do that and just include an uber-basic GPU on-die just to avoid user complaints. I guess having a backup GPU for the unlikely event that your discrete graphics card decides to kill itself on a hot summer day couldn’t hurt now, could it? A ‘limp-mode’, if you will.

      • DarkMikaru
      • 6 years ago

      Intel being our only options scares the *&^% out of me! It really does. With no other options, what is to keep them form charging us way way to much for the bottom of the barrel CPU’s?

      Not an Intel hater, gotta give credit where its due. They make great chips. But I’ve been an AMD fan since my very first build in 01. I love the underdog and its not like Intel needs my money or anyone else’s for that matter lol But I agree, don’t really care what Intel does anymore. It’s going to be great regardless right? Ehh….

      What was it that Jessie Jackson used to say… “Keep Hope Alive!” for AMD.

        • ronch
        • 6 years ago

        You know what Intel’s really scared of? Empty fabs. Intel is half a manufacturing company. The reason why they wanna open up their fabs to others is because desktop chips sales are slowing down, generally speaking, and they can’t seem to make a big splash in mobile. At this point, if they raise their prices it’s just gonna help drive ARM faster into mainstream computing as people look for affordable options. Even without AMD they’d be stupid to raise prices especially when they have nothing in mobile to fill their fabs with if x86 continues to slow down.

        Also, what do you think motivates Intel to sell their mainstream (but still frickin fast) chips for around $200 -$350? If you think about it, those prices are cheap considering the performance you’re getting. Intel could very well charge people a lot more, given AMD’s situation. But they’re not. Reason? They’re not really trying to squeeze AMD down the price ladder (although it does have that unfortunate side effect), but rather, they very well know the economies of the chip business and their current prices help make sure ARM & Co. can’t climb the price ladder either (just like AMD), earn more money, and come up with much faster cores that will even be more threatening to x86. And of course, it helps motivate people to keep buying their chips because they’re not too expensive. If they raise prices, it’s not only gonna help slow down x86 sales, but also, either ARM climbs up the ladder and makes more money for R&D later or ARM can price the same and drive more people towards ARM computing. I’m thinking it’s gonna be somewhere between these two possibilities.

          • DarkMikaru
          • 6 years ago

          That’s a bold statement Ronch. You trying to convince us that they wouldn’t take the opportunity to jack up prices should AMD fail? Your fooling yourself. Every company in the history of mankind that has had the “advantage” will charge more because they can. Look at gas prices? Sure, it isn’t just one company but what are our alternatives? So sure, gas will continue to climb because it can. And ARM can’t and won’t ever be expensive because of the devices they are designed for. Intel has little to nothing to do about the prices of chips in that market.

          I just don’t buy it dude. Say if every car manufacturer went the way of the dinosaur and Honda was the last man standing. You think the price wouldn’t go up? To what degree who knows, but to say that they wouldn’t want to capitalize is crazy.

            • ronch
            • 6 years ago

            Never before in the history of x86 computing has an alternative ISA gained so much installed base as ARM is enjoying now. There’s nothing stopping it. Many big, resourceful companies can band together and create a new desktop platform centered on ARM. Everyone is aware that the industry can’t and shouldn’t be monopolized by Intel anymore. Intel knows that ARM is a REAL, BIG threat. That’s why they also wanna push into mobile, to slow down ARM’s momentum.

            And no, your car analogy isn’t right. Perhaps you can modify it. Say, Honda is the last car maker that makes big engines, and they just won’t let anybody else build the sort of engines they’re making. But the thing is, a bunch of other companies such as GM and Nissan are also making less powerful but adequately powerful engines. These smaller engines can’t win a race with a Honda but they’re just fine for most folks. Do you think Honda can charge whatever it wants for its cars/engines? Maybe. But there ARE REAL alternatives. Perhaps these Nissans and GMs can’t do certain things a Honda can, say, climb a mountain, but as these alternatives increase in number, someone is bound to keep improving them and slowly get over their limitations.

      • lckbrend
      • 6 years ago

      I want a quad core without built in Intel graphic card because i got a graphic card.

    • BoilerGamer
    • 6 years ago

    I am interested in both Broadwell and Haswell-E. but since I intend on getting a Broadwell Macbook before uprgrading my desktop, Broadewell it is.

    • Krogoth
    • 6 years ago

    Munster cheese

    • sschaem
    • 6 years ago

    Voted for Haswell-E, even so I will hold off until Skylake is out.

    I think haswell/broadwell is a small step forward, but skylake will be a game changer.
    Big leap closer to “Fusion”…

    • BIF
    • 6 years ago

    I voted Haswell-E with 8 cores and DDR4.

    I remember the whining about DDR3 years ago, and all that turned out to be just so much nonsense.

    People rarely change, and almost as rarely do they learn from their mistakes, so as soon as I started reading the deja vu whining about DDR4, I knew that was the one true and correct answer. 😉

    • OneShotOneKill
    • 6 years ago

    X5470 with socket 771 to 775 mod… 90s style.

      • sanikaorient
      • 5 years ago
    • Chrispy_
    • 6 years ago

    They’re all pretty interesting options, but only Haswell-E moves things on.

    With no AMD competition at the high end we’ve been stuck on 3.xGHz quads for four generations of i7.
    I know that the E-series i7s break this rule, but they’re not really i7’s, they’re rebadged Xeons.

    In order to progress the mainstream into more cores, we need the high-end to be more than Ivy-E which added a whole slew of compromises (IPC vs Haswell, X79 dated platform and IO, dated feature-set etc) just to get 50% more cores.

    If the high-end platform is [i<][b<]considerably[/b<][/i<] better than the mainstream quads, then perhaps more mainstream, consumer software will focus on parallelism over single-threaded performance (or at least work on removing bottlenecks specific to a single thread). If Intel released a 10C or even 12C processor to consumers, it would move things forwards, IMO.

    • Klimax
    • 6 years ago

    Haswell-E. DDR4 is not an issue. And I still need more performance…. (Incidentally AVX2 is coming in Update 2 for VS 2013, so it will be just in time)

      • chuckula
      • 6 years ago

      In cases where software actually takes advantage of AVX2 and other features like FMA3, you actually do see some pretty substantial performance jumps over Ivy Bridge. Of course, only some types of software can actually take advantage of those instructions in a meaningful way, but when it works, it makes you feel like Haswell is an actual upgrade vs. Ivy Bridge.

    • ronch
    • 6 years ago

    I love my 8-core AMD but despite being an AMD fanboi I know I just won’t be able to resist an 8-core Broadwell with 20 megs of L3, built on 14nm, running at 4.0GHz, with a sub-95w TDP, unlocked multiplier, fluxless solder instead of cheap TIM used as thermal interface between the die and heat spreader, and selling for just $200 in a nice tin box with a more-than-just-decent HSF included in the box. And oh, lifetime warranty too with money back guarantee + a year’s supply of beer and wings!!

    Edit – a downmod??? REALLY??!? And all this time I thought I’m gonna please my fellow consumers!! Either the guy who thumbed me down is an Intel employee who’s too serious for his own good or someone who simply wants to pay a couple of grands for the hypothetical product I just… er… hypothesized. Come on guys, be with me! It’s not everyday that Intel’s this willing to move things beyond Sandy Bridge!!

      • BIF
      • 6 years ago

      Dude, the downvote is only because you didn’t insist on the warranty including “A year’s supply of beer and wings AND GIRLS for me AND MY BUDS” (edit: and beer and wings for the girls too).

      🙂

      Okay, maybe not…

    • ronch
    • 6 years ago

    Isn’t it a little too late for a 20th anniversary special edition Pentium? The original Pentiums came out in 1993, you know. 60MHz and 66MHz. I read all about it in PC Magazine (which was written by a bunch of old fuddy duddies).

      • UberGerbil
      • 6 years ago

      They want to celebrate the anniversary of the first Pentium [i<]without[/i<] the FDIV bug.

    • Voldenuit
    • 6 years ago

    Where’s the ‘Cheese’ option?

    • Juusu
    • 6 years ago

    Broadwell-E haha

    • marraco
    • 6 years ago

    What do they promises? 10% extra performance at 50% extra cost?

    I want a CPU which does not waste the power budget with crappy graphics.
    I want 16 cores.
    I want 2X more performance for single thread than my processor.

    I will not upgrade until I get at least two of these things.

      • yammerpickle2
      • 6 years ago

      I agree. None of the above should have been an option. I don’t really see anything that is going to be a big enough bang for the buck to make me want to upgrade over my sweetly overclocked P-2600K. I’m going to wait on benchmarks, but I don’t believe I’ll see anything that will make me want to make the jump. Intel should just push on to Skylake-E.

      • Klimax
      • 6 years ago

      2 out of three are Xeons. As for last, you can forget it. Most of free performance got taken already. (Well, there is always possibility of some breakthrough, but not too likely)

      • ronch
      • 6 years ago

      Well my friend, if you’re still sporting something like an Athlon XP 1700+, yeah, your [url=http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819113307<]Dream CPU[/url<] is right over at Newegg waiting for you to click that "Add to Cart" button.

    • Bensam123
    • 6 years ago

    8 core Haswell-E minus DDR4.

    DDR 4 doesn’t interest me and will be super expensive, but hopefully 8 cores is a sign that we may see the amount of cores increasing over the next few years, which is a really, really good thing. Ever since the announcement of multi-core count instead of a really fast core, we sorta just stagnated, which has not helped the transition to more multithreaded oriented software.

      • marraco
      • 6 years ago

      That.

      I see no reason to spend on memory again.

      Intel wants me to spend on cpu, memory, mother, just to get a 10% faster system? Forget about it.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 6 years ago

      Agree. They really should offer a version without DDR4. It’s going to drive up the cost for next to no gain in the near term.

        • Bensam123
        • 6 years ago

        Yeah… imagine if it worked in socket 1150 motherboards too. :O

        • Ninjitsu
        • 6 years ago

        No but then what would be the point? I mean sure you get 2 more cores and 4 more threads at the same price point, but finally you’re missing out on a substantial increase in memory bandwidth when you total across 4 channels. Great for “Prosumer” work, i would think?

        I also remember reading that the minimum density for DDR4 modules will be 4Gbits, which i think will mean that a the minimum capacity of a single-sided stick will be 4GB (8GB for two a sided one).

        Higher density may make it cheaper. Also i think the voltage is lower. So power savings.

        Additionally, this means Haswell-E will be rated for much faster memory out of the box.

          • HisDivineOrder
          • 6 years ago

          It won’t be cheaper for the time that Haswell-E is on the market.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 6 years ago

            Which may be 2 years like Sandy Bridge-E, for all you know.

        • jihadjoe
        • 6 years ago

        But then adding in a DDR3 controller drives up the price of the chip, and slows down adoption of DDR4 leading to slower price drops.

        The transition has to happen sometime, and the E platform is the right place to start, IMO.

          • HisDivineOrder
          • 6 years ago

          Slowing down adoption of an unreleased memory spec is fine by me. It will only JUST be available in quantity and certainly not in appealling options by the time Haswell-E arrives. Better to show up when more than just one chipset is out there to use it. Drop it when there’s a mainstream chipset that uses it, too.

          Then you’ll see DDR4 everywhere. Release it only on the prosumer model for a year or more? That’s not going to increase adoption enough to mitigate the huge cost premium that’s going to happen to prevent people upgrading to it that might have otherwise.

          The platform is already going to cost more, but I can account for that if I could carry over at least one bit of my existing system. But changing the memory spec arbitrarily denies me that. So now I have to spend twice as much on memory on top of twice as much on the CPU and twice as much on the motherboard…

          …and that’s a LOT to ask for really no upgrade at all to my existing DDR3’s performance. Octacore is great because it’s TWICE as many CPU cores and twice as many hyperthreaded cores. That’s an impressive upgrade. Adding in all the bells and whistles of a modern chipset makes the new chipset an impressive upgrade for the prosumer, too.

          But the addition of DDR4 does nothing to improve the platform compared to the far more mature DDR3 available right now for far cheaper pricing. There’s just no advantage. Leave DDR4 for the Xeon’s and leave DDR3 for the prosumer who isn’t getting registered memory until such time as there are other options that use DDR4, too.

          With demand will come all the options we should have and pricing that will be even VAGUELY within the reasonable. Just LGA2011-3 socket systems alone will not make enough demand to lower pricing one whit. In fact, it’ll probably just drive up the price.

            • jihadjoe
            • 6 years ago

            That would have been a great solution if the prosumer platform didn’t share chips with the Xeons.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 6 years ago

    pentium 4 3.4 ghz!!!

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 6 years ago

    phenom x6 1060T superclocked edition!!! Last decent Processor AMD ever made.

    • WillBach
    • 6 years ago

    It’s the unlocked Pentium anniversary edition for me because it’s the only one that get appreciably better with overclocking. My Sandy Bridge K-series CPU is running at stock speeds – what’s the fun in that? I miss running my Sempron at 4 GHz with an EPoX motherboard and leaving the window open in the winter to keep it cool enough.

    • DPete27
    • 6 years ago

    I feel like I’d buy an unlocked Pentium just to see how far I could push it…even if I didn’t need another system running in the house, I’d hope they’d be <$100. I suppose that counts for motor revved.

      • ImSpartacus
      • 6 years ago

      I agree, I want to see how the Pentium will oc. I hope Intel bins them well.

    • internetsandman
    • 6 years ago

    With an i7-2600k at 4.5GHz, I’m waiting for something that’s actually worth the cost of upgrading, and Haswell-E is the first thing to fit that description in 4 years

      • Airmantharp
      • 6 years ago

      I know, right?

      Heaviest game I’m playing is Battlefield 4, and it’s actually easier to drive than BF3 was :/.

      • moshpit
      • 6 years ago

      Same here exactly.

    • flip-mode
    • 6 years ago

    i5 4670 is one month old. No revs allowed in my motor.

    If any of them tempted me it would be ‘Devil’s Canyon’, but my particular i5 4670 does 4.4 GHz at stock voltage so I’m not needing much more.

    Haswell-E? Meh, I have absolutely no need for eight cores at all. None.

    Unlocked Pentium? LOL.

    Unlocked Broadwell? It will be interesting to see only from the perspective of seeing how much of a bump it will provide over Haswell. Is there any reason to expect it to be impressive?

    The old X4 955 lasted me 4 1/2 years, and only got replaced because it went to my pops. I’m counting on the i5 4670 to last me that long again. I won’t complain if Intel found a lost can of whoop-ass and plans to mix it in with the next couple generations of CPUs, but I’ve come to the point that I upgrade when I need to and not just because there’s something new available. So long live the i5 4670.

    • mesyn191
    • 6 years ago

    Couldn’t vote. Need more pricing details on Haswell-E, DC-Haswell, and Broadwell. Performance numbers on Broadwell (doubt that it’ll be much of a performance improvement over Haswell, Intel has been focusing on power/temp for a long time now, but still) would be nice too.

    • sweatshopking
    • 6 years ago

    none of them. i want 16 cores, at 10ghz. it’s 2014.

      • Deanjo
      • 6 years ago

      That’s it? I want 128 core, with hyperthreading, running at 1 THz running on my garage door opener. It is after all 2014.

      • Grigory
      • 6 years ago

      That was the most sensible thing you ever posted. (And I mean that in a positive way.)

      • moshpit
      • 6 years ago

      Yeah? Well I want 2880 cores all on my video card running around 1Ghz… oh wait, nevermind…

      • Bensam123
      • 6 years ago

      +1

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 6 years ago

      I want the CPU from The Machine on Person of Interest. I want it to have the GPU from The Matrix. It can run Bishop’s OS and have Six from Battlestar Galactica as its case.

      It’s 2014. It’s not really asking too much.

    • Mentawl
    • 6 years ago

    I voted for Devil’s Canyon, but only if it fits on existing 1150 boards 😛

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 6 years ago

      Maybe 1149 requiring a new board just for lulz.

      • stdRaichu
      • 6 years ago

      I won’t be buying it unless it’s out for S939 boards.

    • tazpa
    • 6 years ago

    Some workloads still don’t benefit from multiple cores. I’ve been looking for fast duallies, without the need for HT shenanigans or price of i3’s. Sadly that probably is not that pentium.

    • PenGun
    • 6 years ago

    MY i5 750 is getting some fast RAM and we’ll pick her off the 2.3GHZ floor for 2014. She has done 4.4 GHz stable, and I think 3.6GHz will do for my upgrade.

    I’ll give my slow RAM to my son as he will not be OCing anything.

    There are new processors? ROTFLMFAO

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 6 years ago

      I got my old i7 920 up to 4.4GHz once. It ran SuperPi 1M. I think that’s as stable as it was. The old 750 still works well.

        • PenGun
        • 6 years ago

        Yeah I used SuperPi to test my i5 too. Ran 24 hours so i think she’ll be just fine in her fifth year. Picked her up because she gets a GTX 780 in a week or so.

        Gonna hit ESO with my new 2560×1600 Korean special, all new digital sound front end and some extra visual goodness. Sweet!

    • PrincipalSkinner
    • 6 years ago

    It’ll be 3 years this year that my 2500K spent ticking at 4.5GHz.
    That Broadwell however sounds egg-citing.

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 6 years ago

      I put my 2700k back to stock. There was little to no point having it at 4.7GHz 24/7. If games are well over 60 FPS in many cases and other workloads aren’t too intense, it’s not worth the extra energy costs. Did you buy that at launch?

    • ptsant
    • 6 years ago

    Why is Iris Pro so important in the desktop space? I don’t get it. I mean it’s very expensive, it has, at best, midrange discrete GPU performance, and is not an elegant technological solution. Just slap even more ultra-fast RAM on the die and … profit.

    I voted for Haswell-E because I find the delay between the non-E and E series unacceptable. I want quad channel next generation RAM, multiple PCIe lanes, multiple cores, multiple everything. I know I won’t be able to afford the Haswell-E, but it seems sexier. Like comparing a Ferrari with a Toyota. I know which I’m going to buy, but the first one is definitely sexier.

      • FanlessTech
      • 6 years ago

      The market for cheaper, but most importantly smaller gaming rigs is huge 😉

        • ptsant
        • 6 years ago

        I can get cheap, but as I said cheap is not exciting. Smaller, however? Why? It’s not like you have to carry the box on your shoulders all day (which I used to do when I went to LAN parties, before the arrival of cheap broadband).

      • Wirko
      • 6 years ago

      [quote<]Why is Iris Pro so important in the desktop space?[/quote<] There are many nice Mini-ITX cases with no room for a discrete GPU. Also, an i7-4770 plus an R7 240 should be comparable to an i7-4770R both in price and performance, if you could choose either on LGA1150.

        • Airmantharp
        • 6 years ago

        It’s important because of that extra cache, and what developers will be able to do with a GPU that shares local memory with the CPU and has it’s own massive local cache, particularly when it comes to compute operations that are tightly integrated into their code. Think AMD APU, but better.

        • ptsant
        • 6 years ago

        As I said before, I never understood the need for very small desktops. It is cute, in a certain way, but without any practical benefit, unless if you need 8 desktops scattered in your small studio or you live in a japanese capsule hotel.

          • HisDivineOrder
          • 6 years ago

          Well, here’s the thing.

          A lot of those people buying those small systems would look at you and say:

          “As I said before, I never understood the need for very high end desktops. It is hot, in a certain way, but without any practical benefit, unless if you need a supercomputer running on water cooling in your basement next to your version of IBM Watson.”

          Different strokes for different folks.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 6 years ago

      Iris Pro matters not because you’ll use it, but because if Intel makes the “bare minimum” a bit higher, it has repercussions for how many MORE people might one day start using their el cheapo PC to game.

      If Intel keeps shoveling out crapware as their integrated GPU’s that can barely do more than play Angry Birds, then how can you expect those el cheapos to ever branch out? You have to let them play games at low/med detail levels at 768p, get hooked, then get to upgrading.

      Intel sets the line for what “bare minimum” actually means. If they raise that line, even just a little, it gives developers a LOT more potential for profit and makes it easier to make a business case for even more PC games.

      Get it now?

      • maxxcool
      • 6 years ago

      Beacause a 128meg l4 is awseome even if edram…

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 6 years ago

    More important: is 6 core Haswell E cheaper? Rumors imply no more quad-cores.

    But since it won’t be $200-300, the board and RAM cost more, eDRAM has similar bandwidth to quad-channel DDR4, and it can’t be swapped to a tiny case with integrated graphics when it has worn out its welcome…I’d have to take Broadwell.

    Haswell E is a tough sell. The memory bandwidth advantage of the platform is gone, but it may even have a memory latency disadvantage due to the preposterously large L3.

    Even the original Haswell implementation of eDRAM has a net reduction in latency, as it has no negative impact when everything fits in the L3, and anything larger is faster.

    And that’s with the eDRAM running only 1.6 GHz, so there’s room for improvement. Intel is producing 14nm eDRAM for Xeon Phi, and Haswell’s eDRAM was 22nm, not something old.

    • Ninjitsu
    • 6 years ago

    Actually, all of them for different reasons.

    Devil’s Canyon, because a Haswell at 5.0GHz on air will give me a nerdgasm. Pentium because i’m just curious to see how it affects AMD. Broadwell with Iris Pro because wow such L4. Haswell-E because holy moley it’s a true flagship.

    As far as I am personally concerned, Devil’s Canyon, because I plan to buy that. Can’t afford Haswell-E, especially given that both X99 and DDR4 will be very expensive. I think the Broadwell with Iris Pro will be more expensive too, and i don’t run computational fluid dynamics in my daily life.

      • Wirko
      • 6 years ago

      [quote<]Devil's Canyon, because a Haswell at 5.0GHz on air will give me a nerdgasm.[/quote<] The chip should also have a lowly 3.0 GHz stock speed so we can brag about 70% overclocks on stock fans again, like we used to do with Core 2 Duos.

        • OneArmedScissor
        • 6 years ago

        I got a 100% “overclock” on a 1.6 GHz E2140. :p

          • derFunkenstein
          • 6 years ago

          Dang it. Best I’ve ever done is 67% on two CPUs – E2160 and Duron 600. But hey, 3GHz and 1GHz were both pushing top-of-the-line CPUs at the time, so I can’t complain.

            • Ninjitsu
            • 6 years ago

            My Core 2 Quad Q8400 doesn’t go more than 4%, no way to tweak voltages on the board i have.

    • slowriot
    • 6 years ago

    Where is the cheese option? Seriously. None of these CPU’s rev my motor. There can’t be a “most” because they’re all none.

    Unless something changes in software land I have zero interest in a faster CPU. It’s not limiting me now and it doesn’t appear to be a barrier for the next few years still.

    What I am interested in a hybrid tablet/laptop with an Intel Atom chip inside. But currently all of these are outright horrible products.

    Ugh. The market sucks.

      • indeego
      • 6 years ago

      Agree.

      PCIe SSDs at a much lower pricepoint, or SSD NGFF that are external accessible/drop in seem much more exciting to me.

      Intel putting that R&D into serious GPU power would be nice. Better driver support, too (seen those Intel image quality oddities lately?)

      I/O and bandwidth are much more bottlenecks of significance.

    • albundy
    • 6 years ago

    based on my current rig, i would want the latest tech…ddr4, sata express, but in a SFF. I did the midtower thing and i just wasnt making the most of it. in the past 10 years, i havent added 1 pci-e card and have only stuck with 1 discrete gpu. that pretty much leaves half the case empty. i would also prefer that the cpu come with AIO liquid cooling.

      • kuraegomon
      • 6 years ago

      You do realize that “half-empty” space actually has cooling value, right? Or rather, [b<][i<]silent[/i<][/b<] cooling value.

    • drfish
    • 6 years ago

    Intel needs to step up and release a 6 core Broadwell chip that finally makes a worthy successor to the i7-2600K at the same price point. Oh wait, they don’t need to, because AMD.

      • derFunkenstein
      • 6 years ago

      Mostly true, but they kind of need to if they want Sandy Bridge buyers to spend money going on 4 years after they upgraded.

        • drfish
        • 6 years ago

        Fair enough. I think 6 core becoming the new 4 core and 8 core becoming the new 6 core is past due.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 6 years ago

          Agreed, and not in the AMD “modular” CPU sense, either.

      • Farting Bob
      • 6 years ago

      If they want me to ever upgrade from my launch day 2500k, they should be interested in offering real improvement. 15% improvement 3-4 years later and lower consumption is nice, but not close to being worth me upgrading. At the rate CPU’s are going i wont feel the desire to give Intel my money for another 3 years.

        • yammerpickle2
        • 6 years ago

        I’m not even sure the lower power consumption is true. I can run my P-2600K easy at 4.5 ghz with very little tweaks. From what I’ve seen you have to really crank the voltage and up the cooling on Haswells to get them stable at 4.5 ghz and by then your burning more power than on a Ivy bridge chip.

      • HisDivineOrder
      • 6 years ago

      Hopefully, the changes at Intel will lead to this. If they are refocusing on the enthusiast, then they have to make do with what they have right now. Changing the lidding and/or solder on existing product is likely a test case just like a low-end unlocked CPU is a test case.

      If the tests are successful (ie., going hard on their GPU drivers (last year) or NUC (last year/year before)), then they’ll turn their attention toward incorporating those changes in more of their products, right? Just like they saw success with NUC and their GPU improvements, so they expanded them out across more products the following year.

      I imagine they have a lot of wheels already in motion and cannot add more cores or do improvements to current mainstream lines that enthusiasts would enjoy… yet. Certainly, they might add such things in years to come, but would rather not KILL their current sales talking about things so far in the future.

      But if they are turning around and looking at the enthusiasts again, then perhaps that means they’re working on that, too?

      One can hope.

    • spiked_mistborn
    • 6 years ago

    Broadwell w/Iris Pro, especially at < 50 watts, would be great for a family computer. Plenty of power for web browsing, and you can also do some gaming. If you play games based on how much fun they are, rather than how much eye candy they have, then something like the Iris Pro might be good enough if you want to do a little gaming occasionally. I still regularly play games on the NES, SNES, and Genesis, which are passively cooled and just use a few watts of power, that are as much fun to me as anything out today. Having an unlocked chip might be nice to squeeze out a little more performance within the same power envelope.

    • Stargazer
    • 6 years ago

    Well, I feel that I have to go with “Unlocked Broadwell 14-m w/Iris Pro”. Any processor with 14 [b<]meter[/b<] transistors is obviously going to be huge (literally). Even if they'd scale it down a bit (say to 14-nm or so) I'd probably go with the same choice, since the process shrink should also help with thermals, and it'll come with some other goodies too.

    • anotherengineer
    • 6 years ago

    None of the above ‘rev’d my motor’

    Now if there was a 6 core unlocked Desktop Haswell, with IRIS Pro graphics for about $300, that would get my motor rev’d.

    I mean not too long ago I could have gotten an AMD 1090T for around $200, so I think my above statement is not asking for too much?

    • southrncomfortjm
    • 6 years ago

    Give me a quad core processor that I don’t have to delid to get some solid overclocking headroom on and I’m happy. Oh, and do it for around $200 (cheaper at Microcenter with a Mobo :)).

    Then again, I don’t really see my 3570k getting long in the tooth anytime soon.

    • Deadsalt
    • 6 years ago

    Haswell E six core since I want faster video transcoding but the eight core is just too expensive. I wouldn’t mind going for Broadwell, but h.265, vp9, and x265 are going to be CPU hogs.

    • dalingrin
    • 6 years ago

    I really want to upgrade to Haswell-E from my Sandy Bridge-E but the DDR4 is a major turn off. I already have a ton of memory bandwidth since Sandy Bridge-E is quad channel. DDR4 is likely to be stupid expensive until DDR4 is used in the regular consumer parts.

      • khands
      • 6 years ago

      Isn’t that the whole point of the E parts?

      • mesyn191
      • 6 years ago

      Supposedly DDR4 DIMMs will cost about double DDR3 DIMMs for the same capacity. If true this is certainly a large relative price increase but it wouldn’t be like going back to the days of Rambus-esque RIMM-job pricing.

      Currently (2x4GB DIMM) 8GB of PC1600 DDR3 goes for around $65…so expect around $130 for 8GB of DDR4.

      Its really the server grade DDR4 that is going to be stupid expensive.

        • Airmantharp
        • 6 years ago

        That sounds fair- the only pain for the Haswell-E buyers will be the need for a four-DIMM kit, but it still won’t be too expensive if you need the performance.

          • mesyn191
          • 6 years ago

          Will you need 4 DIMMs though for Haswell-E? That is only if you want peak bandwidth right?

        • Ninjitsu
        • 6 years ago

        I don’t know, the density they appear to be using for DDR4 is double that of DDR3. May end up being equally priced, or cheaper a year or two from now.

          • mesyn191
          • 6 years ago

          DDR4 is expected to drop 20-30% in price within a year of launch IIRC.

      • stdRaichu
      • 6 years ago

      …but think of how much better your integrated graphics will perform once you’re fully kitted out with 64GB of DDR4. That’s worth the $400 premium alone.

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 6 years ago

        No -E CPU has yet to release with integrated graphics.

      • TechNut
      • 6 years ago

      Agree. I’d love the Haswell-E parts, but the price and new RAM will make it crazy expensive.

      I managed to buy 352GB of 16GB (2x8GB Kingston Blue HyperX non-ECC) kits for around 70$ CDN each in November 2012. I was refreshing the servers I had to the newer Sandy Bridge-E platform. At today’s prices (NewEgg is showing out of stock at 180$ CDN for the SAME kit!!), that type of memory capacity would just not be possible on the budget I had. Effectively, it would be $8000 for that memory on Haswell-E (considering I spent just over $1500 in the first place, ouch!). That price jump is just not worth the performance gain. I went with 6 core E5-2620’s, and they run just fine. I’m likely to get the Ivy-Bridge E’s from eBay in a couple years and get a power decrease and 10% performance boost doing that, and not refreshing to Haswell.

      I’ll likely look at the platform beyond Haswell-E, as I expect I can likely get what I have to last to 2016 at least….

        • HisDivineOrder
        • 6 years ago

        I agree it’s a shame Intel is artificially raising the price of the upgrade by using DDR4 instead of the far more prevalent and mature DDR3 that more than matches it at current. It’s a shame they can’t offer both options simultaneously (possibly with separate CPU SKU’s) and let the market transition over time.

        I imagine by the time of Broadwell-E or Skylake-E, DDR4 will be showing its advantages, but it won’t be anywhere close to that at the time of Haswell-E’s release. I suspect its release will lead to shortages on the only DDR4 released by then and that the memory on offer will be not nearly as mature or as robust as what we’re used to with DDR3.

        Maybe by the very end of Haswell-E’s lifespan will see DDR4 that is anywhere close to the levels of the DDR3 we have now. That alone is reason to hold off, which is a shame because the rest of Haswell-E is mighty tempting to me (ie., FOUR more cores than the mainstream line, FOUR more hyperthreaded cores than the mainstream line, modern niceties integrated into the actual chipset for the motherboard, quad memory controller, Haswell’s solid performance per watt characteristics without the integrated GPU, fluxless solder for the E-line)…

        But then they hamstring it again. This time, the limiting factor is DDR4. I’m sure DDR4 will be nice to have in the distant future, but for this year… it’s going to be a major hindrance. Perhaps they should put off release until the tail end of the year when DDR4 is more prevalent?

        I don’t know. It’s just annoying there’s always some niggle that keeps me reluctant about the E-line CPU’s. With SB-E, it was the horrible gutting of the chipset and Ivy Bridge’s imminent release. With IVB-E, it was… well horribly delayed, only hexacores(!?), and the SAME chipset as the bad one before. Now with Haswell-E, they finally fix everything… only to tie it to a memory spec that is going to be a huge limiting factor for a long time.

        I don’t like building and rebuilding and rebuilding the same system just to add memory, trying to find a good set. I just want a good set from the start. With DDR4, I won’t get that. This inclines me to just wait until Broadwell releases (given Intel’s new attitude) and see what they’ve done to appease the enthusiast with their mainstream. Perhaps a Devil’s Canyon take on Broadwell will come, right?

        The shame of it is if there were a DDR3 option for Haswell-E, those doubts would just not exist.

    • jjj
    • 6 years ago

    None because of pricing.

    Anything with integrated GPU is a huge chunk of die that we don’t need and Haswell-E will most likely be priced in the same ridiculous way they’ve been pricing the E series for a while now.

    • Generic
    • 6 years ago

    Where’s the “Any CPU Not Currently Available for Purchase” option??

    I’ve come to the conclusion that I’m a disturbed individual when I step back a moment and think about how much time I spend reading about Intel’s future offerings, coupled with the fact that I never follow through and buy them until something I own actually breaks.

    Its a perverse technology voyeurism I tell ya.

    • DancinJack
    • 6 years ago

    srsly no cheese i’m done with TR

      • Srsly_Bro
      • 6 years ago

      Don’t be throwing ’round that srsly stuff, bro. That’s srs life aint for you.

    • NeelyCam
    • 6 years ago

    Where’s the “Desktop? What’s that..?” option?

      • Ninjitsu
      • 6 years ago

      On a different thread. -_-

    • tipoo
    • 6 years ago

    I’m cheating, but I’m most excited about Iris Pro 5200 (or equivalent or higher performance) coming to 13″, thin laptops like for example the rMBP.

    • maxxcool
    • 6 years ago

    Devils Canyon… better thermals == less fan noise

    • the
    • 6 years ago

    Socketed Broadwell + Iris Pro for me. I have zero interest in Intel’s graphic capabilities as I use discrete cards on desktops but the ability to use the eDRAM as a L4 has me very interested. This is one of the few ways to boost IPC a bit. Clock speeds and IPC tend to be more important after moving past the quad core mark for consumer applications. With clock speeds regressing in the overclocked world, IPC gains are what’s left.

      • Pancake
      • 6 years ago

      It should also reduce energy consumption. I have a bit of an eco-fetish when it comes to my desktop builds and am looking forward to this aspect of it.

      • UberGerbil
      • 6 years ago

      Depending on the asking price, it could be the basis of a pretty amazing HTPC build also.

    • Stickmansam
    • 6 years ago

    I would aim for a 6core or 8core but have to wait for the pricing

    Otherwise my pick would be Broadwell. It should have the improved TIM, L4 cache and minor tweaks.

    DC only has better thermals going for it which is a unknown (and Haswell isn’t “that bad”) Also might require 9x chipset afaik.

    • Damage
    • 6 years ago

    I would like to point out that you can vote for one of the four options without feeling any need to upgrade your current system. The question is a simple one and, I think, fun to ponder. Owners of systems that are not in need of an upgrade are welcome to participate without obligation.

      • Sargent Duck
      • 6 years ago

      I voted for better thermals…but I still want my cheese option!

      • flip-mode
      • 6 years ago

      In that case I vote for Broadwell, because of the future and stuff.

    • Sargent Duck
    • 6 years ago

    Agree with the Cheese option. My Ivy Bridge Core i5 4 core 3.0ghz (forget what the model number is) is more than good enough to last me another year, easy.

    • CampinCarl
    • 6 years ago

    Cheese option as well. Unless they start selling 10+ physical core Haswell parts for something less than $500/CPU, I don’t feel like my stock-clocked Ivy Bridge 3770 will feel weak any time soon.

    • bthylafh
    • 6 years ago

    Munster. I’m still fine with my i5-2500K.

    • codedivine
    • 6 years ago

    Cheese.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This