# Intel Core i7-4790 Incrementally Faster than i7-4770K: Review



## btarunr (May 7, 2014)

TweakTown went ahead and posted the first formal review of Intel Core i7-4790, the fastest Core "Haswell" Refresh quad-core processor. Tested on an unnamed Z97 Express motherboard, with discrete graphics, the chip was found to be only incrementally faster than the i7-4770K, and just what you'd expect from a 100 MHz clock speed bump. The i7-4790 is clocked at 3.60 GHz, with a maximum Turbo Boost speed of 4.00 GHz, compared to the 3.50 GHz and 3.90 GHz clocks of the i7-4770K. It lacks an unlocked base-clock multiplier, and so its overclocking potential is severely limited, and close to non-existent; and so the i7-4790 is really a chip for those who want the best gaming performance, and don't intend to overclock their CPUs. Enthusiasts may want to hold out for "Devil's Canyon." Find the full review at the source.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Blazer (May 7, 2014)

matar said:


> Obviously this benchmark does not utilize a 6 core CPU with 12 threads


 
Of corse it doesn't, both the 4770K and its predecessor  the 3770K had only 4 cores, so why would this have more?


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 7, 2014)

What a waste of time. The only real point of interest being voiced (for the top end SKUs) is how well it overclocks and whether the revised thermal interface material is any better than the previous two generations.

Also quite weird that AMD's sole representative is the (relatively) old FX 8150.

TT reaffirming their relationship with the cutting edge


----------



## matar (May 7, 2014)

Blazer said:


> Of corse it doesn't, both the 4770K and its predecessor  the 3770K had only 4 cores, so why would this have more?


I made a mistake I thought I saw i7-4960 I deleted my post


----------



## The Von Matrices (May 7, 2014)

Blazer said:


> Of corse it doesn't, both the 4770K and its predecessor  the 3770K had only 4 cores, so why would this have more?



If you look at the raw benchmarks they also test 6-core CPUs as well, although I am left to wonder why btarunr chose to use the memory bandwidth charts as the figure in the original post.  Of all the benchmarks that is probably the one with the least correlation to real world performance.

Although looking at the charts does lead to the question as to why the processors with the 4-channel memory controllers have 50% less bandwidth than the ones with the 2-channel memory controllers.


----------



## mouacyk (May 7, 2014)

I don't even wan to think about cleaning up my CLU just to upgrade from 4770K to 4790K for that 100MHz...  hope these are better binned so they can help extend Z8/97's life.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 7, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> Although looking at the charts does lead to the question as to why the processors with the 4-channel memory controllers have 50% less bandwidth than the ones with the 2-channel memory controllers.


Well, that's going to have to remain a mystery as long as TT keep their test system fit-outs secret. Maybe they outfitted their 4 channel board with a couple of sticks of DDR3-1066 !?!?!


----------



## The Von Matrices (May 7, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> Maybe they outfitted their 4 channel board with a couple of sticks of DDR3-1066 !?!?!



It's likely literally a couple of sticks, as in two instead of four.


----------



## jmcosta (May 7, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> Although looking at the charts does lead to the question as to why the processors with the 4-channel memory controllers have 50% less bandwidth than the ones with the 2-channel memory controllers.



because its an Ivy bridge?


----------



## The Von Matrices (May 7, 2014)

jmcosta said:


> because its an Ivy bridge?



Both the 3770K and the 4960X have Ivy bridge cores.  The 4960X has a 4 channel memory controller while the 3770K has a 2 channel memory controller, yet suspiciously the 4960X has lower memory bandwidth.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 7, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> It's likely literally a couple of sticks, as in two instead of four.


This is Tweaktown, it could just as easily be that they recycled the benchmarks from an old bench using a  AIDA64 2.xx build.


----------



## d1nky (May 7, 2014)

_''What will be more interesting is the release of the K based processors. While they will carry the same speed bump, what we're really hoping for is better overclocking in both the core and memory department.''

(source tweaktown)_

This is what may persuade me to buy one, and maybe a lot more enthusiasts!


----------



## jmcosta (May 7, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> Both the 3770K and the 4960X have Ivy bridge cores.  The 4960X has a 4 channel memory controller while the 3770K has a 2 channel memory controller, yet suspiciously the 4960X has lower memory bandwidth.


slightly lower performance, maybe they only used 2sticks lol


----------



## The Von Matrices (May 7, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> This is Tweaktown, it could just as easily be that they recycled the benchmarks from an old bench using a  AIDA64 2.xx build.



You're right, but it's even worse.  If you look closely at the article it says:

Version and / or Patch Used: 1.00.1035BETA

So a 2010 era benchmark for a 2014 processor.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 7, 2014)

WRT to my last (half joking) comment about the possibility of Tweaktown recycling an old benchmark score using an old AIDA64 build. It actually looks as if that is exactly the case. The numbers are exactly the same as this November 2012 review. 


EDIT: Out-Clouseau'ed by TVM. Well ninja'ed sir.


----------



## Prima.Vera (May 7, 2014)

Forget those synthetic craps, check out the REAL benches:




and the others:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6...h-cpu-and-z97-performance-preview/index5.html

As you can see there is 0 (zero) difference from this CPU and the older 3770K. 
Yeah, thanks a lot intel, lol.


----------



## Blazer (May 7, 2014)

btarunr said:


> TweakTown went ahead and posted the first formal review of Intel Core i7-4790, the fastest Core "Haswell" Refresh quad-core processor. Tested on an unnamed Z97 Express motherboard, with discrete graphics, the chip was found to be only incrementally faster than the i7-4770K, and just what you'd expect from a 100 MHz clock speed bump. The i7-4790 is clocked at 3.60 GHz, with a maximum Turbo Boost speed of 4.00 GHz, compared to the 3.50 GHz and 3.90 GHz clocks of the i7-4770K. It lacks an unlocked base-clock multiplier, and so its overclocking potential is severely limited, and close to non-existent; and so the i7-4790 is really a chip for those who want the best gaming performance, and don't intend to overclock their CPUs. Enthusiasts may want to hold out for "Devil's Canyon." Find the full review at the source.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
T


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 7, 2014)

Prima.Vera said:


> Forget those synthetic craps, check out the REAL benches


It should come as no surprise to ANYONE that graphics content isn't CPU dependant for a single GPU in virtually any scenario barring (rare) core count coding issues or heavy usage of CPU calculated AI routines or physics.




It is why CPUs are a secondary consideration in a gaming machine unless you're needing to keep multiple GPUs occupied


----------



## radrok (May 7, 2014)

It's Haswell refresh guys, what were you expecting?  A new microarch?

We all know the real deal will be X99's 8 core CPUs.


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

radrok said:


> although I am left to wonder why btarunr chose to use the memory bandwidth charts as the figure in the original post.



I suppose that you answered your own question.



radrok said:


> It's Haswell refresh guys, what were you expecting?  A new microarch?
> We all know the real deal will be X99's 8 core CPUs.



So I guess I don't need to do a 4790 review then, eh? But then...why do I have one? 

I mean, given that there was some obvious confusion about what is/was coming, I'm not surprised by the reactions. It's a non-K chip, not some flagship model. And then, with X99, we have DDR4 to deal with too...or so the rumour goes.


----------



## radrok (May 7, 2014)

Dave I have the answer, are you willing to open the spoiler?



Spoiler



Intel deliberately refreshed Haswell with a clock bump to waste your time 

Or our time maybe.



What bugs me is that now they are going to release yet another pointless (??) CPU, Devil's Canyon which is basically what delidders did one year ago and still continue to do.

Maybe it will target who didn't want to void their warranty.

I'm still skeptical it will bring higher clocks to the table, if it doesn't scale better with voltage you are left with small headroom compared to the first Hsw iteration.

After all Intel's fab process is kinda sensitive to voltage, you don't have to operate much more than 1.5v to degrade irreparably your chip.


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

radrok said:


> Dave I have the answer, are you willing to open the spoiler?
> 
> 
> 
> ...



And give me a free chip or three? Why would I say no? So I can less CPUs to show in future reviews? 

To me, it's useful to have as the example of "top-of-the-line" non-K chippery. Beyond that, there's still not much more I can say yet.


----------



## Fiery (May 7, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> This is Tweaktown, it could just as easily be that they recycled the benchmarks from an old bench using a  AIDA64 2.xx build.



Most likely that's exactly what's happened. AIDA64 v2.xx used to have only single-threaded memory bandwidth benchmarks.  Since v3.00, AIDA64 uses all available CPU threads which boosts memory scores considerably.


----------



## RCoon (May 7, 2014)

There's only one processor I'm interested in these days.
I want to see the Pentium anniversary edition benchmarked against these things.

At 8Ghz.

I'll be laughing while my $60 unlocked chip is laying waste to all these quad core HT'd on liquid cooling in an ITX case.


----------



## DarkOCean (May 7, 2014)

The pc hardware world, at least for me has become more boring than watching the grass grow.


----------



## techy1 (May 7, 2014)

No suprises here... it is a refresh - is is ment for people that do not care about PCs, but might be interested to dump their old system (cuz it is old and/or broken) for new one and then there is message from Intel to them ".....the brand new 4ht generation.... bla bla bla" - win/win for both parties. I just hope that this refresh will not delay Boradwell to much, ofcorse there is nothope to see it in next  6 months, and we can expect 2-3% increasemt in preformance (not more, but it is still beter than 0,00% and +100mhz  )


----------



## TheDeeGee (May 7, 2014)

Ill stick with my 4770K.

Chances of getting a chip that's much much worse is extremely high for me, seeing my 4770K does 4.5 GHz @ 1.175v.


----------



## Eroticus (May 7, 2014)

The Von Matrices said:


> If you look at the raw benchmarks they also test 6-core CPUs as well, although I am left to wonder why btarunr chose to use the memory bandwidth charts as the figure in the original post.  Of all the benchmarks that is probably the one with the least correlation to real world performance.
> 
> Although looking at the charts does lead to the question as to why the processors with the 4-channel memory controllers have 50% less bandwidth than the ones with the 2-channel memory controllers.




Lies , Lies and Lies.

Without any overclock .. 19% = Turbo always on no down clock for energy save.


----------



## Ed_1 (May 7, 2014)

no , one notice the lightroom test score took the longest with 4790 , not sure whats up with tweaktown comment too "
Lightroom continues the trend of extra performance when compared to the i7 4790 "

nothing extra there



http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6...h-cpu-and-z97-performance-preview/index4.html


----------



## Vlada011 (May 7, 2014)

Only 20 months after Ivy we had third chipset. Z87 is finished for less than year or year and now Z97, on every year new chipset.
And difference is...no comment. No way I will every buy mainstream. Extreme and next processor for 4 year.


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 7, 2014)

......everytime there is a new release cpu or gpu...... the comment section is identical and so I'm gonna repeat like some always does:

gee wizz guys its just a refresh.....no one expects major earth shattering improvements.  To the people (like me) who is about to build another pc or upgrading from...you know the rest this is fine.   The Canyon is...HOPEFULLY will be where all the fun is.

And with the world spiraling downward towards tablets and smarter than the user phones......I'm just happy to see any new full blooded CPU (not arms  apu or abi whats it) RELEASE. ....we better enjoy it (end rant)


----------



## Jorge (May 7, 2014)

Gullible sheeple will rush to pay more and get almost the same old shitze. The value/performance proposition for many enthusiasts is still the Vishera FX-8350.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 7, 2014)

Tweaktown reviews are just horrible, there is more page layout dedicated to ads and link crap than actual review material.  TPU's reviews are way better.   

+100mhz bump to dave and the other admins.


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

Hilux SSRG said:


> Tweaktown reviews are just horrible, there is more page layout dedicated to ads and link crap than actual review material.  TPU's reviews are way better.
> 
> +100mhz bump to dave and the other admins.



Well, I posted this some time ago:







And then I posted this:








Got any guess as to what I've been using for a system for the past few weeks? 


I'm working on full review of the board and CPU. I wasn't to post the full board review until next Monday, but have been allowed to post everything as of yesterday. I will have a full CPU review as well, but using a new VGA, new OS, and new drivers means that I've got a TONNE of benchmarks to run. CPU review is going to take some time to complete, simply because it takes nearly two 10-hour days per system for me to do OS and app set-up and then run the tests.

That said...this is still the same old Haswell CPU, with a slight clock boost. Z97, on the other hand...is quite interesting, and not one site has really mentioned why yet. So I'll stop posting in the forums, and get back to finishing the reviews.


----------



## GhostRyder (May 7, 2014)

Yea, Z97 chipset is in reality another unneeded new chipset.  I have been waiting to see the new Haswell-E series for awhile now and with the new chips in the devils canyon series this is not unexpected.  They like to re-release the same chip with a 100mhz clock bump as a new chip all the time, just look at the 2700k and 2600k from sandy bridge.



cadaveca said:


> Well, I posted this some time ago:
> 
> 
> Got any guess as to what I've been using for a system for the past few weeks?
> ...


I look forward to reading it, im interested to see what will happen with these chips and the new Z97 chipset.


----------



## TheMailMan78 (May 7, 2014)

Still not seeing a reason to upgrade my 2600K.


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Yea, Z97 chipset is in reality another unneeded new chipset.  I have been waiting to see the new Haswell-E series for awhile now and with the new chips in the devils canyon series this is not unexpected.  They like to re-release the same chip with a 100mhz clock bump as a new chip all the time, just look at the 2700k and 2600k from sandy bridge.
> 
> 
> I look forward to reading it, im interested to see what will happen with these chips and the new Z97 chipset.




I've got ASRock, ASUS, Biostar, ECS, Gigabyte, and MSI reviews incoming, but I also have school, work, and life to deal with. I'm working as fast as I can, since I think for many other sites, this launch will be Haswell redux...with many saying it sucks, but not understanding why.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 7, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> I've got ASRock, ASUS, Biostar, ECS, Gigabyte, and MSI reviews incoming, but I also have school, work, and life to deal with. I'm working as fast as I can, since I think for many other sites, this launch will be Haswell redux...with many saying it sucks, but not understanding why.



Are you then going to be reviewing in less than a month the devil's canyon release chips?  That would be chip testing overload!


----------



## GhostRyder (May 7, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> I've got ASRock, ASUS, Biostar, ECS, Gigabyte, and MSI reviews incoming, but I also have school, work, and life to deal with. I'm working as fast as I can, since I think for many other sites, this launch will be Haswell redux...with many saying it sucks, but not understanding why.


Indeed, I was curious on how the new board series will stack up.  I totally understand that and feel ya there, finding time is rather difficult these days, but hang in there! 

Im curious more than anything the overclocking on Devils Canyon just because Ivy and Haswell feel so abysmal not in terms of overclocking, but the temps of the clocking to those levels.  Its funny when the radiator on my friends i5 is not too hot but the chip is running in the low 70's .


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

Hilux SSRG said:


> Are you then going to be reviewing in less than a month the devil's canyon release chips?  That would be chip testing overload!


Dude...I still have a bunch of Z87 boards I haven't reviewed.


And yes, I have plans for Devil's Canyon review and OC guide. And I still have to post IVB-E clocking guide...

But, it is all good. I have lots of work to keep me busy, and I love that. I also have no deadlines or expectations from board makers at this time. ASRock sent me board to look at only, but I'll give a good review of it.

My testing platform is 100% new...somehow I killed nearly all of the Z87 test platform. New drives, new PSU, new ram, new case...new cooling...and new OS.



GhostRyder said:


> Indeed, I was curious on how the new board series will stack up.  I totally understand that and feel ya there, finding time is rather difficult these days, but hang in there!
> Im curious more than anything the overclocking on Devils Canyon just because Ivy and Haswell feel so abysmal not in terms of overclocking, but the temps of the clocking to those levels.  Its funny when the radiator on my friends i5 is not too hot but the chip is running in the low 70's .



I understand. Yet, SKT1155 and SKT1150 aren't Intel's real enthusiast platform. The fact we have Devil's Canyon coming at all says that Intel has heard feedback like your, and has taken steps to bring real enthusiast chips to the mainstream platform. I am not expecting more than a few MHz extra with Devil's Canyon. That's not really why we have Z97... nor is it beucase of these new Haswell-based CPUs. i7-4790 = i7-2700, and that is all.


----------



## EarthDog (May 7, 2014)

Welcome back Dave... it will be nice to see some new stuff from you, that is for sure.


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

EarthDog said:


> Welcome back Dave... it will be nice to see some new stuff from you, that is for sure.


Yeah, I have been posting reviews every once in a while, but my time has been really constrained. I've posted a few reviews in the past few months, but not enough, that's for sure! Losing two PSUs and two SSDs really set me back a bit, but I got some help with that and replacement parts have been in my hands for a few weeks now.


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 7, 2014)

.....did i read somewhere  or am I wrong in thinking z97 will support Haswell's sucesssor?


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

ensabrenoir said:


> .....did i read somewhere  or am I wrong in thinking z97 will support Haswell's sucesssor?



You are correct, sir. This bridging platforms is a new thing for Intel, and is one of the major reasons that we have a Z97 in the first place. What that compatibility means... I'll maybe talk about a bit more in my review.


----------



## EarthDog (May 7, 2014)

It means that the Haswell refresh is only good in Z97, while Haswell is good in Z87 and Z97 (among its other, lower end counter parts).


----------



## cadaveca (May 7, 2014)

EarthDog said:


> It means that the Haswell refresh is only good in Z97, while Haswell is good in Z87 and Z97 (among its other, lower end counter parts).



There's more to it than just that.


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 7, 2014)

EarthDog said:


> It means that the Haswell refresh is only good in Z97, while Haswell is good in Z87 and Z97 (among its other, lower end counter parts).


 
and that anyone buying a Z97 board for Haswell's refresh or the canyon  wont have to upgrade their board on brodwell....  or potentially broad's refresh(if it has one) either......bonus


----------



## EarthDog (May 7, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> There's more to it than just that.


Indeed, was just clarifying what I thought the original context was.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 7, 2014)

ensabrenoir said:


> and that anyone buying a Z97 board for Haswell's refresh or the canyon  wont have to upgrade their board on brodwell....  or potentially broad's refresh(if it has one) either......bonus




Well that would be an interesting twist to Intel's new chip, needs new mobo ideology.


----------



## TheHunter (May 7, 2014)

EarthDog said:


> It means that the Haswell refresh is only good in Z97, while Haswell is good in Z87 and Z97 (among its other, lower end counter parts).


Haswell refresh works on z87 too, imei bios firmware update and its ready. 

Apparently even Broadwell, same procedure. 
Intel REP said it in one video back in  September 2013; " One you can plug the chips directly into existing systems and 2nd we will have brand new systems (z97) with broad range of fanless desings,.."


But yeah its missing boot guard, sataxpress, tunderbolt, and few tiny bits like better fan control, a little higher ram support up to 3300mhz and some new tools..


At least that's what I saw in one Asus z97deluxe mini review.
http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Motherboards/ASUS-Z97-Deluxe-Motherboard-Review/BIOS-Features-continued
Also finally found out IME, its 9.1.xxx by z97, mine updated to 9.0.30.xx for haswell refresh (Asus update tool), I can manually update to 9.1.xx but I see they're still testing versions.


----------



## GhostRyder (May 8, 2014)

cadaveca said:


> I understand. Yet, SKT1155 and SKT1150 aren't Intel's real enthusiast platform. The fact we have Devil's Canyon coming at all says that Intel has heard feedback like your, and has taken steps to bring real enthusiast chips to the mainstream platform. I am not expecting more than a few MHz extra with Devil's Canyon. That's not really why we have Z97... nor is it beucase of these new Haswell-based CPUs. i7-4790 = i7-2700, and that is all.



Agreed, I am hoping to see some 5.0ghz area again but im not holding my breath.  I was just hoping that temps would be more manageable again like on Sandy Bridge which in my book was the last time I saw some real enthusiast level stuff on something other than the E series platform (Mostly because of that God awful TIM).

Ill be waiting on Haswell-E and hopefully getting whatever is the mid range chip (Fingers crossed there's an 8 core in the 500 range).


----------



## radrok (May 8, 2014)

Yeah I can't wait for X99, I've loved this 3930K which does 5.3 GHz reliably but it is time for more cores.

Could really use them.


----------



## GhostRyder (May 8, 2014)

radrok said:


> Yeah I can't wait for X99, I've loved this 3930K which does 5.3 GHz reliably but it is time for more cores.
> 
> Could really use them.


Yea, I am a bit worried though because now the predictions sound like its going to be 4 core at 3-400, 6 core at 5-600, and 8 core at 1k+ which saddens me because I could never justify spending 1k on a processor chip for my home machine .  No matter what happens though I definitly will be grabbing whatever is the mid range chip unless they do something unexpected and maybe the new MSI Big Band Edition motherboard or Asus Rampage.

BTW 5.3ghz on the 3930K?  Nice, thats an extreme overclock level.


----------



## radrok (May 8, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Yea, I am a bit worried though because now the predictions sound like its going to be 4 core at 3-400, 6 core at 5-600, and 8 core at 1k+ which saddens me because I could never justify spending 1k on a processor chip for my home machine .  No matter what happens though I definitly will be grabbing whatever is the mid range chip unless they do something unexpected and maybe the new MSI Big Band Edition motherboard or Asus Rampage.
> 
> BTW 5.3ghz on the 3930K?  Nice, thats an extreme overclock level.



I hope for a smaller cached CPU like 3930K-3960X. I wouldn't like getting again the X chip, did it once for the 980x (it was worth it though) but they are too expensive.

Binned two CPUs to get this nice 3930K, I admit I was rather lucky. It still doesn't show degradation, it also keeps up with 2400 MHz on its IMC like a champ!


----------



## GhostRyder (May 10, 2014)

radrok said:


> I hope for a smaller cached CPU like 3930K-3960X. I wouldn't like getting again the X chip, did it once for the 980x (it was worth it though) but they are too expensive.
> 
> Binned two CPUs to get this nice 3930K, I admit I was rather lucky. It still doesn't show degradation, it also keeps up with 2400 MHz on its IMC like a champ!


Same, I have never seen the point of those X series chips as much anymore due to the huge price difference without having much of a gain.  The scenarios that chip would be useful I just feel a Xeon would be just as good or better.

I like the mid range E chips, they are real power house chips with good clocking and a ton of power.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 10, 2014)

GhostRyder said:


> Same, I have never seen the point of those X series chips as much anymore due to the huge price difference without having much of a gain.  The scenarios that chip would be useful I just feel a Xeon would be just as good or better.


Actually there is a pretty distinct segment difference between the two.
Xeon's are multiplier locked. You typically get between 300 and 900MHz from Turbo on a Xeon depending on number of cores involved, and that's it for the most part. You'll also pay handsomely for a Xeon that has a core count and clock speed in the same neighbourhood as an Extreme Edition i7. If you need a better runtime guarantee, maybe a larger cache, and ECC and/or high density memory support then a Xeon fits the bill, but a typical i7 EE user tends more toward overclocking + multi GPU. You can certainly use the i7 platform for workstation use, but the lower price trades off against the much reduced system memory limits- both in density and channels if you take the (LGA2011) Xeon's 2P operation into account.


----------



## radrok (May 10, 2014)

Lovely times when LGA 1366 Xeons were BCLK unlocked, you could put them on an SR-2, reach 4.5GHz on both, and have a multithreaded beast.


----------



## HumanSmoke (May 10, 2014)

radrok said:


> Lovely times when LGA 1366 Xeons were BCLK unlocked, you could put them on an SR-2, reach 4.5GHz on both, and have a multithreaded beast.


Yes, I think the benchmarking fraternity is still mourning the passing of days of the Westmere Xeon. Pity Intel couldn't have had at least one or two unlocked LGA2011's - you'd think the PR would outweigh any cost. If Intel can come up with a special SKU for what amounts to a sole deployment (the E5-2692v2 for the Chinese HPC centre), you'd think that the world's enthusiasts should warrant at least the same consideration.


----------



## GhostRyder (May 10, 2014)

HumanSmoke said:


> Actually


Actually that was my *opinion* you took out of context of that entire conversation I was having with someone else about what I would buy and the k vs x chips.




radrok said:


> Lovely times when LGA 1366 Xeons were BCLK unlocked, you could put them on an SR-2, reach 4.5GHz on both, and have a multithreaded beast.


Indeed, though it's sad to see them go it's from intels newer perspective. Similar to nvidia, it's all about keeping all the markets completely separate to give very little wiggle room.  I doubt we will ever see those again except in some weird thing like with the pentium anniversary chip.


----------

