# Intel Core i7 "Haswell-E" Processor Lineup Detailed



## btarunr (May 27, 2014)

Intel's next-generation Core i7 "Haswell-E" HEDT (high-end desktop) processor lineup, slated for later this year, accompanied by the company's X99 Express chipset, will launch at three price-points, predictably, succeeding the current Core i7-4820K, i7-4930K, and i7-4960X. The platform will herald a new LGA socket, which will have 2,011 pins, but will not be compatible with current LGA2011 platforms based on the X79 Express chipset. That's because "Haswell-E" will be among the first client platforms to support DDR4-SDRAM memory. All Haswell-E chips will support DDR4-2133 MHz out of the box. 

Moving on to the actual lineup, and it begins with the Core i7-5820K. This is a six-core chip, and a welcome departure from Intel's sub-$400 HEDT chips being quad-core. Whether it supports HyperThreading, is not known. You still get 6 physical cores to plow through work. The chip also features a staggering 15 MB of L3 cache, clock speed of 3.30 GHz with a couple of notches of Turbo Boost, and a quad-channel DDR4 integrated memory controller. Oh, and there's the unlocked BClk multiplier. Sounds too good to be true for a sub-$400 chip? Here's the catch - its on-die PCI-Express Gen 3.0 root complex will have fewer lanes. It can spare just 16 + 8 lanes for discrete graphics cards. For boards with three long x16 slots, that would mean x16/NC/x8, or x8/x8/x8, with an additional x4 link.



Next up, is Intel's $600-ish Haswell-E HEDT chip, the Core i7-5930K. Like the i7-5820K, this is a six-core chip, but could feature HyperThreading. It has the same 15 MB L3 cache, and quad-channel DDR4 IMC. It offers higher clock speeds, of 3.50 GHz. Unlike the i7-5820K, it features a full-fledged PCIe root complex, giving out two x16 links, and one x8 link. This would be ideal for 4-GPU setups in which the two x16 links split up as x8/x8/x8/x8, with a fifth long slot still having an x8 link, to drive high-bandwidth SSDs.

Leading the pack, at a four-figure price, will be the Core i7-5960X. This is an eight-core chip with HyperThreading, enabling 16 logical CPUs. The eight cores are cushioned by a massive 20 MB L3 cache. The chip runs at lower clock speeds than its smaller siblings, at 3.00 GHz, and features the same 40-lane PCI-Express root complex as the i7-5930K. 

All three chips feature TDP rated at 140W. 





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Aquinus (May 27, 2014)

Gimping PCI-E? I would rather have the 5820k not be a k and not have an unlocked multiplier instead of having fewer PCI-E lanes.

Real question: How legitimate do you really think the source is? Also no ECC support? That's weird for HEDT.


----------



## dj-electric (May 27, 2014)

If the cheapest 8-core CPU will really cost north of 800$, intel will tear my year-long anticipation apart.


----------



## buggalugs (May 27, 2014)

Looks pretty accurate to me....

Most HEDT platforms of the past don't support ECC, that's usually reserved for the Xeon platforms.

 It looks like an expensive platform, we cant even use our old memory anymore and no doubt DDR4 will be expensive at first. Well, hopefully the performance is there, I'm prepared to pay if the performance is there.


----------



## Aquinus (May 27, 2014)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> If the cheapest 8-core CPU will really cost north of 800$, intel will tear my year-long anticipation apart.


You could always get a board with an 8c/8t Atom? 
I know what you mean though, not that most consumers needs that kind of multithreaded power.


----------



## TheBrainyOne (May 27, 2014)

Considering the price difference between the 5820K and 5930K I am 100% sure that the 5820K doesn't have Hyper Threading.


----------



## Aquinus (May 27, 2014)

buggalugs said:


> Looks pretty accurate to me....
> 
> Most HEDT platforms of the past don't support ECC, that's usually reserved for the Xeon platforms.
> 
> It looks like an expensive platform, we cant even use our old memory anymore and no doubt DDR4 will be expensive at first. Well, hopefully the performance is there, I'm prepared to pay if the performance is there.



I stand corrected. The i7s don't support hardware ECC on memory, but if you threw a Xeon in the same board, it would. I suspect if you put ECC DIMMs in and it worked, it probably wouldn't be doing hardware level ECC so it would probably slow down quite a bit.


----------



## BorisDG (May 27, 2014)

btarunr said:


> four-figure price, will be the Core i7-5960X.


Let me think... mm 1300$+  No point to be "just" 1000$ as 6 core.


----------



## buildzoid (May 27, 2014)

Aquinus said:


> Gimping PCI-E? I would rather have the 5820k not be a k and not have an unlocked multiplier instead of having fewer PCI-E lanes.
> 
> Real question: How legitimate do you really think the source is? Also no ECC support? That's weird for HEDT.


The 3820 3930K 3960X 4820K 4930K and 4960X don't support ECC so that's normal for HEDT as of 2011.


----------



## BorisDG (May 27, 2014)

buildzoid said:


> The 3820 3930K 3960X 4820K 4930K and 4960X don't support ECC so that's normal for HEDT as of 2011.


970/980(X)/990X also doesn't have ECC as I know.


----------



## Breit (May 27, 2014)

The first Intel HEDT CPU where the higher price tag for the X-version is kind of justified with 2 additional cores? Count me in!


----------



## Aquinus (May 27, 2014)

Wow. Huge correction on my part. I saw ECC settings on one my AMD rigs, not my Intel one. I clearly need to drink my coffee before posting.


----------



## RejZoR (May 27, 2014)

Finally 8 cores (+HT). It seemed like we're gonna be stuck with quad cores forever...


----------



## radrok (May 27, 2014)

So it does now make sense to buy the X CPU. You've finally grasped it Intel (at our expense though ).


----------



## sunweb (May 27, 2014)

Intel 
Before that we had 
x930K HT + non crippled PCIe + abit more cache + 2 more cores comparing with x820K
x820K HT + non crippled PCIe

Now x930K will have same cores ammount and so that people would still buy it over x820K they'll cripple x820K beyond the belief taking out HT? *uck you Intel!

So we don't have $600 8 core + HT chip and $400 6 core + HT, there is no point to touch this overpriced $1000 CPU to have real 8 cores and no point to upgrade the lesser ones.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (May 27, 2014)

sunweb said:


> Intel
> Before that we had
> x930K HT + non crippled PCIe + abit more cache + 2 more cores comparing with x820K
> x820K HT + non crippled PCIe
> ...



The lack of competition from AMD is saying its word.

I'm all the time saying that YOU should be very careful what you are buying not to cause monopoly.

The same would happen if you continue to buy nvidia videocards and make AMD even weaker. No one will benefit in the long term.


----------



## romeg (May 27, 2014)

The last thing I need is a $1,000+ 8 core CPU with all the necessary trimmings. That said, I fully intend to build such a system. Desire is all I have to justify such a build, but that is sufficient in and of itself. Most importantly, though, is my wife has actually encouraged me to go "uptown" (we're both 63 btw) so with such a green light as that, who am I to argue?

Seriously, I'm more curious than anything about how well MSFT Flight Simulators 9 & 10 will run. I probably won't notice anything more than an increase in frames over my current overclocked 4770K. I was a private pilot for 35 years until I failed the physical. Now the PC is the only thing I can fly, so there lies my passion and my obsession to see if each new PC generation can make things just a little bit better.

I'm planning to build a Z97/4970K system next month (or whenever) and when the Haswell-Es come out, my existing 4770K rig will be handed down to our one of our seven grandkids.


----------



## ensabrenoir (May 27, 2014)

SOOOO looking forward to playing with some new tech.......Not looking forward to endless post about amd comparisons , prices and the necessity of it.  
 @ Romeg hope to still be doing the same thing when i'm your ag.... level of life experience.


----------



## Sinzia (May 27, 2014)

The more I look at this the happier I am with a 2600k and an Asus P8z77-WS with the PLX chip. I was really thinking about going for a lower end x99 cpu for the more lanes, but if its gimped like that then I simply won't bother.


----------



## chodaboy19 (May 27, 2014)

The 8-core looks like a strong contender when paired up with a Gen3 PCIe M.2 SSD.


----------



## HM_Actua1 (May 27, 2014)

Skip!!!

I'll wait until we get up to 8 or 10 cores


----------



## FX-GMC (May 27, 2014)

Hitman_Actual said:


> Skip!!!
> 
> I'll wait until we get up to *8* or 10 cores



Up to 8 cores you say?
Did you even read the OP?



> Leading the pack, at a four-figure price, will be the Core i7-5960X. This is an* eight-core (8)* chip with HyperThreading, enabling 16 logical CPUs.


----------



## HM_Actua1 (May 27, 2014)

FX-GMC said:


> Up to 8 cores you say?
> Did you even read the OP?




yes I did,

Not paying 1k for a 8core X

when the next line up will have K with 8 or 10 cores


----------



## Octavean (May 27, 2014)

One thing is clear as it has ever been.  Intel always hobbles and compromises the entry level in such a way as to make it unpalatable. Limiting the PCIe lanes was unexpected IMO but we knew Intel would do something to make the customer make hard choices between price and performance. 

The mid level having fewer cores then the high-end wasn't entirely unexpected IMO since I was expecting anywhere from (entry level, mid, high-end) (4/8, 6/12, 8/16) (6/12, 8/16, 8/16) (6/12, 6/12, 8/16).

Currently I have an Intel Core i7 3930K which IMO is a great chip that has served me well for years. The mid level would be what I would typically buy but this time around the entry level is catching my interest if it is a 6 core 12 thread part at ~$300 USD.

I hear the speculation that the entry level Haswell-E Core i7 5820K wouldn't have HT but that seems a little over the top coupled with the PCIe limitations IMO.   Without HT the Haswell-E Core i7 5820K should be named "Core i*5* 5820K.  Cutting the PCIe lanes is going too far but cutting the PCIe lanes and removing HT is really going way, way, wayyyyyy too far.   So I am skeptical of this.

More PCIe lanes is the one thing that many mainstream users would step up to a HED for but since these same people often settle for less in the mainstream its not necessarily like they are losing anything if they go for a Haswell-E Core i7 5820K



Sony Xperia S said:


> The lack of competition from AMD is saying its word.
> 
> I'm all the time saying that YOU should be very careful what you are buying not to cause monopoly.
> 
> The same would happen if you continue to buy nvidia videocards and make AMD even weaker. No one will benefit in the long term.



Controlling / limiting monopolies is the the domain of a governing body. Its not the job of individual citizens.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (May 27, 2014)

Octavean said:


> Controlling / limiting monopolies is the the domain of a governing body. Its not the job of individual citizens.



I thought you would say that it was up to the market to decide. Well, you are part of the market. 



Hitman_Actual said:


> yes I did,
> 
> Not paying 1k for a 8core X
> 
> when the next line up will have K with 8 or 10 cores



I understand you.  

You want a 5770K with 10 cores, 20 threads.  For $350.


----------



## Octavean (May 27, 2014)

Hitman_Actual said:


> yes I did,
> 
> Not paying 1k for a 8core X
> 
> when the next line up will have K with 8 or 10 cores



Perhaps but I remember when many people were saying the same thing about 6 cores.  Now we are on the cusp of the possibility of a fairly cheap 6 core Intel Core i7 processor and a lot of people are figuratively looking that gift horse square in the mouth because it doesn't have more PCIe lanes then the typical mainstream quad core,.......and because an 8 core is being dangled in their face.

The thing is this. Whenever a new lineup comes out like this everyone has eyes for the highest end option but few are willing to pay for it.  As things change and the tech they wanted becomes more affordable a new lineup comes out and expectations change. People lose sight of that cheap 6 core processor they wanted when they first heard about Gulftown 970, 980X and Sandy Bridge-E and then move their sights to new unattainable,.....


----------



## Sony Xperia S (May 27, 2014)

Six-core processors are salvage parts, aren't they? Specially binned because of defective dies or intentionally crippled for marketing reasons, to force you to pay more for the real deal, or to pay less but to get less at the same time too. 

I understand why people don't want them.


----------



## Assimilator (May 27, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> The lack of competition from AMD is saying its word.
> 
> I'm all the time saying that YOU should be very careful what you are buying not to cause monopoly.
> 
> The same would happen if you continue to buy nvidia videocards and make AMD even weaker. No one will benefit in the long term.



AMD is weak because they can't make a CPU that doesn't suck balls. That is entirely their fault, not the consumer's or Intel's or Barack Obama's. It also isn't the consumer's responsibility to prop up companies that can't compete.


----------



## repman244 (May 27, 2014)

romeg said:


> Seriously, I'm more curious than anything about how well MSFT Flight Simulators 9 & 10 will run. I probably won't notice anything more than an increase in frames over my current overclocked 4770K. I was a private pilot for 35 years until I failed the physical. Now the PC is the only thing I can fly, so there lies my passion and my obsession to see if each new PC generation can make things just a little bit better.



FSX only uses 2 cores mostly so you won't see an increase with haswell-E IMO. Best to wait for the next generation and see if single thread performance goes up.


----------



## 15th Warlock (May 27, 2014)

Geez, $1K is the ticket price for desktop 8 core from Intel? Shame on you Intel 

Was hoping for the mid class Haswell-E to be at least an 8 core, considering there are already Xeons that go to 12 cores, even the high end enthusiast desktop parts are stagnating due to lack of competition.

That makes Haswell-E a though pill to swallow, heard rumors about some unlocked Xeons coming down the line, but those are probably going to be really expensive too.

Unless DDR4 offers a quantum leap in terms of performance, I don't see much reason to drop my X79 rig, it even offers the same number of PCIe lanes and I don't need m.2 as my RAID 0 SSDs have given me for almost two years the same level of performance PCIe m.2 drives are barely starting to offer.

Such a disappointment....


----------



## techy1 (May 27, 2014)

I assume that, this table at end of the article did appear only after first 20  - cuz there is information about HT and core count and x820 will have same 6 cores and HT as x930. the PCIe line trimming for cheaper version is unexpected, but hey - if I am gona shed my cash for x99 platrorm with "golden" DDR4's, with multi GPU setup (why the hell else I need those 40 lines?) and maybe some PCIe SSD - that 200$ premium for x930 will make no significant difference in my budget... I mean - LGA2011 was meant never for budget oriented people, it always was for enthusiasts (by the way E - Enthusiast)  who are ready to shed tremendos amounts of $$$ just to get something few precent faster / better


----------



## HM_Actua1 (May 27, 2014)

Octavean said:


> Perhaps but I remember when many people were saying the same thing about 6 cores.  Now we are on the cusp of the possibility of a fairly cheap 6 core Intel Core i7 processor and a lot of people are figuratively looking that gift horse square in the mouth because it doesn't have more PCIe lanes then the typical mainstream quad core,.......and because an 8 core is being dangled in their face.
> 
> The thing is this. Whenever a new lineup comes out like this everyone has eyes for the highest end option but few are willing to pay for it.  As things change and the tech they wanted becomes more affordable a new lineup comes out and expectations change. People lose sight of that cheap 6 core processor they wanted when they first heard about Gulftown 970, 980X and Sandy Bridge-E and then move their sights to new unattainable,.....



That is why I'm waiting to see what's down the line.. Skylake.


----------



## Kyuuba (May 27, 2014)

The only way to Intel drop prices is AMD beating them in a long term for the extreme processor and that day is faaaarrr faaarrrr away from happening.


----------



## TheHunter (May 27, 2014)

Hitman_Actual said:


> That is why I'm waiting to see what's down the line.. Skylake.



Yeah, X99 looks like it will be here for a long time, just like x79.

Haswell-E >> Skylake-E


There is no Broadwell-E DT, only for servers EX, al least according to wiki lol


I might upgrade to skylake-e 8core then, should be mainstream like this 5820K now,. Hopefully higher base clock at least 3.7ghz full load..

Imo this 3.3ghz now is kinda low for a 8core, Haswell per core performance starts to shine ~4.5ghz+  at 4.8-4.9ghz it goes berserk


----------



## Octavean (May 27, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> Six-core processors are salvage parts, aren't they? Specially binned because of defective dies or intentionally crippled for marketing reasons, to force you to pay more for the real deal, or to pay less but to get less at the same time too.
> 
> I understand why people don't want them.



Your making a reasonable assumption since we heard in advance that Haswell-E would be 6 and 8 core plus.   However, when Sandy Bridge-E was launched in late 2011 there was the Core i7  3960X and the Core i7 3930K. The Core i7 3820 became available later and had a different die so it wasn't just a binned and cut part that didn't initially perform to expectations. 

However, as I said before its a readable assumption.

As to why people may or may not want it is likely an individual decision.   Personally, right now I'd probably take a Core i7 5820K over a  Core i7 4770K or Core i7 4790K but I would have to know a bit more to be 100% sure.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 27, 2014)

techy1 said:


> I assume that, this table at end of the article did appear only after first 20  - cuz there is information about HT and core count and x820 will have same 6 cores and HT as x930. the PCIe line trimming for cheaper version is unexpected, but hey - if I am gona shed my cash for x99 platrorm with "golden" DDR4's, with multi GPU setup (why the hell else I need those 40 lines?) and maybe some PCIe SSD - that 200$ premium for x930 will make no significant difference in my budget... I mean - LGA2011 was meant never for budget oriented people, it always was for enthusiasts (by the way E - Enthusiast)  who are ready to shed tremendos amounts of $$$ just to get something few precent faster / better



That's just the thing, Intel is shooting themselves in the face by reducing the number of PCIe lanes on the entry chip.  Don't they realize how many customers they have "up-sized" in the past looking for just an incremental jump up to the "Enthusiast" platform?  Makes no sense to neuter your high end platform by segmenting it, unless they plan to create a sub-category?  

First the x79 debacle, now this.  Broadwell and Skylake to the rescue!


----------



## bogami (May 27, 2014)

Regardless of the new technologies can not come to terms with the behavior of these greedy pigs . So, only $ 1,000 will be received 8 cores .Intel has long been on other products behaves as if the best but we know that does not even remotely ( SSD, Motherboards.. ) where the price far exceeds the specified quality. Unfortunately, the Pentium CPU has no real competition and them are doing whatever they wants with the price and supply.  Looks like it's start behaving like INVIDIA and will be , until they AMD will cut there wings . The production cost are not  exceed $ 10 really .Deem arrogant behavior of if you know it will sell millions of pieces.
Personal adequately experienced !!. When my i72600K canceled I sent representations because it was still under warranty . I72600 I get back !! instead i72600K ! regardless of the account which confirms the model dared to say that I did not have this model ! They were not even able to return consigned model which just goes to show how messed up everything and then they sent me the same model ( i72600 ) costs grew and grew but at the end of the antenna I do not have the right model yet and will not ... .Representatives of these reputable firms are regular drinkers who do not know how to read . They do not talk about greed which exceeds any normal rate. This is not Xsenon server processor to bee so ...
We need a revolution, not technological but ethical .


----------



## GhostRyder (May 27, 2014)

radrok said:


> So it does now make sense to buy the X CPU. You've finally grasped it Intel (at our expense though ).


Agreed, at least they added a better benefit to the X series chips.


15th Warlock said:


> Geez, $1K is the ticket price for desktop 8 core from Intel? Shame on you Intel
> 
> Was hoping for the mid class Haswell-E to be at least an 8 core, considering there are already Xeons that go to 12 cores, even the high end enthusiast desktop parts are stagnating due to lack of competition.
> 
> ...


Im with you though on this, im very disappointed in the fact that the 8 core chip does not have a mid range price tag.  I had a feeling it was going to be this way with 2 entry level 6 cores and the 8 being the top dog but I had hoped to see the 8 core in a mid range offering (Err middle price, however you want to phrase it).  I guess I will be grabbing that middle ground 6 core Haswell-E and being happy with it, just really wanted that 8 core 16 thread offering but I could never justify a desktop processor that costs 1000 bucks roughly unless im paying for a nice Xeon.

Glad to see though they are dropping the Quad core, its no longer necessary on the E series lineup in this day and age since the regular i7 lineup already has that area pretty well handled in my book.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (May 27, 2014)

Assimilator said:


> AMD is weak because they can't make a CPU that doesn't suck balls. That is entirely their fault, not the consumer's or Intel's or Barack Obama's.



AMD's processors are good enough at their respective price points. For instance, the AMD A10-7850K Kaveri 3.7GHz Socket FM2+ 95W Desktop Processor AMD Radeon R7 series AD785KXBJABOX costs $170. 

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...STMATCH&Description=AMD+7850K&N=-1&isNodeId=1

What better do you offer for this money?
You can't deny that in lower mainstream markets, Intel has no competitve advantage at all but people still blindly buy them because of the halo effect coming from the upper tiers.

You need not only to excuse yourself with that argument but also to support the clause. If you understand what I mean.


----------



## Aquinus (May 27, 2014)

Octavean said:


> Your making a reasonable assumption since we heard in advance that Haswell-E would be 6 and 8 core plus.   However, when Sandy Bridge-E was launched in late 2011 there was the Core i7  3960X and the Core i7 3930K. The Core i7 3820 became available later and had a different die so it wasn't just a binned and cut part that didn't initially perform to expectations.
> 
> However, as I said before its a readable assumption.
> 
> As to why people may or may not want it is likely an individual decision.   Personally, right now I'd probably take a Core i7 5820K over a  Core i7 4770K or Core i7 4790K but I would have to know a bit more to be 100% sure.



For all of these people complaining about the cost of an 8c/16t CPU, what are you doing that needs that kind of power? It's not gaming, that's for sure. 

Also, I think it would be wise to wait for DDR4 to come out first and see how it goes. Jumping on the first revision of something is never a great plan, even more so if DDR4 ends up being initially slower than DDR3, much like how DDR2 and DDR3 speeds (at the time of DDR3's release,) were marginal.

People can complain about what Intel is doing as much as they want, but complaints aside, I've been very happy with my 3820 and X79 despite all the flack people have given it and if I could have waited and got another, more modern, machine, I don't think I would have. It may be a while before I upgrade.


----------



## midnightoil (May 27, 2014)

No way they cut HT from it.  Performance would be dire relative to price in a lot of software and load conditions, since most highly threaded software is written to expect Hyperthreading / 8+ threads from Intel chips and has been for a long time.

The PCI-e gimping is actually fairly welcome, given that some kind of gimping was expected.  It won't be an option for people wanting 4 or more GPUs, but people wanting some CPU grunt and only 1 or 2 GPUs - great.  Hopefully it'll actually encourage mobo makers to produce a broader range of more affordable boards, too, since the bottom part should be massively more popular than the 2 that preceeded it (3820k and 4820k).

My only hope is that they don't price gouge as much as they are with Ivy-E ... price increases for a much, much cheaper to produce (than Sandy-E) CPU series.


----------



## MikeMurphy (May 27, 2014)

romeg said:


> The last thing I need is a $1,000+ 8 core CPU with all the necessary trimmings. That said, I fully intend to build such a system. Desire is all I have to justify such a build, but that is sufficient in and of itself. Most importantly, though, is my wife has actually encouraged me to go "uptown" (we're both 63 btw) so with such a green light as that, who am I to argue?
> 
> Seriously, I'm more curious than anything about how well MSFT Flight Simulators 9 & 10 will run. I probably won't notice anything more than an increase in frames over my current overclocked 4770K. I was a private pilot for 35 years until I failed the physical. Now the PC is the only thing I can fly, so there lies my passion and my obsession to see if each new PC generation can make things just a little bit better.
> 
> I'm planning to build a Z97/4970K system next month (or whenever) and when the Haswell-Es come out, my existing 4770K rig will be handed down to our one of our seven grandkids.



I doubt you'll notice any performance improvement.  Overclocked 4770K is already a monster.  You'd probably be better off spending the money on new graphics card(s).


----------



## MikeMurphy (May 27, 2014)

midnightoil said:


> No way they cut HT from it.  Performance would be dire relative to price in a lot of software and load conditions, since most highly threaded software is written to expect Hyperthreading / 8+ threads from Intel chips and has been for a long time.
> 
> The PCI-e gimping is actually fairly welcome, given that some kind of gimping was expected.  It won't be an option for people wanting 4 or more GPUs, but people wanting some CPU grunt and only 1 or 2 GPUs - great.  Hopefully it'll actually encourage mobo makers to produce a broader range of more affordable boards, too, since the bottom part should be massively more popular than the 2 that preceeded it (3820k and 4820k).
> 
> My only hope is that they don't price gouge as much as they are with Ivy-E ... price increases for a much, much cheaper to produce (than Sandy-E) CPU series.



Not much real gimping given it's PCIe 3.0 which doubles the bandwidth, again.  It still offers two GPUs with equivalent throughput as 16 PCIe lanes for each.


----------



## xenocide (May 28, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> AMD's processors are good enough at their respective price points. For instance, the AMD A10-7850K Kaveri 3.7GHz Socket FM2+ 95W Desktop Processor AMD Radeon R7 series AD785KXBJABOX costs $170.
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/ProductList.aspx?Submit=ENE&DEPA=0&Order=BESTMATCH&Description=AMD 7850K&N=-1&isNodeId=1
> 
> What better do you offer for this money?


 
An i3 or the new DC Pentium when it launches.  In terms of actual performance an i3 will match the CPU portion of the A10 with ease, and if you can pair it with even a cheap discrete card you get better performance on all fronts for slightly more.  The major draw for APU's is that you can get a cheap setup that offers acceptable performance, and add a dedicated GPU to crossfire later, but that crossfire solution is mostly a dud since an i3 with the same card will outperm it in almost all situations.  You're also ignoring the fact that you can run an Intel CPU on pretty low-end RAM (which has been going up in price) but to get the advertised performance of an APU you need DDR3-2133 which tacks easily $40-50 onto the price of the system.

The new Devil's Canyon Pentium is looking like it is positioned to take down Kaveri.  A sub-$100 2c/4t Haswell CPU will basically mean you can get a dedicated GPU and the Pentium (which will perform like an i3) for the price of a Kaveri setup.


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (May 28, 2014)

*slow clap*

The problem here isn't another platform, it's too little too late.  Intel seemed to give-up on X79 pre-launch.  If you don't believe that, then look at the planned feature list as opposed to what was actually delivered.  They didn't even release a new PCH with IB-e.  That smacks of forgetting about the HEDT platform, because it doesn't move as many units.

Now, Haswell has had a refresh complete with a new PCH.  Seems odd that Intel could do that, but their HEDT platform is languishing.

Now Intel announces a completely new strategy.  The "enthusiast" will be catered to.  They intend to do this by releasing Haswell-e with a host of new technologies, releasing binned chips with decent TIM (at an increased cost), and delivering "new" chips regularly.  Color me unimpressed.


I've had everything from SB to Haswell, and SB-e.  Nothing released in the last 5 years from Intel really needs replacing yet, and this isn't going to make me want to spend any more cash.  DDR4 is likely to suffer price hiking and low performance when it comes out.  The holding hostage of PCI-e lanes in favor of more cores is absurd, and the nearly 67% difference in price between K and X processors, with a 33% difference in core count, is absurd.


Hopefully Skylake is worth looking at.  So far everything since SB has been a massive let-down.  SB did set the bar unusually high, but Intel hasn't done anything since then but cheapen production price and fix sales price to consumers.  A sub-10% difference between processor generations is a paltry reason to buy a whole new platform.


Edit:
Spelling.  I didn't catch the "buy," that came out as a but.


----------



## matar (May 28, 2014)

Ok intel now we have to pay Over $1000 to get an 8-core CPU = Bad Move...


----------



## Prima.Vera (May 28, 2014)

romeg said:


> The last thing I need is a $1,000+ 8 core CPU with all the necessary trimmings. That said, I fully intend to build such a system. Desire is all I have to justify such a build, but that is sufficient in and of itself. Most importantly, though, is my wife has actually encouraged me to go "uptown" (we're both 63 btw) so with such a green light as that, who am I to argue?
> 
> Seriously, I'm more curious than anything about how well MSFT Flight Simulators 9 & 10 will run. I probably won't notice anything more than an increase in frames over my current overclocked 4770K. I was a private pilot for 35 years until I failed the physical. Now the PC is the only thing I can fly, so there lies my passion and my obsession to see if each new PC generation can make things just a little bit better.
> 
> I'm planning to build a Z97/4970K system next month (or whenever) and when the Haswell-Es come out, my existing 4770K rig will be handed down to our one of our seven grandkids.



Sorry friend, but you would make A HUGE MISTAKE!! An enormous one. There is 0 (zero) point in upgrading your CPU at the moment. For games 4770K still is one of the fastest CPU ever. I would recommend you to buy just a new videocard and that's it. Just check the latest reviews on WatchDogs, Wolfenstein, BF4, etc. There is almost no difference in performance between different generations and types of Intel's CPU's.

Don't throw away your money useless.


----------



## theo2021 (May 28, 2014)

I Believe the X will be a beast because if you look at the clocks it's 3Ghz
and the others are 3+ . When it's basically the same architecture, but they under clocked it to maintain the 
appropriate TDP . If you OC this beast with water cooling It's gonna reach 4.5 + on 8 cores.
No use to by it if you will not heading for overclock since the performance per core is better on the others
unless you need those extra cores, but there aren't many programs that will benefit from them.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (May 28, 2014)

xenocide said:


> An i3 or the new DC Pentium when it launches.  In terms of actual performance an i3 will match the CPU portion of the A10 with ease, and if you can pair it with even a cheap discrete card you get better performance on all fronts for slightly more.  The major draw for APU's is that you can get a cheap setup that offers acceptable performance, and add a dedicated GPU to crossfire later, but that crossfire solution is mostly a dud since an i3 with the same card will outperm it in almost all situations.  You're also ignoring the fact that you can run an Intel CPU on pretty low-end RAM (which has been going up in price) but to get the advertised performance of an APU you need DDR3-2133 which tacks easily $40-50 onto the price of the system.
> 
> The new Devil's Canyon Pentium is looking like it is positioned to take down Kaveri.  A sub-$100 2c/4t Haswell CPU will basically mean you can get a dedicated GPU and the Pentium (which will perform like an i3) for the price of a Kaveri setup.



I call bullshit on all you just typed.

It is possible only by malicious people intentionally wanting to do damage on AMD.

Or by AMD haters only, reserved.


----------



## Scrizz (May 28, 2014)

lawl, So I have to spend $1000+ to upgrade for 2 more cores?

*SOLD!*

maybe I'll keep the new setup as long as my x58 rig.


----------



## Hilux SSRG (May 28, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> I call bullshit on all you just typed.
> 
> It is possible only by malicious people intentionally wanting to do damage on AMD.
> 
> Or by AMD haters only, reserved.




Your response is bullshit.  Did you comment on the article linked by xenocide?  Have you read it?  It looks like AMD priced the A10-7850k too high for what it offers in crossfire situations.  And the anniversary Pentium does indeed look to be an unlocked i3, at a great price point.  Intel could charge $100 instead of $80 and it would still sell well.


----------



## slim142 (May 28, 2014)

Ok but when are these coming out?

Im trying to upgrade my Core 2 Quad already.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (May 29, 2014)

slim142 said:


> Ok but when are these coming out?
> 
> Im trying to upgrade my Core 2 Quad already.



Oh, you will have a splendid upgrade with the fastest AMD FX 8350 CPU for just $190.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...3284&cm_re=amd_fx_8350-_-19-113-284-_-Product

It is super amazing as benchmarks clearly show:

http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages/amd_a10_7850k_apu_review,13.html

I will buy it for me, and all my relatives and friends who need a cheap and very fast desktop.


----------



## Aquinus (May 30, 2014)

Am I the only person bothered by the *lack* of a 4c option? Despite everyone's enthusiasm for more cores, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that some people are getting the platform for the PCI-E lanes and not necessarily more cores? I guess there will probably be a 4c Xeon option, but still I've been plenty happy with my 3820 and it's ability to overclock (not that I really need to,) and I would imagine a 4c Haswell-E consumer CPU could fly if it existed.


----------



## slim142 (May 30, 2014)

Sony Xperia S said:


> Oh, you will have a splendid upgrade with the fastest AMD FX 8350 CPU for just $190.
> 
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produ...3284&cm_re=amd_fx_8350-_-19-113-284-_-Product
> 
> ...



Thanks man, but I rather wait until AMD gets back in the game like they did in the AMD 64 days.


----------



## Prima.Vera (May 30, 2014)

slim142 said:


> Ok but when are these coming out?
> 
> Im trying to upgrade my Core 2 Quad already.


Just go for the 4770K or 4790K, and you wont need any upgrade for the next 5 years.


----------



## Sony Xperia S (May 30, 2014)

slim142 said:


> Thanks man, but I rather wait until AMD gets back in the game like they did in the AMD 64 days.



Маn, АМD is certainly in the game, if you go to see the reviews, you will notice how high the performance from the 8-core FX is, especially in those applications optimised for multi-threading, that is certainly future-proof.

People wrongly undervalue AMD but even Google thinks smart, like me: 

_Why is Google tinkering with a brand new microprocessor? “We’re really driven by an aggressive demand. The growth at Google has been very significant,” McKean says. In other words, Google keeps growing, and so the massive collection of servers that runs Google must keep growing too. Y*es, the company can keep expanding its operation using Intel chips. But it behooves Google to use other chip suppliers. That’s a way to cut costs, but it’s also a way to ensure that the chips it uses just keep getting better. Companies like Google don’t want to rely solely on Intel. They want competition in the market.* They want to play one chip maker off another.

http://www.wired.com/2014/04/openpower/_


----------



## Disparia (May 30, 2014)

Aquinus said:


> Am I the only person bothered by the *lack* of a 4c option? Despite everyone's enthusiasm for more cores, wouldn't it be reasonable to assume that some people are getting the platform for the PCI-E lanes and not necessarily more cores? I guess there will probably be a 4c Xeon option, but still I've been plenty happy with my 3820 and it's ability to overclock (not that I really need to,) and I would imagine a 4c Haswell-E consumer CPU could fly if it existed.



Depends on the final specs. Intel wouldn't have made a 4C cost less, so if the 5820K comes out with HT enabled then no one will wish for less cores. But if it's not enabled there will be some debate whether a 4C/8T chip would have been preferable to a 6C/6T option.


----------



## Am* (May 31, 2014)

Cutting PCIE lanes from a platform built on nothing besides more PCIE lanes is just plain retarded. Turn off HyperThreading on the chip and leave it be on the PCIE lanes -- if not, I can already see the 1-star reviews pop up on sites like Newegg about Intel falsely advertising its platform.


----------

