Intel to Launch Socketed "Broadwell" Processors in mid-2015

[FordGT90Concept]

I hate that these improvements have been so incremental. I've got two 3 year old chipset/cpu's running Ivies, and one Haswell (first gen), and honestly, unless the performance increase is through he roof, I have zero incentive to upgrade.

*cough* Xeon *cough* I hope you have need of 8+ cores though.

 

[15th Warlock]

All I know is I'm skipping broadwell altogether, like I did with ivy bridge, 4% more performance is just not worth it

Will wait for Skylake in 2016

 

[the54thvoid]

I recently ditched any thought of a Chipset upgrade and resurrected my mobo by altering DIMM slot usage (back to 16Gb after a water incident that took out DIMM A1).

I'll skip Broadwell Enthusiast as well methinks (2016 date). No idea if Skylake is even roadmapped to have an enthusiast variant. Either way, I'll be holding onto this 3930K for another year or so. 3 1/2 years and still punching hard (and been running at 4.4GHz all that time).

 

[rtwjunkie]

*cough* Xeon *cough* I hope you have need of 8+ cores though.

LOL, you're referring to my ancient server! Yeah, but as long as it does what I need to, it's staying. It is old enough though that if something breaks on it, it's cheaper to just replace with Haswell or Broadwell stuff.

 

[Beertintedgoggles]

Tantalum is used for the capacitors, not the core. And for doping silicone they use materials with 3 electrons in the other shell (mostly aluminum and Gallium) for the P substrate and materials with 5 electrons ( mostly Phosphorus and Arsenic) for the N substrate, out of them Gallium is a bit rare, but for doping you don't need a lot.

I finally read the whole blurb and now I see what you're talking about.... maybe colossal just doesn't mean what it used to.

 

[rtwjunkie]

I finally read the whole blurb and now I see what you're talking about.... maybe colossal just doesn't mean what it used to.

I think Intel has a valid point, as well as Brusfantomel. However, please try to think of the sheer scale of how many cpu's are made. You start to see where the extremely finite amount of rare earths can be conserved a bit by making true dual cores instead of cut down quads. Every little bit counts..

 

[The Von Matrices]

It looks like Skylake is going to be launched around August, so I would wait for that instead.

www.techpowerup.com/210106/intel-delays-14-nm-skylake-desktop-cpu-launch.html

It's not quite that simple. The Broadwell CPUs in mid 2015 will be the high-end unlocked versions; the Skylake processors that will be released shortly after will be the mid-range and low-end locked versions. The unlocked, high-end Skylake CPUs don't arrive until late 2015 if not 2016.

http://www.techpowerup.com/201936/intel-desktop-cpu-roadmap-updated.html

 

[Octopuss]

I will definitely hang onto my delidded and overclocked 3770K for at least one more year. Plus I learned that buying new tech right after launch is a bad, bad idea on more than one occasion.

 

[qubit]

Yeah, but that is going to require a whole new motherboard. Broadwell will be the upgrade for people that don't want to move to a whole knew platform.

Sure, I'm just talking from my personal point of view. I've got a 2700K and as you've mentioned, the performance improvements have been very small over the last few generations, so it's not worth upgrading.

I really hope Skylake breaks that trend so I can finally upgrade. Such a shame AMD isn't a performance player any more to give Intel some incentive to give us faster processors.

 

[FordGT90Concept]

LOL, you're referring to my ancient server! Yeah, but as long as it does what I need to, it's staying. It is old enough though that if something breaks on it, it's cheaper to just replace with Haswell or Broadwell stuff.

I meant that Intel isn't making 120+w processors for consumer platforms because AMD isn't making them do it and there isn't much demand for it. This is why the top of consumer line is falling in wattage while gaining a little performance. If you want the top of the line performance, you have to go to the Xeon line and spend four digits. So no, I'm not referring to your server at all; I'm point out the consumer market isn't reflective at all of what is available like it was a decade ago. Moore's Law no longer applies to consumer; only enterprise.

My 920 likely isn't all that much slower than these new Broadwell chips but Broadwell is doing it at half to quarter the power. There's no reason why Intel couldn't put out a processor for ~$300 with a 120w TDP and 8-16 cores. But they don't, because they'd rather charge $1000-4000 for that chip to server customers.

Meanwhile, AMD puts out 160w chips that barely compete with my ye-old 920. This is what happens when there is no competition.

 

[rtwjunkie]

Yeeeeeeeaaaaaahhhh.....that's quite the premium for those top-flight Xeons. At least we know they CAN make advances.

 

[BorisDG]

All I know is I'm skipping broadwell altogether, like I did with ivy bridge, 4% more performance is just not worth it

Will wait for Skylake in 2016

Really? Haswell was meh - hot and bad clocker compared to Sandy Bridge. Broadwell will be just 65W TDP and possibly with Iris Pro graphics. It will be like final optimized version of pre alpha chip called Haswell. But after all Skylake in 2k16 - yes. This year's Skylake will be only BGA/Locked multiplier as I know.

 

[newtekie1]

I meant that Intel isn't making 120+w processors for consumer platforms because AMD isn't making them do it and there isn't much demand for it. This is why the top of consumer line is falling in wattage while gaining a little performance. If you want the top of the line performance, you have to go to the Xeon line and spend four digits. So no, I'm not referring to your server at all; I'm point out the consumer market isn't reflective at all of what is available like it was a decade ago. Moore's Law no longer applies to consumer; only enterprise.

My 920 likely isn't all that much slower than these new Broadwell chips but Broadwell is doing it at half to quarter the power. There's no reason why Intel couldn't put out a processor for ~$300 with a 120w TDP and 8-16 cores. But they don't, because they'd rather charge $1000-4000 for that chip to server customers.

Meanwhile, AMD puts out 160w chips that barely compete with my ye-old 920. This is what happens when there is no competition.

You're 920 is in the "Pro-sumer" line. So to really be fair, you have to look at 2011-3 processors, and those start at 140w.

But, yes, I'll definitely agree with your sentiment that in the mainstream consumer line Intel has been focused on lowering power consumption more than raising performance.

 

[15th Warlock]

Really? Haswell was meh - hot and bad clocker compared to Sandy Bridge. Broadwell will be just 65W TDP and possibly with Iris Pro graphics. It will be like final optimized version of pre alpha chip called Haswell. But after all Skylake in 2k16 - yes. This year's Skylake will be only BGA/Locked multiplier as I know.

Well, due to the timing of my upgrades, I usually get the "tock" version of whatever Intel releases. Yes, I have three Haswell rigs currently, and they serve me just fine. I can't justify upgrading to Broadwell for just 4% more performance, so unless Broadwell turns out to be a monster of an overclocker, I'll just skip it entirely.

And to be honest, I couldn't care less about Iris Pro graphics, waste of silicon in the desktop space in my opinion.

 

[Octopuss]

I highly doubt first generation of Core CPUs is comparable to the current lineup at all. It's not about frequency, but you know that just a well as me.

P.S. Is it just me or is anyone else confused by the weird tock-tick schema? It should be the other way around. It's just words, yea, but completely confusing (assuming everyone has "tick tock" burnt in his brains).

 

[BorisDG]

And to be honest, I couldn't care less about Iris Pro graphics, waste of silicon in the desktop space in my opinion.

Yes, but for me will be cool, because I will put it in my HTPC. I don't have any VGA there...

 

[Schmuckley]

What I want to know is: how high will it clock?
It's been looking like clocks are getting lower with the die shrinks..

 

[FordGT90Concept]

You're 920 is in the "Pro-sumer" line. So to really be fair, you have to look at 2011-3 processors, and those start at 140w.

But, yes, I'll definitely agree with your sentiment that in the mainstream consumer line Intel has been focused on lowering power consumption more than raising performance.

2011-v3: 140w, 6 cores, no IGP
1150: 88w, 4 cores, IGP

 

[Octopuss]

The "enthusiast" class of CPUs don't have any GPU inside the package?

 

[DeadSkull]

So lower temps or higher temps?