[coolaler] Devils Canyon: 4.0 base/ 4.4 turbo @ stock

[SlowSpyder]

I predict a common overclock in people's sigs of 5.2Ghz.

 

[OCGuy]

If it's boosting to 4.4 by default, an average oc of ~5GHz wouldn't be surprising. I'd actually be surprised if it didn't.

The Haswell voltage wall is still the Haswell voltage wall. They obviously will bin them very aggressively, but without some relatively substantial revisions beyond TIM, I can't imagine how you push back the wall to 5ghz with air cooling.

I have seen countless examples of Haswell users not being limited solely by temps, but by the drastic increase in CPU voltages needed to get from a comfortable 4.3ghz to 4.4ghz (for example)

I certainly have my fingers crossed that is the case

 

[Freddy1765]

If it's boosting to 4.4 by default, an average oc of ~5GHz wouldn't be surprising. I'd actually be surprised if it didn't.

Indeed. Doesn't make a whole lot of sense for Intel to release a chip with 4 GHz stock clock if it only overclocks to like 4.5 or w/e.
If the 4790k turns out to be a 4770k with marginally better thermals I'll be pretty darn disappointed.

 

[moonbogg]

Does Haswell-E kind of rain on the 4790k's parade? I can't help but think a 4.5ghz 6 core haswell would be better than a 5ghz quad haswell given how the gaming landscape is shifting to more cores.

 

[OCGuy]

Does Haswell-E kind of rain on the 4790k's parade? I can't help but think a 4.5ghz 6 core haswell would be better than a 5ghz quad haswell given how the gaming landscape is shifting to more cores.

Completely different market segments...

 

[moonbogg]

Completely different market segments...

Really? Why would you say that? I am in the gaming market segment and these two options have me going back and forth. Its no secret games are using more cores. Real cores do better than logical ones.
Haswell-E and the current X79 target more than just gamers, but it certainly targets gamers without any doubt.

 

[OCGuy]

Really? Why would you say that? I am in the gaming market segment and these two options have me going back and forth. Its no secret games are using more cores. Real cores do better than logical ones.
Haswell-E and the current X79 target more than just gamers, but it certainly targets gamers without any doubt.

Markets are segmented by more than just intended use. If specifications are true, not only would the 5820k be more expensive than DC and require a platform/RAM upgrade for current Haswell users, it will have limited PCI-E lanes for graphics cards.

I am all for the Intel 8-core processors pushing the 6-cores down to the position currently held by the quads. But that will take a new architecture as well as real-world practicality before that happens.

 

[Skott]

Been checking... haven't seen a Intel announcement yet. Still half a day to go though.

 

[moonbogg]

Markets are segmented by more than just intended use. If specifications are true, not only would the 5820k be more expensive than DC and require a platform/RAM upgrade for current Haswell users, it will have limited PCI-E lanes for graphics cards.

I am all for the Intel 8-core processors pushing the 6-cores down to the position currently held by the quads. But that will take a new architecture as well as real-world practicality before that happens.

I just want things to be simple again. I don't like this clockspeed vs core count dilemma.

 

[OCGuy]

I just want things to be simple again. I don't like this clockspeed vs core count dilemma.

This is the first I have heard about any sort of dilemma for gamers using Sandy or later quad-cores.

 

[Cali3350]

Been checking... haven't seen a Intel announcement yet. Still half a day to go though.

I believe the Announcement is 11:30PM PST tonight (its actually June 3rd announcement in Taiwan ).

 

[StinkyPinky]

Only half a day to go and then we'll have answers.

 

[OCGuy]

 

[Techhog]

If my board gets a BIOS update, I'm gonna try to save up for this and a better cooler this fall. I know this seems like a sidegrade, but since I use my computer for live streaming I really should have had an i7 from the get-go.

If DDR4 weren't so expensive, I'd hold out for X99.

 

[Cali3350]

If my board gets a BIOS update, I'm gonna try to save up for this and a better cooler this fall. I know this seems like a sidegrade, but since I use my computer for live streaming I really should have had an i7 from the get-go.

If DDR4 weren't so expensive, I'd hold out for X99.

Live Streaming is that much of a Thread hog?

 

[Haserath]

Awww, those transistors are so cute when their voltage is zero.

 

[StinkyPinky]

I bet they're all hand picked to be the 1 in a 100 CPU's. They'll all hit around 5GHz+, people will get excited and mass buy them only to get stuck at 4.6

 

[zir_blazer]

If it's boosting to 4.4 by default, an average oc of ~5GHz wouldn't be surprising. I'd actually be surprised if it didn't.

As far that I know the average overclock of Haswell is 4.2-4.4 GHz. Devil's Canyon is still the same Haswell Rev. C0, just with better TIM. That was supposed to be worth around 200-300 MHz according to some educated guesses, 600 is too big of a number. You could say than they're in the same line as AMD FX-9000 Piledrivers, factory overclocker to the absolute top. I suppose that Intel should be more conservative and Devil's Canyon actually has an overclocking margin, but not too much.

Also, don't forget that Intel originally said that Haswell was going to be an "overclocker's dream" and failed to delivery. I'm not going to eat the hype about Devil's Canyon until proof is delivered.

 

[OCGuy]

Any engineers (IDC?) or the like that spot a difference between 4770k and DC?

4770k:

DC:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/CPU-H...-und-Core-i5-4690K-im-Preisvergleich-1123195/

 

[Attic]

Wonder if the 4690K will OC better despite lower stock clocks.

I think if these chips will do 4.6ghz+ on air without anything exotic then I'd be tempted to take the 4690k.

Though to be honest what intrigues me about the 4790k is not so much the overclobility... but that I can drop it in and be at 4ghz on 8 threads on z87 and that turbo is 4.4.

I mean the 2500k from 3.3 stock to 4.4ghz was a 33% boost. Overclocking the 4790k to 5.0ghz is a much lower % increase. It's that stock package of the 4790k that is :biggrin: for me. Kinda disappointed the 4690k is clocked same as 4690 before OC'ing.

 

[Idontcare]

Any engineers (IDC?) or the like that spot a difference between 4770k and DC?

4770k:

DC:

http://www.pcgameshardware.de/CPU-H...-und-Core-i5-4690K-im-Preisvergleich-1123195/

There's a shedload of extra caps placed in the middle of the DC package. They've definitely tweaked the FIVR and power delivery specs.

 

[Idontcare]

My only thought when I saw that pic was to shudder at the prospects of ESD given that those pads are full-on exposed to the static generated by the bedsheets

Poor little CPUs never saw it coming

 

[Techhog]

Live Streaming is that much of a Thread hog?

It can reduce framerates a lot, depending on resolution and framerate. It can easily send an i5 to 100% usage. I'll probably have to use QuickSync to compensate in upcoming CPU-heavy games. I've had it double my CPU usage at 720p. It's honestly not a huge deal right now, but for any future game that uses more than 70% of my CPU, I'll be stuck.

My only thought when I saw that pic was to shudder at the prospects of ESD given that those pads are full-on exposed to the static generated by the bedsheets

Poor little CPUs never saw it coming

Same here lol.

 

[StinkyPinky]

My only thought when I saw that pic was to shudder at the prospects of ESD given that those pads are full-on exposed to the static generated by the bedsheets

Poor little CPUs never saw it coming

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. Bed sheets can generate a lot of ESD too.

 

[Attic]

Yeah I was thinking the same thing. Bed sheets can generate a lot of ESD too.

Guess we all belong. My first thought was "gadzoooks!", I could almost feel the discharge hit me when I saw that pic.