I hear that, I just have a hard time wrapping my head around a haswell, 8 cores non the less, that overclocks 50%+ .. that would surely be intels comeback-kid of overclocking.
Don't forget that Intel's clock speeds and turbo limits (and everyone else's, by the way) are bound by TDP and/or power draw. When you're dealing with many-core processors, the base clock is going to be lower as you add more cores.
It's not like Haswell-E or, say, a 16 core Interlagos are artificially handicapped and can't clock as high as a standard Haswell or Zambezi chip -- they're just clocked lower out of the factory because 8 full fledged cores or 8 modules draw a lot of power. With adequate cooling, that extra power isn't an issue.
Low stock clocks will only become more commonplace as core counts grow. With turbo boost though, the issue is (essentially) fully negated.
I don't think it'll quite be 50% (4.5GHz). Maybe 4.3GHz is a bit more realistic, which is roughly what standard Haswell averages anyway.I hear that, I just have a hard time wrapping my head around a haswell, 8 cores non the less, that overclocks 50%+ .. that would surely be intels comeback-kid of overclocking.
a couple thoughts here:
1. it doesn't look like we're going to see a 4-core consumer Haswell-E
2. if we see a 5820K as a 6-core, entry level CPU for the platform, and even if its only ~$400, we still have $200+ X99 motherboards and all new RAM to buy in DDR4 (likely over $100 if we decide to go with at least two sticks to stay bandwidth competitive with mainstream Haswell) to complete an upgrade.
so its looking like it will still be a couple hundred more to go 6-core, and that's inferring a $400 chip...
I see it differently. I think a quad haswell E with a soldered ihs would be great. At least hope for better overclocking. Also, if there are only six and eight core chips, I don't see why anyone would expect the six core to be 400.00.
I could easily see the six core staying at 500 plus and the eight core replacing the extreme edition at 1000.00. A six core at 400.00, even on a different platform, I think in Intel's mind would compete to closely to the 4770k.
I hear that, I just have a hard time wrapping my head around a haswell, 8 cores non the less, that overclocks 50%+ .. that would surely be intels comeback-kid of overclocking.
I don't think it'll quite be 50% (4.5GHz). Maybe 4.3GHz is a bit more realistic, which is roughly what standard Haswell averages anyway.
I think it'll be able to hit 4.5+GHz, and it wont be a matter of luck, unless you consider having water cooling lucky
Hope you are right, but the spotty at best overclocking of regular Haswell and the low base clock make me less than optimistic. Even a lot of Haswell quads dont reach 4.5ghz.
I can also see this being a play by Intel to move us (i.e. enthusiasts) to the E platform; they want to drive "mainstream" Core products towards lower power, higher integration, so that they can push it into thinner laptops and tablets. If Intel can get us to migrate to the E platform, then they will face less of a backlash if they e.g. cut the number of PCIe lanes available from a mainstream CPU/chipset in order to conserve power.
ES samples are pretty much universally clocked lower than final production, so I would not read too much into the 3ghz base clock. It will be higher
Same process + AVX2 = lots of heat.
They could theoretically go low base clock, high turbo specifically as part of their enthusiast marketing push.
If you cant increase the top overclock, lower the base value so the percentages still look impressive (50% overclocks...)
The picture on the last page shows that its 3GHz. And its even comparing against a "3.7GHz 4C", meaning the base clock might be even lower, since 3.7GHz is a Turbo for 4770K chips.
They are not saying its an "ES" sample, but on a legitimate slide saying "we're so awesome since we have 8 core Haswell". That puts no doubt on the clock.