Haswell-E with DDR4 showed.

[tweakboy]

Who cares its 2 years away....or year and a half... duh

 

[tweakboy]

Ill OC my 4930k to 4.6Ghz. I use Sonar so I need cores. I love this chip. Only difference with the extreme CPU is the L3 cache, 12mb for 4930k and 15mb for 4960,

I mean why would you pay 1.2k for a CPU where a 600 dollar cpu can do the same things. Intel is drunk big time...........

 

[Grooveriding]

I hope they don't do a 6core=5930K, 8core=5960X sort of deal but rather have an 8 core variant for both levels. I want to pay $600 not a $1000 for my next CPU

I get the sense doing a 6&8 core at both SKU levels would probably make more sense and be what does end up happening. Thing is there is of course going to be a price difference between a 6 core and an 8 core SKU. So unless the plan is to drop the price for 6 cores, I am guess the 8 core is going to cost more than $600. Maybe $600/$800 5930K in 6/8 and $1000/$1200 5960X in the same. Hopefully...

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

Wonder if Intel will offer an 8 core non-HT chip like they do with the non-enthusiast desktop line.?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Wonder if Intel will offer an 8 core non-HT chip like they do with the non-enthusiast desktop line.?

Not for desktop LGA2011. Unless you buy some theoretical Xeon variant maybe.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I'd be more interested in a 6 core non HT for say $350 or $400 tbh.

But HT is free for Intel basically so it's unlikely we'll see that kind of segmentation until 6 core is mainstream.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I'd be more interested in a 6 core non HT for say $350 or $400 tbh.

But HT is free for Intel basically so it's unlikely we'll see that kind of segmentation until 6 core is mainstream.

You can just buy the lowest Haswell-E SKU and disable HT. Problem solved.

 

[escrow4]

Not surprising enthusiasts are dying out. Barring content creation and heavy duty workstation apps that 90% of consumers will never touch, what possible use would this really have? Is it the "my chip is bigger than yours" thing again?

 

[bunnyfubbles]

Daijm .. such 8 cores and 64G DDR4... given current trends (cpu iterations, consoles, os'es) that could easily be a 10 year rig.. Problary more.

meh, I'm not so sure 64GB of RAM will be something realistic

last I knew, DDR4 was going to have a new point to point topology (ie each memory channel connects to a single DIMM only)

so while that could be great news for mainstream desktops, as that seems likely to mean we'll be seeing quad channel for everyone, however all indications are that Haswell-E is going to remain quad channel, which means only 4 DIMMs. Not only would an unprecedented consumer 16GB DIMM be required to achieve 64GB (4 x 16GB), it would be comprised of new DDR4 chips and thus likely cost an arm and a leg (and probably both kidneys) to get a Haswell-E rig with 64GB of DDR4 on release.

in fact, we might even have an odd scenario where, because DDR4 being new and likely with a premium, that most Haswell-E adopters coming from s2011 or even s1366 (heck, there was one point where I had 24GB of RAM in my s1366 rig) are going to have to settle for a downgrade in RAM capacity, or a sidegrade at best.

but maybe the current information is off and things may change, but as of right now I wouldn't count on anything more than 4 x 4GB DDR4 for a relatively sensible Haswell-E rig, maybe 4 x 8GB if we're lucky and DDR4 is that much more expensive than DDR3 (not going to hold breath on that)

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

i don't need 64GB in my scenario.. 6 or 8 is overkill for me

 

[cytg111]

meh, I'm not so sure 64GB of RAM will be something realistic

last I knew, DDR4 was going to have a new point to point topology (ie each memory channel connects to a single DIMM only)

so while that could be great news for mainstream desktops, as that seems likely to mean we'll be seeing quad channel for everyone, however all indications are that Haswell-E is going to remain quad channel, which means only 4 DIMMs. Not only would an unprecedented consumer 16GB DIMM be required to achieve 64GB (4 x 16GB), it would be comprised of new DDR4 chips and thus likely cost an arm and a leg (and probably both kidneys) to get a Haswell-E rig with 64GB of DDR4 on release.

in fact, we might even have an odd scenario where, because DDR4 being new and likely with a premium, that most Haswell-E adopters coming from s2011 or even s1366 (heck, there was one point where I had 24GB of RAM in my s1366 rig) are going to have to settle for a downgrade in RAM capacity, or a sidegrade at best.

but maybe the current information is off and things may change, but as of right now I wouldn't count on anything more than 4 x 4GB DDR4 for a relatively sensible Haswell-E rig, maybe 4 x 8GB if we're lucky and DDR4 is that much more expensive than DDR3 (not going to hold breath on that)

Nice point. On the other hand I have a hard time seeing Intel releasing a system that supports 64G's but you cannot put 64G's in it - at the time of launch. Totally anticlimactic for sure.

 

[Arkaign]

Not surprising enthusiasts are dying out. Barring content creation and heavy duty workstation apps that 90% of consumers will never touch, what possible use would this really have? Is it the "my chip is bigger than yours" thing again?

When you look at all the people ditching desktops and moving to ultrabooks, you can tell that most people can get by with shockingly low CPU requirements.

I'd hazard : C2D E6600 w/4GB and a decent hard drive is fast enough for 99% of all worldwide computer users to do common tasks : web, youtube, email, word, angry birds, solitaire.

 

[ShintaiDK]

G.Skill showed DDR4 at IDF as well.

Not exactly record breakers. But DDR4 should be better in a year from now. And affordable.

 

[hackerballs]

8C/16T
you really think that is required other than just bragging rights? Good for 10 years? LOL, nope. 64gigs RAM good for 10 years, nope
While there are a few that will utilize such a beast today, it would do nothing for most who will use it for gaming or general apps

I would guess that it will not be needed for 10 years yet. But we all will buy cause we can

It will also be $$$$$$$, not a good "bang for the buck"

 

[Fjodor2001]

G.Skill showed DDR4 at IDF as well.

Not exactly record breakers. But DDR4 should be better in a year from now. And affordable.

Yes, that DDR4 RAM was PC17000/2133MHz. Not much more than current DDR3 which normally is at PC12800/1600MHz, and can be had up to PC19200/2400MHz which is actually faster than that DDR4 RAM!

So what speeds can we expect from DDR4 going forward? And how long until we get there?

 

[ShintaiDK]

Yes, that DDR4 RAM was PC17000/2133MHz. Not much more than current DDR3 which normally is at PC12800/1600MHz, and can be had up to PC19200/2400MHz which is actually faster than that DDR4 RAM!

So what speeds can we expect from DDR4 going forward? And how long until we get there?

2133 is the lowest speed, 4266 the highest. In terms of how long? Try see how many 1.5 or 1.35V DDR 2133 you can find today. Then think on when DDR3 was released.

I doubt we see more than 2133 and maybe 2400 within specs at release.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

You can just buy the lowest Haswell-E SKU and disable HT. Problem solved.

I don't want to pay the HT tax

 

[PPB]

The grace behind DDR4 is that you can make your system have as much channells as RAM sockets populated in the motherboard. So it really doesn't matter if their starting point is 2166.

 

[AdamK47]

Want

 

[ShintaiDK]

I don't want to pay the HT tax

There isnt any HT " tax" on desktop Haswell-E.

 

[SPBHM]

I don't want to pay the HT tax

HT is built in, disabling HT probably save them $0, if they wanted to sell a cheaper -e CPU they could do that without touching HT... they just don't need to, because they have 1155/1150 for that.... -E part with no HT makes no sense.

Not exactly record breakers. But DDR4 should be better in a year from now. And affordable.

DDR3 standard speed probably still is 1333 (not to mention the 1066), so it's a nice jump I guess...

 

[DooKey]

8c/16t cpu will be mine. Bring it on Intel.

 

[Fjodor2001]

The grace behind DDR4 is that you can make your system have as much channells as RAM sockets populated in the motherboard. So it really doesn't matter if their starting point is 2166.

So it depends on how many channels Haswell-E and other DDR4 capable CPUs will support.

 

[Fjodor2001]

The question is how much impact the increased RAM speed that DDR4 has will actually have. If I recall correctly, RAM speed beyond what's "normal" does not increase CPU performance much at the moment. Might be useful for systems using an iGPU though?

 

[ShintaiDK]

So it depends on how many channels Haswell-E and other DDR4 capable CPUs will support.

The same as today due to pincount. Haswell-E is quad channel.