http://www.anandtech.com/show/6355/intels-haswell-architecture/12Now to the things that Intel didn't let loose at IDF. Although originally an option for Ivy Bridge (but higher ups at Intel killed plans for it) was a GT3 part with some form of embedded DRAM. Rumor has it that Apple was the only customer who really demanded it at the time, and Intel wasn't willing to build a SKU just for Apple.
Haswell will do what Ivy Bridge didn't. You'll see a version of Haswell with up to 128MB of embedded DRAM, with a lot of bandwidth available between it and the core. Both the CPU and GPU will be able to access this embedded DRAM, although there are obvious implications for graphics.
HD4000->GT2 is expected to be less improvement than HD3000->HD4000.
VRM.
Anand Shimpi has explicitly stated that embedded DRAM will be coming to at least one flavor of Haswell, so I've chalked that one up to being a done deal:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6355/intels-haswell-architecture/12
@ShintaiDK: Did you read that? Previously you've said that eDRAM wouldn't even come in Broadwell. :awe:
As for why Intel isn't talking about embedded DRAM on Haswell, your guess is as good as mine.
Can you post the source?
HD3000 = 12 EUs, 850 Mhz base clocks with 1.35 Ghz turbo -->http://ark.intel.com/products/52214/Intel-Core-i7-2600K-Processor-8M-Cache-up-to-3_80-GHz
HD4000 = 16 EUs, 650 Mhz base clocks with 1.15 Ghz turbo -->http://ark.intel.com/products/65523
HD4600? (GT2 for Haswell) = 20 EUs, Clocks??
Clocks shouldn't drop on the Haswell GT2, so I would actually expect a greater increase going from Ivy Bridge GT2 (HD4000) to Haswell GT2 (HD4600??).
With that said, I do have to wonder how memory bandwith will factor in.
You're missing a central piece: IB brought a new iGPU arch. So EUs and frequencies cannot be directly compared with HD3000.
HD3000->HD4000 brought around 30-50% increase (http://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review/9 and onwards). HD4000->GT2 is expected to bring ~30% increase last I heard, but I could not find any source for that now. If you find some source confirming or denying that, please let me know.
Haswell builds on the same fundamental GPU architecture we saw in Ivy Bridge. We won't see a dramatic redesign/re-plumbing of the graphics hardware until Broadwell in 2014 (that one is going to be a big one).
Memory bandwidth on the HD4000.
Your first screenshot doesn't make any sense because memory scaling can change from game to game. I have seen other benchmarks where higher DDR3 speeds to 1866 or 2133 resulted in a nice bump. Regarding GT2 performance improvements, cpu-world reported 15-25% faster than GT2 Ivy Bridge. This should be accurate. I expect another 5% for both Ivy Bridge and Haswell due to a better driver stack (15.31). HD4000 performs almost 50% faster than HD3000 at the same frequency (in GPGPU benchmarks more). Since Haswell graphics contains only a slightly tweaked Gen7, this is not possible. GT3 is another matter though due to EU and slice doubling. Broadwell with Gen8 and bigger uarch changes should bring us a bigger iGPU jump, not really a surprise from the Intel engineer.
Bottlenecked to some degree, but not that much. Have a look to Trinity Desktop. Even with slow dualchannel DDR3 memory, performance can be doubled with faster graphics. We don't know Intel's plan for Broadwell's memory subsystem, it might get some stacked memory for the faster variants. Too early yet. It will be interesting to see how GT3 Quadcores (without the edram) are performing compared to GT2.
But isn't the GT3 supposed to be downclocked? I.e. it's primary purpose is to save power, not to increase performance? So they have 40 EUs to be able to clock them low to save power while still providing decent GFX performance.
Also, with Broadwell Intel will have twice the amount of transistors on the same die area compared to IB/Haswell. We already know whey will not increase the CPU core count. So what could they use the additional transistors for? More EUs, eDRAM, anything else?
Yes, but how should Broadwell be able to deliver significantly better GFX performance without solving the memory bandwidth problem?
Yes, but not low lower TDP (for the desktop CPUs).
better integration
Also, with Broadwell Intel will have twice the amount of transistors on the same die area compared to IB/Haswell. We already know whey will not increase the CPU core count. So what could they use the additional transistors for? More EUs, eDRAM, anything else?
Computer Bottleneck said:HD3000 = 12 EUs, 850 Mhz base clocks with 1.35 Ghz turbo -->http://ark.intel.com/products/52214/...up-to-3_80-GHz
HD4000 = 16 EUs, 650 Mhz base clocks with 1.15 Ghz turbo -->http://ark.intel.com/products/65523
HD4600? (GT2 for Haswell) = 20 EUs, Clocks??
I can guess.
So Intel increases GT2's EU count by 20-25% every generation:
8-10-12-12-16-20
GT3 doubles GT2's EU, and GT4 probably doubles GT3's EU count.
40 EUs(in Haswell GT3) x 1.2 x 2 = 96 EUs
Yeah, I can see that alone taking up all the transistor count increase. Since its a new arch you will probably see enhancements in other areas as well.
But isn't the GT3 supposed to be downclocked? I.e. it's primary purpose is to save power, not to increase performance? So they have 40 EUs to be able to clock them low to save power while still providing decent GFX performance.
Also, with Broadwell Intel will have twice the amount of transistors on the same die area compared to IB/Haswell. We already know whey will not increase the CPU core count. So what could they use the additional transistors for? More EUs, eDRAM, anything else?
Complete Haswell LGA1150 lineup now leaked (seems to be similar to what is already known, with a few additions):
http://wccftech.com/arctic-cooling-...150-cpu-lineup-core-i73980x-confirmed-lga2011
Core i7-3980X also confirmed for LGA2011. First consumer 8 core Intel CPU?
the 8 core Xeon E5-2690 is 2.9GHz base 3.8GHz Turbo and is 135W TDP
while 8 core E5-2687W is 3.1GHz base 3.8GHz Turbo and is 150W TDP
and then there's the 3970X which recently established a 150W TDP for the i7s, however I think that might have just been paving the way for an 8 core part as the 70X is little more relative to the 130W TDP 60X
that being said, unless Intel ups the TDP, I don't see them squeezing a 3.4-3.5GHz and 4-4.1GHz Turbo 8 core part into 150W, so I'd expect clockrates to be more in line with the 2687W, which really wouldn't matter because the likely buyers will just overclock the chip anyway.
The real kicker will be price. Coming in at the standard ~$1000 mark would seem too good to be true as the closest companion 8 core Xeons are already running ~$2000 and there's still the 3970X @ $1000...
At any rate I'd probably be interested @ no more than $1200, but if its $1000 I'll be a first day adopter most likely.