Intel Broadwell Thread

[cbn]

@cbn, The forum link you provide isn't terribly convincing. A link to a test site with benchmarks might actually give some weight to your argument.

Here is a review with a 4.2 Ghz 32nm 3960X Hexcore (using Hyper 212 EVO with single stock fam):

http://www.maximumpc.com/cooler-master-hyper-212-evo-review-0/

So the result of 4.4 Ghz with i7 5820K (using two fans) is probably a typical result.

 

[crashtech]

Here is a review with a 4.2 Ghz 32nm 3960X Hexcore (using Hyper 212 EVO with single stock fam):

http://www.maximumpc.com/cooler-master-hyper-212-evo-review-0/

So the result of 4.4 Ghz with i7 5820K (using two fans) is probably a typical result.

Here you talk about a 5960X, but above we have moved the goal posts to a 5820K. I'm not sure what this dialogue is about anymore. It is a waste to leave the potential of an expensive chip on the table by using a budget cooler, especially on a thousand dollar chip. To advocate the use of a thirty dollar cooler on Intel's flagship is absurd!

 

[cbn]

Here you talk about a 5960X, but above we have moved the goal posts to a 5820K. I'm not sure what this dialogue is about anymore. It is a waste to leave the potential of an expensive chip on the table by using a budget cooler, especially on a thousand dollar chip. To advocate the use of a thirty dollar cooler on Intel's flagship is absurd!

Two things:

1.) Remember you are only asking about a 4Ghz clockspeed on a yet to be released 14nm octocore with a 3.3 Ghz base clock. That is a very mild overclock. Furthermore as I have mentioned the Hyper 212 EVO has a 180W TDP with a single fan (and I am thinking it would work fine for your 4Ghz OC with two fans).

2.) That thread I linked in post #3117 has two results in it.

--- i7 5960X @ 4.4 Ghz with Hyper 212 EVO using one Corsair SP120 fan. (I already mentioned I did not think it was ideal)

--- i7 5820K @ 4.4 Ghz with Hyper 212 EVO using two fans (I mentioned I thought this was a typical result).

 

[Mondozei]

Also, with both diminishing IPC increases and diminishing user benefits per each new IPC architecture (i.e., we are quickly moving into an era where desktop PC performance is primarily GPU+I/O: PCIe limited, not CPU limited), to me the focus in the enthusiast segment should shift to more cores. PC enthusiasts would be much more receptive of upgrading/paying $ to get 6/8/10/12/16 cores vs. a measly 10% IPC increase every 2 years. If I am upgrading, I want to feel that I am getting more IPC and more cores which is why an i7 6700K mainstream platform is disappointing right off the bat. Glad to see that someone at Intel is realizing there is an untapped market which is willing to pay more as long as Intel offers more cores.

The problem is that thus far, 6+ core ultilisation has been poor for gaming and not worth the extra dosh.

I only look at reviews of Skylake/Broadwell where they have an 980 Ti or more and 1080p or less(preferably 720p). If they don't, like Anand, then they don't really get at the heart of the issue.

Sure, who plays at 720p with a 980 Ti or a Titan X? Nobody. But you need that to get a sense of the future. And what we're seeing is that eDRAM is a bigger deal than 'moar cores'.

Advising people to buy 'moar cores' is a terrible advice. It may change with DX12, but we can't bank on that. And if you're an enthusiast, you won't have difficulty upgrading in 3 years or so when we have a larger pile of DX12 games.

 

[crashtech]

@Mondozei, your point of view might be more interesting if Broadwell-C hadn't essentially been stillborn. Take those ill-fated Broadwell-C units out of the equation and overall it's still speed (IPCxGHz) times number of cores that determines which CPU wins in real life. Cache and memory matter, but not enough to change the game.

 

[DrMrLordX]

We won't see a stable release of a desktop 4c/8t chip with significant l4 until the Kabylake release. I'm sure someone, somewhere could make good use of the i7-5775c with the right board and a little luck. At $388 they aren't THAT expensive either . . .

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1181928-REG/intel_bx80658i75775c_core_i7_5775c_3_3_ghz.html

 

[AtenRa]

We won't see a stable release of a desktop 4c/8t chip with significant l4 until the Kabylake release. I'm sure someone, somewhere could make good use of the i7-5775c with the right board and a little luck. At $388 they aren't THAT expensive either . . .

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1181928-REG/intel_bx80658i75775c_core_i7_5775c_3_3_ghz.html

Personally at $388 i find it too expensive for 4C 8T on a dead socket 1150 platform in then end of 2015. Better wait for the 6-8 core Broadwell-E or go Skylake today.

 

[DrMrLordX]

It's better than the $400-$500 price range from a few months ago, and considering how many game benchmarks it wins @ 3.3 GHz, you gotta give it a nod of respect.

The real "gotcha" with those chips is: board support. Tread carefully and do your research before you snag one people, or it could go badly for you.

 

[ShintaiDK]

SL-E hopefully will not have FIVR

Skylake S/H/U/Y would have FIVR if it wasn't for the Core M (Y). Skylake E/EP/EX will all have FIVR.

 

[Sweepr]

FUGGER over at XS who dropped info a few months ago about his BDW-E being a nice surprise for him had this to say after the 10c info leaked:


"Broadwell-E will have dual mode FIVR LVR
non linear droop control
lower vcore -10%
more efficient than HW-E
3DL modules moved under die
10%~15% improvement in performance
14nm = smaller die
very aggressive power management
SL-E hopefully will not have FIVR
I hope we get to 5Ghz on retail BW-E chips "

Thanks for sharing.
Skylake-E dropping FIVR like it's smaller brothers is a surprise.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Thanks for sharing.
Skylake-E dropping FIVR like it's smaller brothers is a surprise.

It has FIVR...

 

[tenks]

Thanks for sharing.
Skylake-E dropping FIVR like it's smaller brothers is a surprise.

He said he was hopeful, I'm sure he didn't know because it looks like Arachno and Shintai, whom I believe, say otherwise.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Whats the issue you have with FIVR anyway? The only known issue is the Core M and power consumption couldn't be managed in time. Hence affecting S/H/U as well.

 

[dark zero]

Whats the issue you have with FIVR anyway? The only known issue is the Core M and power consumption couldn't be managed in time. Hence affecting S/H/U as well.

FIVR helps a LOT in performance. Also H tier is not affected at all. Maybe because is not as bad as U tier.

 

[dooon]

https://benchlife.info/intel-14nm-b...cores-6950x-6900k-6850k-6800k-in-q2-11162015/

 

[Sweepr]

Thanks again dooon. So basically 14nm Broadwell-E brings 25% more cores at the top at the exact same clocks and TDP as Haswell-E. Coupled with the slightly higher IPC, MT performance should increase by up to 30%. Cheaper models will see either increased clockspeeds or more cores.

Now if Summit Ridge comes close to Haswell-E performance like some optimistic users predicted, it will have a hard time competing with the new EE model.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Thanks again dooon. So basically 14nm Broadwell-E brings 25% more cores at the top at the exact same clocks and TDP as Haswell-E. Coupled with the slightly higher IPC, MT performance should increase by up to 30%. Cheaper models will see either increased clockspeeds or more cores.

Now if Summit Ridge comes close to Haswell-E performance like some optimistic users predicted, it will have a hard time competing with the new EE model.

I just hope Broadwell-E is a good overclocker. If 4.3-4.4GHz is possible on a reasonable cooler on the 10 core model, it will be quite an incredible chip IMO.

 

[guskline]

I just hope Broadwell-E is a good overclocker. If 4.3-4.4GHz is possible on a reasonable cooler on the 10 core model, it will be quite an incredible chip IMO.

Amen to that!:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[tenks]

Wow. Just need prices now! That 8core is going to be mine!

Also looks like the 6850k is going to be the bastard stepchild of the group, like the previous middle skus at $500-$600.
200mhz faster and some more PCIe lanes...rather take the 6800k

 

[Arachnotronic]

Wow. Just need prices now! That 8core is going to be mine!

I think the clue that 6950X won't be >$999 is the fact that it's the only "X" part in the lineup.

If there were 6900X and 6950X, then I would think that 6950X would be >$999.

I do wonder what that 8 core beastie will be priced at though..$599 if we're lucky, $699-$799 seems possible too.

 

[tenks]

I think the clue that 6950X won't be >$999 is the fact that it's the only "X" part in the lineup.

If there were 6900X and 6950X, then I would think that 6950X would be >$999.

I do wonder what that 8 core beastie will be priced at though..$599 if we're lucky, $699-$799 seems possible too.

That's a really good point, nice catch..Didn't think about that.

I hope to god the 8 core is $600. $799 is still too high IMHO. I'm also very curious how they price the two 6 cores, as the 5820k is already in the $299-$379 range.

I don't see the bottom sku being less than a 6700k.. $349, $499, $649, $999 would be perfect.

 

[Arachnotronic]

That's a really good point, nice catch..Didn't think about that.

I hope to god the 8 core is $600. $799 is still too high IMHO. I'm also very curious how they price the two 6 cores, as the 5820k is already in the $299-$379 range.

I don't see the bottom sku being less than a 6700k.. $349, $499, $649, $999 would be perfect.

Honestly I think Intel should buy some goodwill with enthusiasts (and effectively set a price ceiling for AMD/Zen) and price it at "just" $599, replacing the 5930K...that's still a ton of money for a defective 10 core die

 

[RussianSensation]

Honestly I think Intel should buy some goodwill with enthusiasts (and effectively set a price ceiling for AMD/Zen) and price it at "just" $599, replacing the 5930K...that's still a ton of money for a defective 10 core die

Rumours have it:

6950X = $999
6900K = $550
6850K = $440
6800K = $390
http://wccftech.com/intels-flagship...s-detailed-upto-10-cores-25mb-cache-140w-tdp/

If these prices are true, RIP glorified i5 - aka i7 6700K. 6900K for $550 would be an incredible pre-emptive strike against Zen. And now imagine in 2017 SKL-E 6/8/10/12 core offerings. I personally think the above prediction is too optimistic. I mean $550 6900K basically makes 6850K completely pointless. Intel could probably easily sell 6900K for $699-799. It also implies an almost linear relationship between price and the number of cores ($390 / 6 = $65 per core on the 6800K vs. $550 / 8 = $68.75 per core on the 6900K).

The crazy part is 6950K is 10C/20T with 3.5Ghz boost, 6900K is 8C/16T with 3.7Ghz boost - both at 140W TDP - while 6800K is only 6C/12T with 3.6Ghz boost in the same 140W TDP. That means there should be a lot of overclocking headroom on the 6800K model since its 140W TDP seems more of an arbitrary rating.

If these prices and specs for BW-E come true and Intel adds even more cores with SLK-E, it's going to be incredibly hard for Zen to hit its profitability targets. I bet AMD would never have anticipated Intel moving 8-core to a $550-600 price levels. AMD better pray this doesn't happen. With Intel becoming so aggressive, the mainstream platform's i7 quads are going to be a hard sell imo.

 

[Arachnotronic]

If these prices and specs for BW-E come true and Intel adds even more cores with SLK-E, it's going to be incredibly hard for Zen to hit its profitability targets. I bet AMD would never have anticipated Intel moving 8-core to a $550-600 price levels. AMD better pray this doesn't happen. With Intel becoming so aggressive, the mainstream platform's i7 quads are going to be a hard sell imo.

I think AMD will have a very hard time gaining share in the enthusiast segment. Intel is in the driver's seat here. By the time Zen comes, Intel will be on the eve of launching Skylake-E, which might increase the top core count to 12, meaning that instead of gunning for Intel's $500+ CPUs with 8 core Zen, it will be stuck fighting defective 12 core chips masquerading as 8 core chips

 

[Sweepr]

I think AMD will have a very hard time gaining share in the enthusiast segment. Intel is in the driver's seat here. By the time Zen comes, Intel will be on the eve of launching Skylake-E, which might increase the top core count to 12, meaning that instead of gunning for Intel's $500+ CPUs with 8 core Zen, it will be stuck fighting defective 12 core chips masquerading as 8 core chips

Can you believe some people tried to convince us Intel wouldn't react with more agressive Broadwell-E/Skylake-E SKUs to protect their margins? Curiously they are missing from this thread right now.