Intel Broadwell Thread

[The Stilt]

So according to you this FPU, that score 155 when loaded with two threads and wich is recycled by Zen, will score 120 when loaded by a single thread in a Zen core..?..

To get to 155 they would need 29% gain with SMT, wich is quite high for Cinebench, and this is without taking account that they improved this FPU, one has to wonder why since you are stating that it will be used below the usage %age in Excavator...:sneaky:

To summarize you are stating that a Zen core will have less FP throughput than a EXV module...

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm just interpreting the data AMD themselves has provided.

AMD themselves say 40% more IPC over Excavator core. They also say that Excavator based Carrizo for example has four cores. So based on this, what exactly indicates that Zen core would have higher performance than a Excavator compute unit (two cores, according to AMD).

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9Mjg0ODkyfENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

http://products.amd.com/en-us/searc...Laptops/FX-8800P-with-Radeon™-R7-Graphics/123

 

[DrMrLordX]

From where would you expect to gain more, since up to 40% higher IPC is what AMD themselves expect Zen to have over Excavator?

I've blathered on about this particular subject too much already, but seriously, if AMD takes a core that is as wide as - if not wider than (fp) - an XV module, improves the cache subsystem, rebuilds/improves the front end, AND adds SMT on top so that the core can either split resources between one or two threads like an Intel CPU and yet somehow manages to produce less throughput per thread with the new core compared to an XV module, then AMD is beyond pathetic. Consider that a hypothetical 8m XV running @ 3.4 GHz should score anywhere from 1225-1376 assuming it uses cores identical to those in Carrizo, which it probably wouldn't (it would have L3, probably bigger L2, and maybe some other goodies, or maybe not).

 

[Abwx]

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm just interpreting the data AMD themselves has provided.

AMD themselves say 40% more IPC over Excavator core. They also say that Excavator based Carrizo for example has four cores. So based on this, what exactly indicates that Zen core would have higher performance than a Excavator compute unit (two cores, according to AMD).

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9Mjg0ODkyfENoaWxkSUQ9LTF8VHlwZT0z&t=1

http://products.amd.com/en-us/searc...Laptops/FX-8800P-with-Radeon™-R7-Graphics/123

To not derail this thread further i answered you here :

http://forums.anandtech.com/showpost.php?p=38233706&postcount=1215

I also "ported" DrMrLordx post since it summarize the things adequately..

 

[csbin]

Coolaler got 4.2 GHz out of his Core i7-6950X:

www.coolaler.com/showthread.php/336635

Insane MT performance. To put it in perspective:

4.3GHz failed
4.4GHz do nothing
4.6GHz do nothing

:ninja:

 

[Abwx]

4.3GHz failed
4.4GHz do nothing
4.6GHz do nothing

:ninja:

And yet the displayed voltage/frequency show a perfect scaling in this respect, that is, the curve has about no variation, so if this was on air the thing would clock higher than this, a voltage/frequency curve is always well past its knee when the CPU become deaf to voltage increasements...

That said there could be protection mechanism at work, we ll have to wait for reviews but so far i m skeptical on this matter..

 

[dooon]

Broadwell-E release 31 May (in Japan).
https://translate.google.com/transl...&u=http://www.gdm.or.jp/crew/2016/0525/163640

 

[BrainEater]

Well.....

At least the wait will be worth it.
I'm waiting on a pair of e5-2687w-v4's

 

[Sweepr]

http://videocardz.com/60515/dont-click

 

[Lepton87]

I thought I would buy the 8-core version. I expected it to cost more or less the same as 5930K cost due to the similar position in the line-up. Gosh was I wrong. I didn't really expect the ST performance to advance both in absolute terms and per dollar but I expected that at least MT performance would advance in the performance per dollar department but it didn't.
It seems that BW is actually worse than 5820k because the junior HW-E model doesn't cost as much as 432$. The pricing is a huge disappointment. I would only take the bite if they had integrated an L4 cache. That would be so awesome that I could even pay 600$ for the 6-core version.

 

[24601]

http://videocardz.com/60515/dont-click

Guess I'm with everyone here that builds PCs even remotely on a budget and waiting for Skylake-E........

At the price for the 6950x they could have at least given us ceramic substrate.....

Also should have given silver coated copper instead of nickel coated copper for the IHS.

 

[DrMrLordX]

AVX ratio offset huh. What exactly is that?

 

[24601]

AVX ratio offset huh. What exactly is that?

I'd assume it gives you the option to use a lower ratio for AVX loads, in a way it's them acknowledging that their chips can't do AVX loads at full listed clock-speed.

 

[DrMrLordX]

Right, that was my assumption, but I wanted more info if anyone has any. I can't find any details on it.

 

[crashtech]

I'd assume it gives you the option to use a lower ratio for AVX loads, in a way it's them acknowledging that their chips can't do AVX loads at full listed clock-speed.

You mean not on air, or not at all?

 

[DrMrLordX]

I would only take the bite if they had integrated an L4 cache. That would be so awesome that I could even pay 600$ for the 6-core version.

btw sorry I didn't pick up on this part of your post earlier. HEDT Intel chips with eDRAM L4 would be fantastic for enthusiast users.

 

[Arachnotronic]

btw sorry I didn't pick up on this part of your post earlier. HEDT Intel chips with eDRAM L4 would be fantastic for enthusiast users.

Not really. If eDRAM L4 made a big diff, it would be added to server chips.

Now, a Broadwell-EP with HMC on package could be very interesting.

 

[DrMrLordX]

L4 wouldn't make a big difference for server use, I wouldn't think. For enthusiasts, it most certainly would!

 

[24601]

Not really. If eDRAM L4 made a big diff, it would be added to server chips.

Now, a Broadwell-EP with HMC on package could be very interesting.

Yes, HMC, HBM, or simply more memory lanes would be more effective per die space (and therefore per cost) increase of performance for all of those scenarios in comparison to the hacky, tacked on eDRAM which doesn't even add that much throughput, it's simply useful for covering the latency gap between SRAM and main memory.

 

[RussianSensation]

I thought I would buy the 8-core version. I expected it to cost more or less the same as 5930K cost due to the similar position in the line-up. Gosh was I wrong. I didn't really expect the ST performance to advance both in absolute terms and per dollar but I expected that at least MT performance would advance in the performance per dollar department but it didn't.
It seems that BW is actually worse than 5820k because the junior HW-E model doesn't cost as much as 432$. The pricing is a huge disappointment. I would only take the bite if they had integrated an L4 cache. That would be so awesome that I could even pay 600$ for the 6-core version.

The rumors of 8-core coming down to $699 and 10-core occupying $999 were all wrong. For $1723, the 6950X is laughable for gamers. I7 6700K and 7700K OC would leave it for dead for only $340-350. That's unacceptable. No $1000-1700 Intel CPU should be slower for games than a $350 one. Price increase in the 6800K is still reasonable I guess because it still offers good value for the $ for those seeking a great balance of gaming and productivity. 6850K is another useless SKU like the 5930K was. With NV fully abandoning 3-4 way SLI, those 40 PCIe lanes are a useless marketing gimmick.

Fire sale 5820K may become a good value as MicroCentre has it for $319.99. I can see it going EOL at $249.99 on special. Overall, looks like a yawn release after the ludicrous price on the 10-core, > $1K on the 8-core. This definitely leaves room for Zen's 8-core to make an entrance. With Intel's cheapest 6-core at over $400 and 8-core at almost $1100, AMD has room to drop 8-core Zen for $499-549 if it can reach Ivy Bridge IPC levels. For productivity/workstation use, that would be a decent buy.

IDontCare was right. Buy an i7 6700K (overclock it to 4.6-4.8Ghz), and not worry about a CPU upgrade for 5 years. Fingers crossed Zen / Zen + are actually good putting more pressure on Intel. Maybe we will see a 6-core Icelake on the mainstream platform in 2018.

 

[24601]

The rumors of 8-core coming down to $699 and 10-core occupying $999 were all wrong. For $1723, the 6950X is laughable for gamers. I7 6700K and 7700K OC would leave it for dead for only $340-350. Price increase in the 6800K is still reasonable I guess because it still offers good value for the $ for those seeking a great balance of gaming and productivity. 6850K is another useless SKU like the 5930K was. With NV fully abandoning 3-4 way SLI, those 40 PCIe lanes are a useless marketing gimmick.

Fire sale 5820K may become a good value as MicroCentre has it for $319.99. I can see it going EOL at $249.99 on special. Overall, looks like a yawn release after the ludicrous price on the 10-core, > $1K on the 8-core. This definitely leaves room for Zen's 8-core to make an entrance. With Intel's cheapest 6-core at over $400 and 8-core at almost $1100, AMD has room to drop 8-core Zen for $499-549 if it can reach Ivy Bridge IPC levels. For productivity/workstation use, that would be a decent buy.

IDontCare was right. Buy an i7 6700K (overclock it to 4.6-4.8Ghz), and not worry about a CPU upgrade for 5 years. Fingers crossed Zen / Zen + are actually good putting more pressure on Intel. Maybe we will see a 6-core Icelake on the mainstream platform in 2018.

Depending on how much the memory controller of the BW-E improved over the memory controller of the HW-E, the 6800K may be worth the current premium over the 5820k.

We have seen the sky high DDR4 clocks of the Skylake chips give very tangible throughput as well as critically latency improvements over the very tepid clocks and latencies the HW-E is/has been able to post.

 

[2blzd]

Ooh you look at that!

*cough*calledit*cough*


MSR199 FTW!

 

[RussianSensation]

Depending on how much the memory controller of the BW-E improved over the memory controller of the HW-E, the 6800K may be worth the current premium over the 5820k.

We have seen the sky high DDR4 clocks of the Skylake chips give very tangible throughput as well as critically latency improvements over the very tepid clocks and latencies the HW-E is/has been able to post.

Skylake is only dual channel. That's why it benefits from faster DDR4. My point still stands, i7 6700K OC (and then 7700K OC) will be faster with 1080 SLI than any BW-E CPU. When i7 6700K just came out with a $70-$100 mark-up, Z170 mobos didn't have good deals and price of 16GB DDR4-3200 was high, 5820K OC + AsRock X99 Extreme 4 + 16GB DDR4 2666 was a brilliant choice. Now eBay often has 6700K for $309.99, MicroCenter has 6700K for $309.99, excellent Z170 boards can be found for $100-130, and 16GB DDR4-3200 costs $70-75, 6700K is easily the best gaming CPU. With higher prices of BW-E and lower prices on all key Z170 parts, BW-E looks less enticing than owning 5820K @ 4.3-4.5Ghz since August 2014.

Another new penalty against X99 now is DDR4 3000+ 4x4 GB DDR4 has a premium over fast 2x8GB sticks. For 6+ months since i7 6700K launched, the opposite was true -- 2x8GB DDR4 cost more than 4 sticks of the same speed.

If 6800K can consistently overclock to 4.7-4.8Ghz, I still might build a rig with it.

 

[24601]

Skylake is only dual channel. That's why it benefits from faster DDR4. My point still stands, i7 6700K OC (and then 7700K OC) will be faster with 1080 SLI than any BW-E CPU. When i7 6700K just came out with a $70-$100 mark-up, Z170 mobos didn't have good deals and price of 16GB DDR4-3200 was high, 5820K OC + AsRock X99 Extreme 4 + 16GB DDR4 2666 was a brilliant choice. Now eBay often has 6700K for $309.99, MicroCenter has 6700K for $309.99, excellent Z170 boards can be found for $100-130, and 16GB DDR4-3200 costs $70-75, 6700K is easily the best gaming CPU. With higher prices of BW-E and lower prices on all key Z170 parts, BW-E looks less enticing than owning 5820K @ 4.3-4.5Ghz since August 2014.

Another new penalty against X99 now is DDR4 3000+ 4x4 GB DDR4 has a premium over fast 2x8GB sticks. For 6+ months since i7 6700K launched, the opposite was true -- 2x8GB DDR4 cost more than 4 sticks of the same speed.

If 6800K can consistently overclock to 4.7-4.8Ghz, I still might build a rig with it.

I'm honestly chomping at the bit for the 6800k due to the current good prices on DDR4 3000 16 gB sticks as well as the 4 channels. (I'm currently running 32 gB 3570k so it would actually be quite an upgrade for me)
I'll try to hold for Skylake-E though, as that will likely be the last stably priced HEDT part before they go full gouge mode and increase prices exponential due to dead AMD [IBM style pricing] (As I expect Zen to fail miserably on all counts).

I seem to remember that even 6600k showed significant gains due to 3 GT/s DDR4 though, so I'm thinking that the total latency was more key to Skylake's fantastic DDR4 scaling that the throughput itself.

 

[IntelUser2000]

tacked on eDRAM which doesn't even add that much throughput, it's simply useful for covering the latency gap between SRAM and main memory.

But latency is what's important for CPU workloads. We'll see what their plan for eDRAM is once the 2x128MB version for Kabylake materializes. HMC/HBM is more for Graphics/Xeon Phi than anything else. It's surely coming, but its going a lot slower than we all expected.

It feels like innovation just stopped at Intel. Nothing new from them.

 

[dooon]

Amazon.com Links
i7-6800K
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLA8NI
i7-6850K
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLAITC
i7-6900K
http://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FJLAIG0

i7-6950X BOX Art

https://www.amazon.cn/dp/B01FJLA9IM