Intel Broadwell Thread

[MrTeal]

At first the insane pricing turned me off, but that box alone is worth $500.

 

[RussianSensation]

At first the insane pricing turned me off, but that box alone is worth $500.

Ahhaha. Sad part is for $1723, Intel could have thrown in a free Corsair H115i GTX Extreme. The hilarious part is after spending $1723, the CPU is a coaster paperweight without spending more $$$. Honestly at that price, I expect a Swiftech H320 X2 Prestige to be thrown in for free.

It's more shocking to think you can buy:
$310 i7 6700K
$110 Corsair H115i GTX
$650x2 Asus Strix 1080 OC (boost out of the box is 2063mhz!)
http://www.computerbase.de/2016-05/asus-geforce-gtx-1080-strix-oc-test/5/

Total: $1720 USD

This CPU only makes sense for workstation/content creation users who make $$. Then again, it should be possible to easily find 2 used 5960X chips for less than $1723 and just build 2 workstation PCs that will smoke this chip.

 

[RussianSensation]

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.

G.Skill has DDR4 3200 (4x4) for $85-90 on Newegg. I think Intel raising prices actually helps AMD here. The cheapest 8 core is now over $1000. I am just concerned they will start charging a premium for the latest architecture on the mainstream platform too and justify it that for gamers it's the lead platform. This way they can raise prices on both platforms since they are targeting different users. Icelake i7 9700K could then be a $449-499 CPU since it'll still be the fastest gaming CPU. The lowest end i7 6800K is the only chip on X99 worth considering. With NV saying bye-bye to 3-4 way SLI, the extra lanes on the 6850K are now mostly marketing.

 

[AdamK47]

2-Way GTX 1080 uses 32 PCI-E lanes. Add a 950 Pro and that takes up 4 more. It's not marketing.

 

[2blzd]

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

Hopefully those prices will drop to MSRP levels once it's officially out.

 

[Sweepr]

Core i7-6950X Review

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K_JbFDe6afA

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intel-Core-i7-6950X-10-core-Broadwell-E-Review

MT beast.

 

[Sweepr]

Hardware.fr - Core i7-6950 Review

www.hardware.fr/news/14643/intel-lance-i7-bdw-e-i7-6950x-tete.html

~20% faster than Core i7-5960X on average.


PCLab - Core i7 6900K Review

Average gaming performance:

Average application performance:

http://pclab.pl/art69780.html

 

[RussianSensation]

2-Way GTX 1080 uses 32 PCI-E lanes. Add a 950 Pro and that takes up 4 more. It's not marketing.

Do you have a review showing more than 1-2% benefit at high gaming resolutions of running 1080 SLI on 16x/16x over PCIe 16x/8x or PCIe 8x/8x?

Until there is proof that shows otherwise, it's marketing.
https://www.techpowerup.com/reviews/AMD/R9_Fury_X_PCI-Express_Scaling/18.html

The irony here is that i7 6700K max overclocked paired with DDR 4000 and 1080 SLI would beat any i7 6950X (and any other Broadwell-W chip) in games as far as minimum and average FPS are concerned. So you trying to justify 1-2% PCI 16x/16x delta and ignoring Skylake's superior performance in the first place only undermines your argument.

Z170 boards can easily do SLI and the fastest Intel drive too.

It's now possible to build a workstation PC and the fastest gaming PC in the same case.
http://www.phanteks.com/Enthoo-MiniXL-DS.html

Why is it "price inelastic" PC gamers don't buy the fastest workstation consumer PC and the fastest gaming PC and put it into the same case?

Fact is i7 6700K OC with fast DDR4 will beat BW-E in games. Broadwell-E is the best all around Intel processor but not the best gaming CPU due to 1 generation behind architecture (unless it can overclock beyond 5Ghz). If 6950X maxed out at 4.5Ghz, the gap between that and i7 6700K 4.7-4.8Ghz is even greater. Without many DX12 games, the 8-10 core BW-E cannot utilize that power which means it won't even be faster for games than the 6-core BW-E parts.

AnandTech's sample couldn't even go beyond 4.1Ghz:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10337/the-intel-broadwell-e-review-core-i7-6950x-6900k-6850k-and-6800k-tested-up-to-10-cores/10

That means there is a real chance of getting a slower $1723 gaming CPU in the 6950X than a stock $310 6700K.

 

[Sweepr]

Core i7-6900K 8C/16T got to 4.5 GHz in PCLab's review. Looks like more cores come at the cost of slightly decreased OCing potential, which is expected TBH.

Edit: Hardware Canucks pushed the Core i7-6950X 10C/20T beast to 4.43 GHz for all cores.

 

[zentan]

Core i7-6900K 8C/16T got to 4.5 GHz in PCLab's review. Looks like more cores come at the cost of slightly decreased OCing potential, which is expected TBH.

Edit: Hardware Canucks pushed the Core i7-6950X 10C/20T beast to 4.43 GHz for all cores.

Yeah and Hardwarecanucks also got 4.46GHz for i7 6900K.

 

[crashtech]

There's no reason to trade up from a 5820K, is there.

 

[2blzd]

Is there ANY reviews out there with Adobe Premiere Pro or Lightroom or any CC apps benchmarked? I cant find any.

 

[Sweepr]

How to get the best performance from Broadwell-E processors – The ASUS Thermal Control Tool

The ASUS Thermal Control Tool is not just beneficial when using high-end water cooling. In fact, there’s a stronger argument to be made for the tool when using less capable CPU cooling. In such cases, our overclock is thermally limited way before we approach our 270-Watt power limit. Sure, you do not have to push the CPU to such limits, but there is something to be said about an overclock constrained by the heat a single, multi-threaded application generates. Most of us run a variety of applications on our systems, some of which are performance-bound by CPU frequency. That is why the ASUS Thermal Control Tool is invaluable; it allows us to maximize performance for both heavy and light workloads.

The ASUS Thermal Control Tool works exclusively with ASUS X99 motherboards and is compatible with Haswell-E and Broadwell-E processors. Click here to download.

http://edgeup.asus.com/2016/05/get-...well-e-processors-asus-thermal-control-tool/6


Preliminary specifications of Intel Xeon E5-1600 v4 CPUs

www.cpu-world.com/news_2016/2016060201_Specifications_of_Intel_Xeon_E5-1600_v4_processors.html

 

[Aristotelian]

Thanks Sweepr. With that tool, it seems as if they managed a 4.6GHz overclock for the 6950X in "games and light workloads" (I guess this means when not every core is in use) and 4.3GHz for "heavy workloads" which I guess means where every core is being used, say in heavily multi-threaded applications. So the point of that tool is to basically switch between overclocks?

I suppose from a power use perspective this is much better than setting a 6950X overclock at 4.4 GHz permanently? I wonder if the software simply switches down to near idle clocks say for desktop use or word processing etc...

 

[frozentundra123456]

6950x is in stock at microcenter in my area for 1599, 6800k for 399.

but 6700k is only 309.

 

[Sweepr]

First time I hear about this model, a massive 20C/40T Broadwell-E chip at 2.5 GHz (200W TDP?).

Almost twice Core i7-6950X's CB R15 score:

 

[cytg111]

First time I hear about this model, a massive 20C/40T Broadwell-E chip at 2.5 GHz (200W TDP?).

Holy crap. I want one.

 

[SAAA]

200W TDP is really unheard of for Intel, aside for Xeon Phi

...so basicallly they ended the codenames with E5-2699v4 and didn't know how to call a faster (even with less cores) chip? Genius.
Now let's see how incoming 24 cores are called

 

[Nothingness]

First time I hear about this model, a massive 20C/40T Broadwell-E chip at 2.5 GHz (200W TDP?).

It's supposed to be an eBay specific chip.

http://itpeernetwork.intel.com/the-next-leap-in-software-defined-infrastructure/

 

[jpiniero]

Intel's also got the 2698... 2.2 Ghz base but it's TDP is only 135 W.

Also love the Geforce 6200 being used.

 

[IntelUser2000]

200W TDP is really unheard of for Intel, aside for Xeon Phi

Xeon Phi(Knights Landing) also includes 16GB of MCDRAM with 500-600GB/s peak bandwidth, along with optical interconnects at 215W.

The chip TDP might be at 150-160W.

 

[gbeirn]

Holy crap. I want one.

Here you go: http://m.ebay.com/itm/Intel-Xeon-E5-2679-V4-OEM-2-5Ghz-3-3-Max-20-Core-Faster-Than-E5-2699-V4-/272246720084

Isn't marked as ES in pictures. Heck for $2300 that seems like a way better deal than the 6960X

 

[Arachnotronic]

Xeon Phi(Knights Landing) also includes 16GB of MCDRAM with 500-600GB/s peak bandwidth, along with optical interconnects at 215W.

The chip TDP might be at 150-160W.

Peak bandwidth on the MCDRAM is lower, more like 400GB/sec.

http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/.../HC27.25.710-Knights-Landing-Sodani-Intel.pdf

Slide 4.

 

[IntelUser2000]

Peak bandwidth on the MCDRAM is lower, more like 400GB/sec.

http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/.../HC27.25.710-Knights-Landing-Sodani-Intel.pdf

Slide 4.

That's likely achieved bandwidth.

Look at the footnotes. They claim DDR4 gets 90GB/s+. 102GB/s = 6 x DDR4-2133. Knights Landing has support for DDR4-2400, making it 115GB/s. Don't forget its 400GB/s+ as well. Likely on early samples.

Also the reason I say that is because its rumored to be HMC, and the first gen modules are at 640GB/s. Bandwidth utilization is likely going to be less than much more mature DDR4 controllers.

 

[Arachnotronic]

That's likely achieved bandwidth.

Look at the footnotes. They claim DDR4 gets 90GB/s+. 102GB/s = 6 x DDR4-2133. Knights Landing has support for DDR4-2400, making it 115GB/s. Don't forget its 400GB/s+ as well. Likely on early samples.

Also the reason I say that is because its rumored to be HMC, and the first gen modules are at 640GB/s. Bandwidth utilization is likely going to be less than much more mature DDR4 controllers.

It would seem that I did not read the "+" next to the "400." Whoops.