I guess we'll see. I won't be upgrading any time soon either way, since I'm not satisfied with my cooling and I still need an SSD.
According to Intel Desktop Compatibility Tool your board is compatible, just need to wait to see if Asrock release updated bios. http://processormatch.intel.com/Processors/CompatibleProcessors?componentName=Z87 Pro3
I'm definitely getting the i5 4690k if it can overclock to the same speeds as the i7 4790k. I need the fastest single-threaded performance I can get.
Well thankfully for you, the Crucial MX100 just came outI guess we'll see. I won't be upgrading any time soon either way, since I'm not satisfied with my cooling and I still need an SSD.
Interest in the 4690K will increase rapidly once it's released. I think the speculative focus is usually on the flagship part, pre-release.There really seems to be no interest in that chip here or online yet. I'd like to see what it does to since that chip is $90 cheaper at micro center and i'd rather dump the $90 I save towards a faster video card
Man, I would have thought at least one review site would have done some overclocking reviews of the 4790K by now.
Anand's preview made it sound like they were being sent over soon after he wrote the piece. Any decent review and write-up will take at least a day I would imagine...
Ian Cutress said:Review samples for sites like ours should be arriving sometime this week when we can test and dissect the new parts, with a full retailer release later in the month. At present the date is still uncertain: we were hoping to get samples before Computex in order to present results today, but delays have pushed testing and release later down the line. This is in part due to the restricted timescale for these new processors, whereby VP Lisa Graff in a recent press call stated that the Intel engineers had fewer than six months from idea-to-launch.
^ Also when scouring the internet to try to score an early chip, I saw multiple US and international vendors with the part listed @ 4.1 base clock. I think the final spec may have been a game-time decision since the older ES screenie was 4.0. It may be why review samples lagged behind the launch.
Nah, the 4/4.4 specs were locked in long ago. But different vendors were told different numbers so Intel could see who was leaking what, and how.
Nah, the 4/4.4 specs were locked in long ago. But different vendors were told different numbers so Intel could see who was leaking what, and how.
I was thinking how interesting it would be if you had something that when you downloaded confidential documents off a sharepoint, it would install a unique key by scrambling some non-essential words. Then when it was leaked, you can tell which document version it was as well as who's leaking them.
Will be interesting to see if the 4790K will hold it's value vs a 5930K rig. I think the hexacore will dominate new games
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFGfHgLavJY
4.8GHz and 1.37V with water cooling, and nearly 80W higher power consumption than a 4770K at 4.4GHz 1.25V. 79C under load. It's better than the original Haswell release, but it's not even close to Sandy Bridge unless they got a truly abysmal chip. In the comments of the stock vid, they said that they believe that the 5.5GHz at the competition was on a single core. Based on these results, I can see why. Realistic chips will likely only hit 4.3-4.5GHz on air. Wait for Haswell-E/Broadwell/Skylake.
Seems overly-pessimistic, considering that's exactly where Haswell currently lands. Definitely interesting though... good to see overclocking results finally surface.Realistic chips will likely only hit 4.3-4.5GHz on air.
In the comments of the stock vid, they said that they believe that the 5.5GHz at the competition was on a single core.
One data point is not enough to form an opinion about clock speed and voltage. There are so many variables that go in to what Vcore you need to get a stable clock, that you have to look over several different thorough reviews in order to gain a consensus. That is the only way to minimize the effect of the array of variables, such as mobo, RAM, user error, etc.
The reach the same conclusion as most people are predicting, which is that those with a 4770k should hold off, particularly if they can hit 4.4 on air already.
But 4.4 on air is no guarantee for the original Haswell chips, so 4.8ghz would be an achievement by Intel.
On a side note, for the vast majority of people, AVX stress testers are for stability, not a real-world idea of temperature expectations. Even so, 4.8 @ 79C on an unrealistic burn test isn't bad. But why would you switch out the cooler between stock and OC? Far too much variance, I believe.
Aren't those temps really high for water?That's 4.8GHz under water. Unless this is an exceptionally bad chip, this isn't a notable improvement.
Aren't those temps really high for water?