Intel Haswell-E price list available

[Fjodor2001]

Yup. The best way to buy Intel CPUs is skip a generation, even two, and then buy again. Otherwise if you're expecting a noticeable upgrade every generation you'll be disappointed. Even GPUs are going this way with small performance increases every generation, although in their case it seems more out of forced circumstance unlike Intel which does not seem to focus on anything but big power consumption improvements and a drop of performance.

Yes, but the average Joe can probably even skip 5-8 generations nowadays on the desktop.

 

[Makaveli]

Yes, but the average Joe can probably even skip 5-8 generations nowadays on the desktop.

lol 5-8 is abit excessive.

more like 3-4 before platform upgrades will force you too.

Going back 5 generation puts you in P4 territory and these are pretty much unusable today.

Going back 8 generations puts you in 486 era and that is laughable if you try to use one today.

 

[EnzoLT]

The prices are actually really reasonable..

Now depending on DDR4 prices, I may jump to this platform...^_^

 

[Fjodor2001]

lol 5-8 is abit excessive.

more like 3-4 before platform upgrades will force you too.

Going back 5 generation puts you in P4 territory and these are pretty much unusable today.

Going back 8 generations puts you in 486 era and that is laughable if you try to use one today.

Yes, but I'm looking forwards, not backwards. :|

Extrapolate the improvements on desktop that we've seen lately (past 2-3 generations) and I don't think 5-8 CPU generation are too far off unfortunately.

 

[Makaveli]

Yes, but I'm looking forwards, not backwards. :|

Extrapolate the improvements on desktop that we've seen lately (past 2-3 generations) and I don't think 5-8 CPU generation are too far off unfortunately.

Very true and according to the media the desktop is dying so we will go back to that speed in the tablet market

 

[Techhog]

Yes, but I'm looking forwards, not backwards. :|

Extrapolate the improvements on desktop that we've seen lately (past 2-3 generations) and I don't think 5-8 CPU generation are too far off unfortunately.

That's conservative, really. I don't see web browsing ever needing more processing power, so many people won't need to upgrade until their computer breaks. With Windows becoming more and more resource efficient, even the issue with Windows slowing down over time is much smaller than it was in the XP days. These are the real reasons why PC sales have slowed, not the post PC era BS apple fanboys are spreading.

 

[SPBHM]

from a gaming perspective I think it's really hard to justify, when the i7 4790K is probably faster, cheaper and much cheaper once you consider MB+RAM,

still, it's a good thing, not really that amazing once you consider the extra cost of DDR4 compared to 2011 (and the loss of pcie lanes for the cheapest part?), hopefully being closer in price to the 4 core i7s from lga 1150 means six core CPUs are not to distant in the future for the "mainstream" platform, and quad cores can go down in price to the i3 range!?

 

[RussianSensation]

4790K is much cheaper if you get a $150 and below mobo. However, plenty of motherboards are $180-220. Even a $250 X99 board will be stacked with features, possibly Ultra M.2, and even USB 3.1. So $70 premium, maybe another $50 for RAM. CPU is $100 more. Add it all up, $220 more but now amortize the cost over 3-5 years:

$220 / 3 = $73.3
$220 / 4 = $55
$220 / 5 = $44

For someone building a new system from scratch, it will be a $1,300-1,500 PC vs. $1520-$1720 PC, not much difference.

I mean people pay $150 more for 780 over 290 or $80-130 more for 770 2/4GB over 280X for no real increase in performance or $500+ over 290s for a 780Tis for a 10-15% increase!! If I was building from scratch, I would actually justify getting cutting edge DDR4 that I can reuse in 3-4 years when DDR3 is worthless. Secondly, even if only 1-2 AAA games show a 20-30% increase in gaming, all of a sudden $220 spent will give someone with $1,400 of 880s/980s/390Xs maximum performance. This platform isn't meant for someone who spends $500 on a CPU, $250 on a mobo and $150 on a GPU. If you want SLI + M.2 PCI 4x, X99 is better than Z97. But for someone who has $1000 of GPUs, what's another $220 for a 6 core Hw-E that will last for a loooong time. The case for 4790K is stronger if someone upgrades every 3 not 5 years.

I think 4790K is way overhyped. It has difficulty reaching 4.7-4.8Ghz. If 4790K could hit 5Ghz 90% of the time I could understand. I just can't see how a 4.7Ghz 4790K will prove to be a better choice than a 4.5Ghz 5820 over 4-5 years.

5820 costs $100 more for 2 more cores but 4790K costs $100 more over 4690K for HT. Looking back, I didn't even have to upgrade my i7 860 @ 3.9Ghz to 2500k, which would mean my 860 would have lasted me 5 years!!! The time where we upgraded a CPU every 1-2 years for a real increase in performance is long gone. 6-core HW-E @ 4.5Ghz should last 4-5 years for games with no need to upgrade.

If one makes a case why spend $ to future proof, then might as well get 4690K, OC it to 4.7Ghz, save $100, sell it when Skylake comes out and get that. I know I am in the minority but I can't justify 4790K when it doesn't have the future proof confidence about it and yet OC 4690K is just as fast in 95% of games.

My disappointment is that neither the 4790 nor the 5820 OC aren't much faster than 2500K OC in games. I mean how many people replay Crysis 3 over and over??? Every time I think about upgrading the CPU, it ends up better getting a faster/larger SSD and new GPUs. Ahhh... Frustrating.

 

[Techhog]

The main reason I'd consider Haswell-E is for extreme quality x264 encoding/streaming of newer games.

 

[aigomorla]

im gonna wait til someone delids the 5960K.
if its soldered and not TIM'd, i may pick it up.
Im also gonna see what features will be available on the X99.

Im praying for 10gb-e, as i have now already max'd my current 1gb-e connection in data transfers in network.



But i refuse to buy a cpu which i am gonna overclock to have a TIM under the IHS.\
Especially if its a 1100 dollar cpu.

 

[Techhog]

im gonna wait til someone delids the 5960K.
if its soldered and not TIM'd, i may pick it up.
Im also gonna see what features will be available on the X99.

Im praying for 10gb-e, as i have now already max'd my current 1gb-e connection in data transfers in network.



But i refuse to buy a cpu which i am gonna overclock to have a TIM under the IHS.\
Especially if its a 1100 dollar cpu.

E CPUs are soldered.

 

[frozentundra123456]

4790K is much cheaper if you get a $150 and below mobo. However, plenty of motherboards are $180-220. Even a $250 X99 board will be stacked with features, possibly Ultra M.2, and even USB 3.1. So $70 premium, maybe another $50 for RAM. CPU is $100 more. Add it all up, $220 more but now amortize the cost over 3-5 years:

$220 / 3 = $73.3
$220 / 4 = $55
$220 / 5 = $44

For someone building a new system from scratch, it will be a $1,300-1,500 PC vs. $1520-$1720 PC, not much difference.

I mean people pay $150 more for 780 over 290 or $80-130 more for 770 2/4GB over 280X for no real increase in performance or $500+ over 290s for a 780Tis for a 10-15% increase!! If I was building from scratch, I would actually justify getting cutting edge DDR4 that I can reuse in 3-4 years when DDR3 is worthless. Secondly, even if only 1-2 AAA games show a 20-30% increase in gaming, all of a sudden $220 spent will give someone with $1,400 of 880s/980s/390Xs maximum performance. This platform isn't meant for someone who spends $500 on a CPU, $250 on a mobo and $150 on a GPU. If you want SLI + M.2 PCI 4x, X99 is better than Z97. But for someone who has $1000 of GPUs, what's another $220 for a 6 core Hw-E that will last for a loooong time. The case for 4790K is stronger if someone upgrades every 3 not 5 years.

I think 4790K is way overhyped. It has difficulty reaching 4.7-4.8Ghz. If 4790K could hit 5Ghz 90% of the time I could understand. I just can't see how a 4.7Ghz 4790K will prove to be a better choice than a 4.5Ghz 5820 over 4-5 years.

5820 costs $100 more for 2 more cores but 4790K costs $100 more over 4690K for HT. Looking back, I didn't even have to upgrade my i7 860 @ 3.9Ghz to 2500k, which would mean my 860 would have lasted me 5 years!!! The time where we upgraded a CPU every 1-2 years for a real increase in performance is long gone. 6-core HW-E @ 4.5Ghz should last 4-5 years for games with no need to upgrade.

If one makes a case why spend $ to future proof, then might as well get 4690K, OC it to 4.7Ghz, save $100, sell it when Skylake comes out and get that. I know I am in the minority but I can't justify 4790K when it doesn't have the future proof confidence about it and yet OC 4690K is just as fast in 95% of games.

My disappointment is that neither the 4790 nor the 5820 OC aren't much faster than 2500K OC in games. I mean how many people replay Crysis 3 over and over??? Every time I think about upgrading the CPU, it ends up better getting a faster/larger SSD and new GPUs. Ahhh... Frustrating.

It is disappointing that the 4790k wont reach 5ghz, but still that is just an arbitrary number. Even if you only assume 4.7 that is only 6% less than 5ghz, probably cant tell the difference in games or general use without running a benchmark. The choice still comes down to how well games will utilize six cores vs four, and we still dont know that.

The question though is how the hex core will overclock. If it does 4.5ghz easily, I might agree with you, but I am not taking that as a given. If you have to pay 100 more for the cpu, plus an expensive cooler, to get to 4.5ghz, plus a more expensive motherboard and ram, the price goes up quite a lot compared to 4790K which does 4.2 turbo on all cores, hopefully without special cooling.

 

[RussianSensation]

The main reason I'd consider Haswell-E is for extreme quality x264 encoding/streaming of newer games.

I want to see someone hit close to 20 on Cinebench with the 5960X @ 4.7Ghz+, which should nearly double the 4770K OC. :biggrin:

 

[Fjodor2001]

E CPUs are soldered.

Hmm... Why are they moving back and forth between Solder (SB), TIM (Haswell), and Solder (Haswell-E)? Since they reintroduce solder, does it mean they consider it to be better than TIM after all? And will we only see solder going forward?

 

[Pwndenburg]

I'm so glad I lurk these forums, at a glance I thought the lowest priced sku was locked just like last gen. Thanks to this thread I can save some dough. I would hope to God that that sku could give me a simple stable 4.0. That's all I'm asking. I wonder if I'd even have to replace the hyper 212 evo... I'm thinking ... maybe lol. I know that prime 95 is not a good "real world usage" model, but I get 85 C on package running that at max turbo on the locked 4770 sku.

 

[Grooveriding]

im gonna wait til someone delids the 5960K.
if its soldered and not TIM'd, i may pick it up.
Im also gonna see what features will be available on the X99.

Im praying for 10gb-e, as i have now already max'd my current 1gb-e connection in data transfers in network.



But i refuse to buy a cpu which i am gonna overclock to have a TIM under the IHS.\
Especially if its a 1100 dollar cpu.

10gb ethernet would add a few $100 in cost to a motherboard is my guess. But, maybe Asus will produce a model with it. I can't see it coming as standard on every X99 board though, it's an expensive feature.

 

[Makaveli]

I want to see someone hit close to 20 on Cinebench with the 5960X @ 4.7Ghz+, which should nearly double the 4770K OC. :biggrin:

With the IPC difference between Ivy and Haswell on the 6 core models I don't think we will see that maybe DDR4 will help.

As for the 8 core model I think that is doable.

 

[tential]

It is disappointing that the 4790k wont reach 5ghz, but still that is just an arbitrary number. Even if you only assume 4.7 that is only 6% less than 5ghz, probably cant tell the difference in games or general use without running a benchmark. The choice still comes down to how well games will utilize six cores vs four, and we still dont know that.

The question though is how the hex core will overclock. If it does 4.5ghz easily, I might agree with you, but I am not taking that as a given. If you have to pay 100 more for the cpu, plus an expensive cooler, to get to 4.5ghz, plus a more expensive motherboard and ram, the price goes up quite a lot compared to 4790K which does 4.2 turbo on all cores, hopefully without special cooling.

Doesn't Haswell-E utilize DD4 Ram too? Or will there be boards that utilize DDR3? Because in no way am I rushing out to get DDR4 Ram. The price difference between a platform with a 4790k and a Haswell-E platform is quite large...

Maybe RussianSensation as an enthusiast is willing to pay that, but I certainly wouldn't be for gaming until we get games that show a large performance increase. Right now we don't even see a large performance increase on the 4690k to the 4790k... let alone to Haswell-E.

 

[YBS1]

I want to see someone hit close to 20 on Cinebench with the 5960X @ 4.7Ghz+, which should nearly double the 4770K OC. :biggrin:

Cinebench 11.5 scales linearly with cores, so assuming we see the octo core able to hit 4.6,GHz, that should be dead on 20.

 

[dud]

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2014/2014071501_Pre-order_prices_of_Intel_Haswell-E_processors.html

Cheapest 6C @ $426, 8C @ $1108. To me the former seems within the price range for most enthusiasts, the latter not so much.

Also, aren't the TDP:s quite high? After all there is no iGPU in them either.

Anyway, who's getting what and why? And will someone be getting Broadwell-K or Skylake-S instead?

I understand that these prices are for I7s but IMHO this is why PC sales are down worldwide.

I've had my eye on an I5 (Ivy or Haswell) but I'm not biting. IMHO retail prices on these chips are too high ATM. If I had a Fry's or Microcenter close by then I would bite for a new build but I am limited to Internet retailers like Newegg, a retailer who, IMHO is really slipping as of late.

Intel needs my $$$ much more than I need their processors. If they would discount their chips then I would consider giving them my money. As for the prices of these new i7s ... I have sticker shock.

 

[aigomorla]

E CPUs are soldered.

i heard this rumor about devils canyon, and well, we lost... :whiste:
Need to physically see the IHS and the shiny solder under it.

Hmm... Why are they moving back and forth between Solder (SB), TIM (Haswell), and Solder (Haswell-E)? Since they reintroduce solder, does it mean they consider it to be better than TIM after all? And will we only see solder going forward?

dunno but rumor ville was devils' was suposed to get soldered.
And well its TIM.

10gb ethernet would add a few $100 in cost to a motherboard is my guess. But, maybe Asus will produce a model with it. I can't see it coming as standard on every X99 board though, it's an expensive feature.

yeah i agree, but im praying its going to be available on the super premium line.
If your gonna get a 1100 dollar cpu, chances are your gonna get a flag ship board.

Doesn't Haswell-E utilize DD4 Ram too? Or will there be boards that utilize DDR3? Because in no way am I rushing out to get DDR4 Ram. The price difference between a platform with a 4790k and a Haswell-E platform is quite large...

X99 supposed to be DDR4.
There maybe venders who will utilize DDR3, but only launch will answer that speculation.

 

[Techhog]

i heard this rumor about devils canyon, and well, we lost... :whiste:
Need to see one actually with the IHS off the shiny solder under it.

It's no rumor. The enthusiast platform uses soldered CPUs. If they were going switch over, they would have done it for IVB-E.

 

[Techhog]

Hmm... Why are they moving back and forth between Solder (SB), TIM (Haswell), and Solder (Haswell-E)? Since they reintroduce solder, does it mean they consider it to be better than TIM after all? And will we only see solder going forward?

Ivy Bridge-E is soldered. They never switched to TIM on the enthusiast platform. They only switched to TIM on the consumer platform to save on costs. Haswell-E is based on the high-end server platform, so the solder adds value. It uses the same socket, and i don't see Intel ever switching to TIM for high-performance server platforms, where heat dissipation is extremely important. There's a slight chance that they'll decide that the enthusiast consumer CPUs will have TIM to save costs, but I doubt it. It's easier to just inflate the cost of the CPU itself in this case.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

I can't see me replacing my i5-3570K(running @ 4.0Ghz) for at least 4 years. :hmm:

Yeah -- I'm having second thoughts or option inspirations for my plan to build a Haswell-E next year with custom-water-cooling. I'm skeptical about the OC scalability of these chips. Only the software would use the power of hex-core, and it's beginning to look like an overkill-luxury. Unless there's a specific application that would benefit massively from six or eight cores, I could see scaling my ambitions back to four.

As for the 3570K as a "futureproof" status-quo, I feel the same way about my i7-2600K system. Not only did I "build it" and overclock it in 2011, it has "evolved" since then. If I had to "let go," it would be hard. That rig continues to amaze me. And I can see how Ivy and Haswell have improved raw performance, likely augmented the instruction sets and features.

Well. Heck. According to my "project schedule," I have a good part of a year to think it over . . . Don't I? Yup.

 

[Pwndenburg]

You guys are definately giving me second thoughts. I was thinking that the only way to get pci ssd was via the m.2 slot. But, if they will simply link to the pci slots, as a single card user what good would this really be. Those consoles 8 cores don't even come near haswell's 4 that I already have. May be better off to just get a cheap mx100 and hold on until I see more of these new ssds. On the other hand, all the rumored improvements coming in the next two gens at least don't interest me a bit. I've just always wanted to have that awesome "E" setup and to try sli for the first time.