Dresdenboy
Golden Member
Ummm...What? Intel had an integrated GPU long before AMD did.
Yep, as did Cyrix 15 or so years ago.
All these were not really usable for computing tasks.
Ummm...What? Intel had an integrated GPU long before AMD did.
Ummm...What? Intel had an integrated GPU long before AMD did.
How would the Haswell OC. The hexacore version ? I think with a good OC that 5 to 7 percent will be 15 percent. Then another 15 to 20 percent for having 2 extra cores.
I think Haswell 6 core will be 25 percent faster then sandy or ivy.
But wasn't it AMD that promoted the "proper GPU on CPU die" concept, and then turned it into a case for "GPGPU compute on CPU?"
Haswell will be 10-15% faster than Sandy Bridge per clock. The clock ceiling of ~4.6 GHz for Sandy Bridge and ~4.8 GHz for Ivy Bridge will probably land somewhere around 5.0 GHz on Haswell. Expecting six-core Haswell parts on a mainstream platform isn't likely to happen, however.
Based solely on history, Haswell units will initially ship at slightly higher clock speeds than equivalently priced parts from the previous generation.
Throw all of those together, and you're likely to see somewhere around 200 MHz higher clocks at stock (compared to current products) and an average of ~12.5% increase in performance per clock. This would place an i7-4770 (whatever they decide to call it) at 3.6 GHz - ~12.5% faster than a 3770 per clock, as well as being clocked 5.9% higher. The top mainstream part will likely outperform the current top mainstream part by ~19%.
Unless you are saying AMD opened their mouths like they did with their dual core fiasco, giving Intel the chance to out-engineer them and deliver sooner? That could be.
Hey, that's completely your prerogative. You can spend your money any way you want. I'm just giving a heads up straight up 2 core, 4 core, X core CPUs isn't where tech is going. Just look at the supercomputers, how did that happen right?
Too bad Haswell-E says otherwise too you.
I'd rather have 2-4 cores more and no IGP..and I'll pay for such a solution.
Hey, that's completely your prerogative. You can spend your money any way you want. I'm just giving a heads up straight up 2 core, 4 core, X core CPUs isn't where tech is going. Just look at the supercomputers, how did that happen right?
The main focus -again- will be on improving the iGPU. If Intel can gain another 25-30% improvement in that area, it would be a big win. It would bring Intel very close to AMD, and then in a couple more generations maybe they can even dream of overtaking AMD in the iGPU department.
I gather you have absolutely no idea who TuxDave is, what company he works for, and what he does to earn his paycheck from his employer
*snip*<- cannot put enough of these here to express my ROFL upon reading your "rebuttal" to a rather transparently obvious "heads-up". Wow
But wasn't it AMD that promoted the "proper GPU on CPU die" concept, and then turned it into a case for "GPGPU compute on CPU?"
If anything Intel was countering the graphics on CPU idea that AMD originally had. Intel wouldn't want high end GPGPU compute on their IGP because it doesn't tie directly into them expanding the capability of their actual CPU cores which are much more flexible.
He could be the tooth-fairy for all I care...don't alter my stance...nice "Appel to authority"....when we are talking about my subjective stance...:whiste:
I don't care if Otellini himself praised tie migdet-wanna-be-IGP...wouldn't alter my stance...or opinion.
I have no need for a crappy IGP...no matter who gets a boner on for the IGP...simple as that...nice fail though! :whiste:
How would the Haswell OC. The hexacore version ? I think with a good OC that 5 to 7 percent will be 15 percent. Then another 15 to 20 percent for having 2 extra cores.
I think Haswell 6 core will be 25 percent faster then sandy or ivy OCed.
Dont forget we OC the haswell,, maybe 6GHZ ?
This chip being hexacore also, will pownz any desktop chip. You guys are crazy if you think its not gonna have a big difference then ivy or sandy. A OCed hexacore will crush any oced Sandy or bridge.
99% of users will be fine with an APU, the real boys(1%) will always need more CPU performance/threads and discrete GPUs
No matter how fast the APUs will become(fused, more apps to take advantage off etc), a CPU + Discrete GPU will always be faster in both apps and Games.
Haswell will be 10-15% faster than Sandy Bridge per clock. The clock ceiling of ~4.6 GHz for Sandy Bridge and ~4.8 GHz for Ivy Bridge will probably land somewhere around 5.0 GHz on Haswell. Expecting six-core Haswell parts on a mainstream platform isn't likely to happen, however.
Based solely on history, Haswell units will initially ship at slightly higher clock speeds than equivalently priced parts from the previous generation.
Throw all of those together, and you're likely to see somewhere around 200 MHz higher clocks at stock (compared to current products) and an average of ~12.5% increase in performance per clock. This would place an i7-4770 (whatever they decide to call it) at 3.6 GHz - ~12.5% faster than a 3770 per clock, as well as being clocked 5.9% higher. The top mainstream part will likely outperform the current top mainstream part by ~19%.
I'm afraid you're not aware of the revolution that is about to hit us... It's certainly true that the increase in core count has slowed down in the past few years, but that's because with today's CPUs it's quite hard for developers to juggle many threads (because these CPUs only have very primitive and slow means for synchronizing between threads).I'm just giving a heads up straight up 2 core, 4 core, X core CPUs isn't where tech is going.
Your dreaming . THE APU isn't going to win . The IGPU is . AMDs APU name will be disgarded. As Intels cpus will be better at everthing including graphics as iGPU name also disappears. Intels cpu will be a cpu that does it all . NV coined the GPU name what was it that ATI coined theirs. Its been so long I forgotten those 3 small letters from ATI . APU is bound for the same result. Because INTEL will never use APU.
Also mainstream desktop 4C GT2 @ 65W TDP (I assume they correspond to IB 3570/3770K?). Somehow they have been able to lower the TDP from 77W->65W compare to IB without a node shrink?