The i7-5775C is awesome

[ShintaiDK]

In pure calculation the faster core clock CPU will always win. 5960X is also rather slow in this case. But when you are more memory dependent that's where cache comes in. Either as a big L3 or a EDRAM based large L4.

 

[LTC8K6]

In pure calculation the faster core clock CPU will always win. 5960X is also rather slow in this case. But when you are more memory dependent that's where cache comes in. Either as a big L3 or a EDRAM based large L4.

I was responding to the "higher ipc" than Haswell part.

If Broadwell has higher ipc than Haswell, it's not much at all.

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

Looks like 4.2GHz is really the wall on this chip. L3 cache also doesn't OC as well, I just left it at 3.6GHz and core at 4GHz. eDRAM is now OCed to 2GHz from 1.8GHz with no effort, max multi is 25 or 26.

Overall I like this chip a lot because it runs way cooler and it punches above it's weight in anything that demands strong memory performance and who knows maybe with D3D12 the Iris Pro GPU will put to some use.

 

[Ketchup]

Thanks for the update. Are you getting the Iris performance you were expecting? I saw some pretty amazing numbers by reviewers, even if they weren't in situations I cared about (silly resolutions or detail settings, imo).

 

[Magic Carpet]

Yeah I hate that Broadwell is only available for Z97/H97 chipsets. Have a few B85 boards lying around that are waiting to be re-purposed. Would rather use this chips instead. Sucks.

 

[iGigaflop]

I couldnt believe some of the benchmarks ive looked at it matches the 6700k in most games and beating it at others, i think we need a 6790k with more cache like the 5775c. And it does this at a lower clock speed.

 

[VirtualLarry]

i think we need a 6790k with more cache like the 5775c. And it does this at a lower clock speed.

I agree. Imagine what kind of performance we would have, with Skylake IPC, clocks, and 128MB-256MB of L4 / eDRAM!

It's a shame Intel doesn't want to make their desktop chips TOO high in performance, because then people would buy desktops again, instead of expensive Ultrabooks.

 

[Head1985]

L4 EDram helps alot in games

Final fantasy benchmark 5775C:
4Ghz L4 online RAM 2133Mhz: 26079 points
4Ghz L4 online RAM 1333Mhz: 25751 points
4Ghz L4 offline RAM 2133Mhz: 22418 points
4Ghz L4 offline RAM 1333Mhz: 18689 points

Compared to skylake 6700k on 4Ghz with 3000mhz ram:
25174

Without L4 broadwell is crap=5%faster than haswell.But with L4 on its Beast.But skylake can overclock higher so after max OC its still beats max overclock broadwell.But skylake need Fast DDR4 ram.3600Mhz minimum to not be bottleneck.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I agree. Imagine what kind of performance we would have, with Skylake IPC, clocks, and 128MB-256MB of L4 / eDRAM!

It's a shame Intel doesn't want to make their desktop chips TOO high in performance, because then people would buy desktops again, instead of expensive Ultrabooks.

Or the beloved HEDT platform.

I think Kabylake is supposed to have desktop chips with edram, like BW-C isn't it? That is what is frustrating about intel though. They put all the resources into developing something like e-dram, make a buttload of skus that are supposed to have it, but they never seem to materialize, and if they do they are in some super high end 2000.00 surface or ultrabook.

 

[Headfoot]

eDRAM is going to be like popular game franchises (halo, call of duty). Remove the popular feature every other release so that you can "Bring it back" to much fanfare on the next one.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Without L4 broadwell is crap=5%faster than haswell.But with L4 on its Beast.But skylake can overclock higher so after max OC its still beats max overclock broadwell.But skylake need Fast DDR4 ram.3600Mhz minimum to not be bottleneck.

Yeah, if I want to buy something today w/ L4 cache (i.e. Broadwell-C) I have to get stuck to an older 1150 platform. Just meh :/

I am not impressed by Skylake, nor by its integrated graphics core, to be frank, partially because the better DDR4 ram doesn't exist yet. It clearly does benefit from the faster memory. I want some low voltage, low profile and high performance ddr4 32gb kit (16gb x 2 preferably, but 8gb x 4 should do). Not this overclocked monstrosity that is available today :thumbsdown:

Again, more meh. Might as well pick that "antique" i7-5775C for my upcoming build, seems like quality/smart design all-together. At least, I could save on its cooling (comes with the stock hsf and runs silent enough); the resale value should, too, be quite decent.

 

[Head1985]

Yeah, if I want to buy something today w/ L4 cache (i.e. Broadwell-C) I have to get stuck to an older 1150 platform. Just meh :/

I am not impressed by Skylake, nor by its integrated graphics core, to be frank, partially because the better DDR4 ram doesn't exist yet. It clearly does benefit from the faster memory. I want some low voltage, low profile and high performance ddr4 32gb kit (16gb x 2 preferably, but 8gb x 4 should do). Not this overclocked monstrosity that is available today :thumbsdown:

Again, more meh. Might as well pick that "antique" i7-5775C for my upcoming build, seems like quality/smart design all-together. At least, I could save on its cooling (comes with the stock hsf and runs quiet enough); the resale value should, too, be quite decent.

GSkill announced 3600Mhz ram cl15.That will be perfect for skylake.With that Ram skylake should match broadwell IPC with L4 ON.
http://www.pcgamer.com/gskill-adds-lower-latency-ddr4-3600-trident-z/

 

[crashtech]

This thread just reminds me of the fact that Broadwell-E doesn't have the only thing that would have really made it exciting.

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

The only thing disappointing about broadwell is how poor it OCs compared to haswell and skylake. To get to 4.2GHz on my chip I had to up the voltage to 1.36! It still runs really cool with that voltage and doesn't have those crazy temperature swings but going higher than 4.2/4.3GHz is nigh impossible without some major effort.

 

[Maxima1]

eDRAM proves some here that they are clearly wrong. Intel is holding back instead of giving the performance increase because it's like a tic-tac-toe all at once. Why give it? They can do the same as they do with hyperthreading or igpu and segment it to oblivion.

 

[SAAA]

This thread just reminds me of the fact that Broadwell-E doesn't have the only thing that would have really made it exciting.

Indeed, quite sad considered the only real news is a 10 core extreme end part... maybe there's a vague chance of higher OC if it runs cooler than Haswell but that's all.

The only thing disappointing about broadwell is how poor it OCs compared to haswell and skylake. To get to 4.2GHz on my chip I had to up the voltage to 1.36! It still runs really cool with that voltage and doesn't have those crazy temperature swings but going higher than 4.2/4.3GHz is nigh impossible without some major effort.

That's because it's made on a mobile process yet turned into a desktop chip: it really shouldn't have existed as product line in the first place but they ended up releasing it anyway.
Also it shows how much difference there is among processes looking at Skylake average overclock, some 400MHz more!

eDRAM proves some here that they are clearly wrong. Intel is holding back instead of giving the performance increase because it's like a tic-tac-toe all at once. Why give it? They can do the same as they do with hyperthreading or igpu and segment it to oblivion.

It's been years since memory mattered this much and more than 4 cores limit it looks like the memory has hit a wall: 8MB of L3 for 6 generations is a bit much considered they went from 45 to 14nm.
Heck they even reduced the absolute amount since the core duo quads, 12MB of L2 even if slower can keep 50%more everything...

L4 surely consumes more power, it isn't the best of improvements in many fields yet when it matters it's huge: with large clock deficit and less IPC Broadwell sometimes tops the recent arch!?
But no let's waste a third of the die on IGP that could easily be cut in half if you really need one (12EUs is definitely enough if you also increase clocks and add eDRAM) to include 64/128MB of L4.

 

[Magic Carpet]

That's because it's made on a mobile process yet turned into a desktop chip: it really shouldn't have existed as product line in the first place but they ended up releasing it anyway.

Not quite.

With Broadwell, Intel focused mainly on laptops, miniature desktops, and all-in-ones. This left traditional desktop users with no new socketed CPU options beyond 4th-generation Haswell, which first arrived in 2013. Although Intel finally coughed up a pair of Broadwell desktop chips this past summer, the company launched its high-end 6th-generation Skylake CPUs very shortly thereafter.

At a recent industry conference, Kirk Skaugen, senior vice president and general manager of Intel’s Client Computing Group, admitted that skipping desktops with Broadwell was a poor decision. Between the end of life for Windows XP in 2014 and the lack of new desktop chips, Intel hasn’t given tower PC users any good reasons to upgrade in 2015.

“We made an experiment and we said maybe we are putting technology in to the market too fast, but let’s not build a chip for the mainstream Tower business, more than a $10 billion business,” Skaugen said, as first reported by WCCFTech. “Turns out that was a mistake.” Source.

Oh well. One too many.

 

[Keljian]

the bandwidth is one thing for Broadwell's L4 (50gb/s bidirectional), but the latency can't be matched by standard memory on anything else on the platform.

https://forums.aida64.com/topic/2864-i7-5775c-l4-cache-performance/

40~ ns - which is 50% faster than CAS11-1866

For cache activities (eg activities that make use of a lookup table which will fit in ram) there is nothing that comes close, not even on the 2011 platform.

I find it rather staggering that there isn't a 4.5-5ghz Broadwell with 2000mhz edram specifically for microtrading.

 

[superstition]

Peter Bright wrote about the problem back in September:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...obbing-us-of-the-performance-king-we-deserve/

 

[beginner99]

Peter Bright wrote about the problem back in September:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...obbing-us-of-the-performance-king-we-deserve/

Yeah, it's pretty much fail on intel side. I almost bought the 5775c but decided against it due to users having issues with mobos. Skylake was way to expensive here so waiting for kaby lake...(Broadwell-e was an option but now it's too late and as far as we know to little).

 

[sm625]

Peter Bright wrote about the problem back in September:

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2015...obbing-us-of-the-performance-king-we-deserve/

Funny article. Why would intel sell a processor with an expensive L4 cache for $350 when it can sell one without the cache for the same money?

 

[superstition]

Yeah, it's pretty much fail on intel side. I almost bought the 5775c but decided against it due to users having issues with mobos. Skylake was way to expensive here so waiting for kaby lake...(Broadwell-e was an option but now it's too late and as far as we know to little).

As far as I know, if you're looking at overclocking and performance you want to find a board that does both of the following:

1) Lets you override the TDP, to prevent throttling. Anandtech's review found the 5675C outperforming the 5775C in a few games and speculated that it was turbo/throttling related to TDP that caused that.

2) Lets you overclock the EDRAM slightly, decoupled from the main clock rate. The optimal performance level appears to be 2000. As I recall, some boards automatically overclock the EDRAM when overclocking the main CPU clock, which greatly limits the overclockability of the chip.

Funny article. Why would intel sell a processor with an expensive L4 cache for $350 when it can sell one without the cache for the same money?

I think the key here is to:

A) Force people to buy into an EOL socket if they want the EDRAM.*

B) Force people to buy Skylake and then replace it with an EDRAM chip when it comes available.*

Segmentation at its finest (most macabre, particularly given that Skylake has an EDRAM controller).

*unless they want to wait around

What Intel should have at least done is offer a higher TDP SKU of Broadwell for gamers with the iGPU disabled and decent-quality thermal transfer. But, I would have rather had seen Broadwell have a longer life on the desktop in lieu of Skylake's "premature" release. The extreme hype about Skylake made people think it's a bad move to buy into Broadwell but then we saw the actual performance. The extreme hype favored Intel's strategy, though, by pushing people into the A/B scenario above.

 

[crashtech]

If Intel was under any pressure from competition, you can bet your rear end that many of its CPUs would now be featuring eDRAM. As it is, we'll feel fortunate to eventually see a socketed Skylake chip with eDRAM, eventually, probably with limited availability and very high price tag just like Broadwell-C.

 

[ZGR]

Yeah, it's pretty much fail on intel side. I almost bought the 5775c but decided against it due to users having issues with mobos. Skylake was way to expensive here so waiting for kaby lake...(Broadwell-e was an option but now it's too late and as far as we know to little).

It was a pain in the butt getting my 5775c to play nice with my Motherboard. But I can easily say the difficulties were worth it. I will never buy an Intel CPU without eDRAM again. The performance gains in CPU bound games is quite noticeable. This is coming from a 4690k @ 4.4 GHz.

For the price of a 4790k, the 5775c is a much more attractive option IMO. Raw clockspeed is overrated. Give me more/faster eDRAM instead!

 

[Hi-Fi Man]

Even if the 5775C was slower I would still prefer it because it runs so much cooler and handles voltage much better. Ivy bridge and Haswell can get hard to cool once you start bumping up voltages and their temps swing around quite a bit.

Broadwell C is definitely a hidden gem.