Intel Reportedly Pushing Back Launch of Next-Gen CPUs

CommanderFrank

CommanderFrank

Cat Can't Scratch It
Joined
May 9, 2000
Messages
75,399
Intel was expected to dazzle the show goers at Computex the first week of June with its new Devil Canyon-based CPUs, but it looks like it’s going to be only a paper launch, at least until late September.

The Core i7-4790K was meant to be the star of the show, but along with the Core i5-4690K and Pentium G3258 CPUs, retail launches won't happen until later in the year.
Click to expand...
 
This should be pretty much assumed by now. Things are always a quarter to a year "late" (more like there's no competition / need to pump things out so quickly)
 
colinstu said:
This should be pretty much assumed by now. Things are always a quarter to a year "late" (more like there's no competition / need to pump things out so quickly)
Click to expand...

Or a less nefarious take on it might be that submicron processes with complex CPUs are more difficult to troubleshoot and implement and the unforgiving nature of the internet makes a schedule slip less painful than launching with limited supply or major bugs :cool:
 
kbrickley said:
Or a less nefarious take on it might be that submicron processes with complex CPUs are more difficult to troubleshoot and implement and the unforgiving nature of the internet makes a schedule slip less painful than launching with limited supply or major bugs :cool:
Click to expand...

and/or that they're buying needed time because silicon process shrinks can only go so far. Carbon nanotubes and other nanotech are a different ball game compared to silicon... but boy will it be exciting when this stuff comes out!
 
This makes me glad i didn't decide to wait and just went ahead and got a z87 board with a 4770K.
 
Meanwhile everyone is snoozing. Only real interesting things coming from Intel these days is the Extreme and Server parts.
 
Liger88 said:
Meanwhile everyone is snoozing. Only real interesting things coming from Intel these days is the Extreme and Server parts.
Click to expand...

Yea, and it sucks. I think a lot of us are still using 2500/2600K parts just because there is nothing to upgrade to that will give a good enough upgrade. Now, the name of the game is lower power for portable devices rather than faster and more powerful.
 
I only care about these chips if they get Iris Pro graphics. From the looks of benchmarks, it would kill AMDs APUs. It could create an APU war between AMD and Intel, cause CPU performance is certainly not in AMDs favor.
 
They have no one to compete with but themselves, so why rush if you still have old stock left to sell?
 
Who cares, I'm still on my trusty old i5-750 from 2009, in the old days I upgraded every second year, nowadays every 5 years seems to be enough.

Looks like Moore's law is only valid now, if the software you run can handle several cores.
 
Ur_Mom said:
Yea, and it sucks. I think a lot of us are still using 2500/2600K parts just because there is nothing to upgrade to that will give a good enough upgrade. Now, the name of the game is lower power for portable devices rather than faster and more powerful.
Click to expand...

Well I have 2600k and are planning to upgrade to a 4790k because it is faster and more powerful.

So there.
 
Blue_Scholar said:
Well I have 2600k and are planning to upgrade to a 4790k because it is faster and more powerful.

So there.
Click to expand...

I was thinking about it, too. Why haven't you upgraded in the past couple years, though? With the new CPU's out, there wasn't enough of an improvement to upgrade? It's not to the point where I'd think I was getting my moneys worth, but I just want to upgrade to something. It's more of a want than a need. It's going to be a full system upgrade, though. MB, RAM, CPU, GPU, HDD, KB, Mouse. The works.
 
....do what they want with Devil's Canyon, but they better not shove Haswell-E back or castrate it. I've waited bloody long enough.
 
I'm still more then happy with my i7 3820. Since I work too much to enjoy gaming I don't see myself upgrading for quite a while longer :eek:
 
Still rockin' my 2500K, but had no intentions of upgrading again until there was an affordable platform with both DDR4 and SATAe.
 
Might pick one of these up for my wife's new build. I'll be sticking with my 3930k for a few more years. Here is hoping they fixed the thermal paste issues for overclocking.
 
The higher performance desktop end of the market seems basically stagnant in terms of competition at the moment. There's no real benefit to intel in actually releasing these unless they are cheaper to manufacture and existing stock has nearly run out.

I suspect neither is the case.
 
Ur_Mom said:
I was thinking about it, too. Why haven't you upgraded in the past couple years, though? With the new CPU's out, there wasn't enough of an improvement to upgrade? It's not to the point where I'd think I was getting my moneys worth, but I just want to upgrade to something. It's more of a want than a need. It's going to be a full system upgrade, though. MB, RAM, CPU, GPU, HDD, KB, Mouse. The works.
Click to expand...

After I build a new pc I tend to stay away from tech news for a long while for fear of buyer's remorse among other things. (you know as well as I do there is always something around the corner.) well I started to snoop around about six months back to see what was going on and I was seduced and now I have the itch (so to speak). I was planning for Haswell-E but I relented as I feel it's too much too soon, new tech standards that need to go through some growing pains first, a little too expensive and more of a "want" than a "need", as you pointed out.

I then thought to wait around for Skylake or Skylake-E and well that could be pushed indefinitely and mid to late 2016 is a little too far off for me. So now I'm deciding to just take the plunge what with the proper Maxwells coming out relatively soon (hopefully) and strike while the iron is hot. Save a little money, have some fun building and quell my impatience at the same time.
 
CPU's? Lemme consult my gauge to see if I really give a rats freakin' arse about CPU's

giveashitometer.jpg


Just as I suspected. :p
 
I think AMD is in a decent position moving forward, less reliance on the just the CPU and more GPU loads benefits them immensely. Intel is king of the CPU, but AMD spanks em on the GPU and APU front...and that the thing people will probably continue to hold onto the 2500/2600K setups for a long time as anything newer isnt really doing anything groundbreaking for performance. Only reason I jumped to the 3930K is because I got the intel summer deal last year and a smokin deal on a MB.

CPU Performance has flatlined, dont reward Intel with buying an incremental upgrade. Wait for the next actual jump in performance not "Now with more megahurtz!" 100MHz jumps...

In a way I wish AMD was brewing something to knock Intel on its ass again, but I dont see that happening again, just want something to give em a kick in the ass and get the race going again.
 
Surface Pro 3 is exactly what I want except for it being held back by Intel's crappy mobile CPU and iGPU that's making me seriously considering canceling my preorder. I'd like to see AMD step up to the plate and deliver a mobile APU on GloFo or Samsung 14nm.
 
Honestly the past two chips were stellar enough that you have to wonder whether you really need to spend more than Haswell to get a small boost...not worth it IMO. I guess this is what happens when AMD is not really competing, Intel will continue to rehash the older models.
 
Blue_Scholar said:
After I build a new pc I tend to stay away from tech news for a long while for fear of buyer's remorse among other things. (you know as well as I do there is always something around the corner.) well I started to snoop around about six months back to see what was going on and I was seduced and now I have the itch (so to speak). I was planning for Haswell-E but I relented as I feel it's too much too soon, new tech standards that need to go through some growing pains first, a little too expensive and more of a "want" than a "need", as you pointed out.

I then thought to wait around for Skylake or Skylake-E and well that could be pushed indefinitely and mid to late 2016 is a little too far off for me. So now I'm deciding to just take the plunge what with the proper Maxwells coming out relatively soon (hopefully) and strike while the iron is hot. Save a little money, have some fun building and quell my impatience at the same time.
Click to expand...

I try and look at the roadmap and see if there is anything huge around the corner. If it's a big deal, I'll wait. If there isn't much other than incremental updates, I'll bite and be happy for a while.
 
Sandy bridge for life..... it looks like sadly.

Intel is giving AMD plenty of time to come out with something worthwhile, hoping that happens would rather give them my money anyway.
 
MrWrong said:
This makes me glad i didn't decide to wait and just went ahead and got a z87 board with a 4770K.
Click to expand...

Me too. I was kinda sick about the new processors coming out right after I put together my new system. I really had no need to upgrade from my 2600k, but I wanted an htpc for gaming. I remember buying a new processor every six months, if not sooner, back in the amd Thunderbird/Barton days. Now its every 4-5 years. Easy on the wallet, but the hobby sure isn't what it used to be.
 
MindBuster said:
Who cares, I'm still on my trusty old i5-750 from 2009, in the old days I upgraded every second year, nowadays every 5 years seems to be enough.

Looks like Moore's law is only valid now, if the software you run can handle several cores.
Click to expand...

I'm in the same boat as you. I just yesterday purchased a Radeon R9 290. I have been using a HD 5850 since 2009. My 2009 era Phenom II just got replaced a couple months ago. These new hardware releases just don't smoke the old parts like they used to.
 
To much emphasis on mobile at the moment, it in a way benefits us, but not the same as all out performance as the main motivator.
 
Problem is that the software doesnt take advantage of all these new hardware innovations. There are barely enough games that take advantage of say SLI and Crossfire...in 2014! And majority of games for example couldnt care less what kind of CPU you have as long as its not Athlon 64
 
Igroock said:
Problem is that the software doesnt take advantage of all these new hardware innovations. There are barely enough games that take advantage of say SLI and Crossfire...in 2014! And majority of games for example couldnt care less what kind of CPU you have as long as its not Athlon 64
Click to expand...
QFT!!
MANY games now are still being developed for consoles so until console hardware takes a giant step forward PC hardware will be ready for years to come (unless you go 3x 4k monitors :p).
 
The Haswell refresh are for sale already so how is that a delay?

Intel Core i5-4690 Haswell 3.5GHz LGA 1150 84W

Do they mean the K's are delayed?
 
I`m still using an old X5690, hardly worth upgrading at he moment unless i want more chipset features than the OEM X58 motherboard has (was meant to be a server but it never happened so its used as workstation now).

I`m running 280X OC so i doubt my CPU is even an issue.
 
Igroock said:
I guess this is what happens when AMD is not really competing, Intel will continue to rehash the older models.
Click to expand...

The Athlon 64 stomped Intel's netburst architecture in pretty much every way, but that didn't cause Intel to rush out better chips. It was cheaper just to lean on OEMs and pay the antitrust fines for doing so.
 
DeathFromBelow said:
The Athlon 64 stomped Intel's netburst architecture in pretty much every way, but that didn't cause Intel to rush out better chips. It was cheaper just to lean on OEMs and pay the antitrust fines for doing so.
Click to expand...

Well, it isn't "easy" to rush out new chips sometimes, especially since Intel had painted themselves into a corner on that architecture and had to jump back several generations to create the Core architecture ... not trivial and certainly not instantaneous ;)

As to the OEMs, they were sometimes the chefs in that kitchen too ... it isn't trivial to maintain two competing supply chains that aren't interchangeable ... the big OEMs would often use the threat of a switch to negotiate better terms, pricing, or other benefits with Intel but they had no intention of switching ... also, AMD's inconsistent ability to deliver high volumes of processors on schedule didn't help them ... even if the Intel chips were slower they were "good enough" for many users (especially the jane and joe six pack crowd) and Intel could deliver high volume and reliable chips on demand :cool:
 
kbrickley said:
Well, it isn't "easy" to rush out new chips sometimes, especially since Intel had painted themselves into a corner on that architecture and had to jump back several generations to create the Core architecture ... not trivial and certainly not instantaneous ;)

As to the OEMs, they were sometimes the chefs in that kitchen too ... it isn't trivial to maintain two competing supply chains that aren't interchangeable ... the big OEMs would often use the threat of a switch to negotiate better terms, pricing, or other benefits with Intel but they had no intention of switching ... also, AMD's inconsistent ability to deliver high volumes of processors on schedule didn't help them ... even if the Intel chips were slower they were "good enough" for many users (especially the jane and joe six pack crowd) and Intel could deliver high volume and reliable chips on demand :cool:
Click to expand...

Sure. The point was that competition from AMD has historically had little to no real impact on Intel's product cycle. AMD is too small to matter. Intel isn't ignoring the high end because of AMD, they're ignoring the high end because desktop sales are flat and the market for low power chips is growing.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top