Haswell-E w/ X99 mobo + DDR4 demo'd at IDF13.

What's this LGA2011-3 business? Is it just getting my hopes up that there's a possible BIOS update that'll allow SB-E/IVB-E mobo's the ability to swap out chips? Assuming DDR4 support I'm guessing that's just a placeholder for the actual socket name.
 
Liger88 said:
What's this LGA2011-3 business? Is it just getting my hopes up that there's a possible BIOS update that'll allow SB-E/IVB-E mobo's the ability to swap out chips? Assuming DDR4 support I'm guessing that's just a placeholder for the actual socket name.
Click to expand...
Intel has already let known that Haswell 2011 is NOT compatible with Sandy Bridge-E/Ivy Bridge-E 2011.

You have to remember: Haswell-E has an on-die VRM plus DDR4 controller. It is also supposedly more power efficient. If like Haswell 1150, then the cores and CPU components in Haswell-E are also re-arranged.

Therefore, Haswell-E will not fit on current Socket 2011 boards. That's why it becomes a dilemma of sorts-- Do you go with IVB-E now but are stuck on a dead end socket? Or, do you wait one year plus for Haswell-E?

Either CPU will last a very long time given the current the state of software. Probably only reason to go to Haswell-E is power efficiency as the major factor.
 
And the idea of an 8-10 core i7 with DDR4 factor. I wouldn't mind 64gigs of 2666mhz memory paired with an unlocked 10-core processor.

Haswell-E beast that would feature 8 cores, faster clocks and 20 MB of L3 cache. Intel is aiming for an 55% IPC improvement over quad cores with their flagship Haswell-E processors
Click to expand...

Now intel has joined AMD among the ranks of companies who use the ambiguity of the term IPC to wrongly represent CPU power. I have advocated using the term 'IPCPC' to avoid this, but hey who am I to question their marketing?
 
Last edited:
octoberasian said:
Therefore, Haswell-E will not fit on current Socket 2011 boards. That's why it becomes a dilemma of sorts-- Do you go with IVB-E now but are stuck on a dead end socket? Or, do you wait one year plus for Haswell-E?
Click to expand...

There is no dilema for me. I waited for HW already and after I seen what it do, I thought about getting quad channel, and durable socket.

So it's either Ivy-E, or 4670K. And this quarter.
 
The difference between IB-E and Haswell-E will be similar to the ~5% difference between IB and Haswell. Combine that with a new platform along with new memory and you're going to see a minor performance boost for around 2x the price. Complaints on the internet will be epic!
 
RVWinkle said:
The difference between IB-E and Haswell-E will be similar to the ~5% difference between IB and Haswell. Combine that with a new platform along with new memory and you're going to see a minor performance boost for around 2x the price. Complaints on the internet will be epic!
Click to expand...

Not quite, as it will bring what people have been asking for a while - unlocked 8-core chips.

OTOH, I love the new high end platform stuffed in a cheap NZXT case.
 
Mind you USB 3.1 should be out then. Wait and see. I am not liking current 4960x or 4930K at all. No real advantage in upgrading.
 
Raghar said:
There is no dilema for me. I waited for HW already and after I seen what it do, I thought about getting quad channel, and durable socket.

So it's either Ivy-E, or 4670K. And this quarter.
Click to expand...
I'm in the same boat, and will most likely have a 4930K-based system before the end of the year.

Haswell-E is too far away to consider, and I don't feel like paying a premium for DDR4 memory. DDR3 RAM is still cheap (hopefully).
 
The mediocrity of upcoming releases caused me to go ahead with Haswell. I will definitely stay with it at least until Skylake-E.
 
Still not seen an official SATA Express confirmation on x99. Even the chart on the page doesn't show it.
 
Ultima99 said:
The mediocrity of upcoming releases caused me to go ahead with Haswell. I will definitely stay with it at least until Skylake-E.
Click to expand...

I am sorta pissed that Intel is sitting back and riding the money train instead of giving us Haswell-E now..They clearly have the chips ready, as the process has been mature for some time..The X99 chipset is ready, and I know DDR4 hasn't been ramped up yet, but what is to stop them from releasing a chipset with DDR3 support now, and then DDR4 later?

Both AMD and Intel have been this in the past. With Intel, it was done with the P4 first being Rambus only, and then Intel relenting to pressure and releasing an SDRAM chipset..Then with the SD/DDR and then DDR1/2 3/4 changes..

Then again, they *COULD* have given us 8-10 core SB-E CPUs over a year ago:rolleyes:..

/endrant
 
ccityinstaller said:
I am sorta pissed that Intel is sitting back and riding the money train instead of giving us Haswell-E now..They clearly have the chips ready, as the process has been mature for some time..The X99 chipset is ready, and I know DDR4 hasn't been ramped up yet, but what is to stop them from releasing a chipset with DDR3 support now, and then DDR4 later?

Both AMD and Intel have been this in the past. With Intel, it was done with the P4 first being Rambus only, and then Intel relenting to pressure and releasing an SDRAM chipset..Then with the SD/DDR and then DDR1/2 3/4 changes..

Then again, they *COULD* have given us 8-10 core SB-E CPUs over a year ago:rolleyes:..

/endrant
Click to expand...

FYI, the memory controller is on the CPU, not the chipset, and has been since the first generation i7s for Intel. Why should they waste die space incorporating both a DDR3 and DDR4 memory controller, especially since DDR3 and DDR4 use completely different protocols, unlike DDR2 and DDR3, which had a good number of similarities.

Liger88 said:
What's this LGA2011-3 business? Is it just getting my hopes up that there's a possible BIOS update that'll allow SB-E/IVB-E mobo's the ability to swap out chips? Assuming DDR4 support I'm guessing that's just a placeholder for the actual socket name.
Click to expand...

Yes, you are just getting your hopes up. See above, and it's called 2011-3 because the socket will have 2011 pins, but connected differently than current 2011 sockets.
 
8 cores is all you will get with Haswell-E, any more than that and intel risks damaging sales of its very profitable Xeon cpu's (which are rumoured to have upto 14 cores).

Oh and as for the why so late rants, - The i7-4xxx cpu's are tied into the launch dates of the 1p and 2p E5 xeon's.
 
Nathan_P said:
8 cores is all you will get with Haswell-E, any more than that and intel risks damaging sales of its very profitable Xeon cpu's (which are rumoured to have upto 14 cores).

Oh and as for the why so late rants, - The i7-4xxx cpu's are tied into the launch dates of the 1p and 2p E5 xeon's.
Click to expand...

I'm hoping the 8-core Haswell-E means we might finally see 6 core in the mainstream platform, especially if the "entry-level" Haswell-E becomes a 6-core. But Skylake might be a little early to expect that, especially since the rumor mill says they're also introducing AVX 512 on that part.

Wouldn't want Intel to give us TOO MUCH improved performance, would we? :D
 
I suppose we could see a skylake 5790k six core. Not impossible but not too likely.
 
defaultluser said:
Why all this whining? You can have your 12 core CPU anytime you want.

https://www.sabrepc.com/p-4202-inte...-2697-v2-27ghz-lga2011-server-cpu-retail.aspx

Oh wait, you want it for $100? Come back around 2030 :D
Click to expand...

If that CPU were unlocked, I'd buy a bunch of them...at least three of them.

The issue here is that there isn't a fully enabled, unlocked CPU available at ANY price. All I want is a fully enabled, fully unlocked, dual capable CPU with no features, cores or cache neutered. I don't care what Intel wants to charge for it...

Intel should have an early access program to allow enthusiasts to purchase their next gen platforms. This way, we get the cutting edge hardware we crave, and Intel gets feedback and valuable information regarding the hardware's issues, limits and how it behaves when flogged...;)
 
Last edited:
lutjens said:
If that CPU were unlocked, I'd buy a bunch of them...at least three of them.

The issue here is that there isn't a fully enabled, unlocked CPU available at ANY price. All I want is a fully enabled, fully unlocked, dual capable CPU with no features, cores or cache neutered. I don't care what Intel wants to charge for it...

Intel should have an early access program to allow enthusiasts to purchase their next gen platforms. This way, we get the cutting edge hardware we crave, and Intel gets feedback and valuable information regarding the hardware's issues, limits and how it behaves when flogged...;)
Click to expand...

Bravo! Well said my friend!
 
Maybe if they raised the price to $5000 or so for the unlocked 12 core 24 threaded workstation CPU to make sure they were not hurting server sales by releasing an unlocked server processor. Although that would be way out of my price range.
 
And about a year away...what a stupid tease this is. lol

Guess I'll buy a caselabs case to scratch the itch that x79 can't currently cure while I wait for x99.
 
drescherjm said:
Maybe if they raised the price to $5000 or so for the unlocked 12 core 24 threaded workstation CPU to make sure they were not hurting server sales by releasing an unlocked server processor. Although that would be way out of my price range.
Click to expand...

I wonder what the yields are on the top-end chips. They wouldn't want enthusiast demand to cut into their limited supply for professional customers.
 
drescherjm said:
Maybe if they raised the price to $5000 or so for the unlocked 12 core 24 threaded workstation CPU to make sure they were not hurting server sales by releasing an unlocked server processor. Although that would be way out of my price range.
Click to expand...

Intel wouldn't have to even create a new SKU...all they need to do is unlock the turbo multipliers and BCLK strap on the top bin 12 core CPU, the E5-2697V2. By default, it would run like it does now, and with the option to overclock, the possibilities are endless. Intel has a win/win situation here...they sell more of their top bin (and top margin) CPUs and we get the ultra premium product that we want. I don't see a downside for Intel by doing this.

DeathFromBelow said:
I wonder what the yields are on the top-end chips. They wouldn't want enthusiast demand to cut into their limited supply for professional customers.
Click to expand...

OEMs already get their allocation of production before the surplus hits the channel, so the biggest customers wouldn't have to worry about it. With the current price of the E5-2697V2, I don't think that Intel's production of these CPUs is outstripped by demand, especially considering the other new offerings of the Xeon line. With their new strategy of running 6, 10 and 12 core dies, all they'd have to do to meet any increased demand would be to run a few more 12 core wafers. The incredibly high profit margin of the 12 core chips makes this proposition one that would be very attractive to Intel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top