Time table on X99?

R

Rizen

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Jul 16, 2000
Messages
9,487
When is the next Intel chipset coming? I assume this is set to be released with Haswell-E? I'm really ready to build another monster system, as my i7 930 is starting to become a bit of a bottleneck without SATA 3, PCI-E 3.0, and limited memory speeds. But I really don't want to upgrade to a X79, as it's fairly old at this point.

Do we have any realistic idea at this point?
 
Rizen said:
When is the next Intel chipset coming? I assume this is set to be released with Haswell-E? I'm really ready to build another monster system, as my i7 930 is starting to become a bit of a bottleneck without SATA 3, PCI-E 3.0, and limited memory speeds. But I really don't want to upgrade to a X79, as it's fairly old at this point.

Do we have any realistic idea at this point?
Click to expand...

Last I read it was still Q3/4 2014. There was a demo of the chipset with DDR 4 on display at (IDF?) a recent intel expo.

I'm still on my 980X. It's not terrible by any means. But I do want to upgrade myself. I am interested at Serial ATA 3, USB 3.0, and PCI Express 3.0. I already have two PCI Express 3.0 video cards and Serial ATA 3.0 hard drives that need a new home. Gamingwise, I am still over 60 FPS in everything. I am probably wanting to upgrade for the sake of upgrading because of how old it is. But when I go check my CPU against the latest and greatest extreme edition CPUs, I see at most a frame or two difference at 2560x1600 :p
 
Rizen said:
Sigh. Times like this I wish AMD was competitive so Intel didn't just sit on their ass.
Click to expand...

A lot of it is the readiness of DDR4. I've heard that there were some delays setting back the release of DDR4, and Haswell-E/X99 will be the first platform to feature DDR4.
 
^ doesn't surprise me that DDR4 would be delayed. RAM manufs are reaping the rewards off falsely inflated DDR3 pricing right now due to the "disaster" at the one plant a while back.
 
Tsumi said:
A lot of it is the readiness of DDR4. I've heard that there were some delays setting back the release of DDR4, and Haswell-E/X99 will be the first platform to feature DDR4.
Click to expand...

And, non-enthusiast consumer boards with DDR4 memory compatibility isn't out until after in 2015 with Skylake (if Intel sticks to their old timeline).

DejaWiz said:
^ doesn't surprise me that DDR4 would be delayed. RAM manufs are reaping the rewards off falsely inflated DDR3 pricing right now due to the "disaster" at the one plant a while back.
Click to expand...

That and I bet they are just salivating at the thought of a price premium and overcharging with DDR4 RAM when the modules are first readily available for the X99 platform then the Skylake boards afterwards.
 
What would be the standard after DDR4? I heard they want some sort of serial interface or something.
 
Mr Mean said:
Last I read it was still Q3/4 2014. There was a demo of the chipset with DDR 4 on display at (IDF?) a recent intel expo.

I'm still on my 980X. It's not terrible by any means. But I do want to upgrade myself. I am interested at Serial ATA 3, USB 3.0, and PCI Express 3.0. I already have two PCI Express 3.0 video cards and Serial ATA 3.0 hard drives that need a new home. Gamingwise, I am still over 60 FPS in everything. I am probably wanting to upgrade for the sake of upgrading because of how old it is. But when I go check my CPU against the latest and greatest extreme edition CPUs, I see at most a frame or two difference at 2560x1600 :p
Click to expand...
I am on a highly clocked 930 but I want to move to a hexcore with more games starting to leverage more cores (BF4 specifically, I have found myself CPU bound on occasion). Also, I have two SATA3 SSDs and two PCI-E 3.0 video cards, and X58 is holding me back.

But upgrading to a chipset that was released almost 2 years ago just seems silly at this point. Not sure what I want to do. Maybe build a Haswell LGA1150 system for the next year, then pass it down to the girlfriend's gaming system and go X99 for myself?
 
Rizen said:
I am on a highly clocked 930 but I want to move to a hexcore with more games starting to leverage more cores (BF4 specifically, I have found myself CPU bound on occasion). Also, I have two SATA3 SSDs and two PCI-E 3.0 video cards, and X58 is holding me back.

But upgrading to a chipset that was released almost 2 years ago just seems silly at this point. Not sure what I want to do. Maybe build a Haswell LGA1150 system for the next year, then pass it down to the girlfriend's gaming system and go X99 for myself?
Click to expand...

You should just get a cheap 970 and call it a day. Sata3 and pci-e in the real world is not a deal breake.
 
Rizen said:
I am on a highly clocked 930 but I want to move to a hexcore with more games starting to leverage more cores (BF4 specifically, I have found myself CPU bound on occasion). Also, I have two SATA3 SSDs and two PCI-E 3.0 video cards, and X58 is holding me back.

But upgrading to a chipset that was released almost 2 years ago just seems silly at this point. Not sure what I want to do. Maybe build a Haswell LGA1150 system for the next year, then pass it down to the girlfriend's gaming system and go X99 for myself?
Click to expand...

SATA2 is only a bottleneck in mass file transfers from SSD to SSD. It does not affect the random access times of your SSD, which is what make SSDs feel a lot more responsive than regular hard drives. So unless you're constantly doing mass file transfers, you should not feel bottlenecked by SATA2.

There has been no single GPU card yet that has been shown to fully saturate a PCI-E 3.0 x8 (PCI-E 2.0 x16) connection.
 
Tsumi said:
SATA2 is only a bottleneck in mass file transfers from SSD to SSD. It does not affect the random access times of your SSD, which is what make SSDs feel a lot more responsive than regular hard drives. So unless you're constantly doing mass file transfers, you should not feel bottlenecked by SATA2.

There has been no single GPU card yet that has been shown to fully saturate a PCI-E 3.0 x8 (PCI-E 2.0 x16) connection.
Click to expand...
I was interested in running my SSDs in RAID-0 since I have 2x Corsair Neutron 256GB SSDs. Is there any real world benefit to this? I really only using my computer for gaming, but I don't believe SATA2 would provide enough bandwidth to make RAID worthwhile.

I've seen some benchmarks that show PCI-E 3.0 making a different in multiple GPU setups, which I currently use (680 SLI), as well as at higher resolutions (I have a 5760x1200 setup, but I am currently using a 1440p single display).

But if I can make this work another year I am certainly open to it.
 
Tsumi said:
Late 2014.
Click to expand...
That is what I've seen on leaks for the 9 series chipsets. It's also when socketed Broadwell is due according to those sources.

Have no idea when the X99 is coming out, but it may be in the same time-frame since that's when Haswell-E is due.
 
I dont know why intel would ... nothing can really even push current Sandy-Es
 
Rizen said:
Sigh. Times like this I wish AMD was competitive so Intel didn't just sit on their ass.
Click to expand...

AMD has nothing to do with Intel's strategy. They absolutely kicked their ass by every measure in the socket 939 era and it did nothing to accellerate the phase-out of the Pentium 4.

Intel is focusing on cutting power consumption because they're missing out on a huge market for low power devices while the traditional PC market is sluggish.
 
Rizen said:
I am on a highly clocked 930 but I want to move to a hexcore with more games starting to leverage more cores (BF4 specifically, I have found myself CPU bound on occasion). Also, I have two SATA3 SSDs and two PCI-E 3.0 video cards, and X58 is holding me back.

But upgrading to a chipset that was released almost 2 years ago just seems silly at this point. Not sure what I want to do. Maybe build a Haswell LGA1150 system for the next year, then pass it down to the girlfriend's gaming system and go X99 for myself?
Click to expand...

You're in the same position as I am. But I want native USB 3.0/PCI Express. I have USB 3.0 support with the NEC chipset and Serial ATA 3.0 support with the marvel controller. Both are considered bad. I am just using the intel USB/Serial ATA controllers only. Hence why I have to wait for the X99.

The only stop gap solution I can think of is get the i7-970 processor ( http://www.amazon.com/Intel-i7-970-...UTF8&qid=1383394399&sr=8-1&keywords=intel+970 (Jesus did you look at the 980x prices? It's over $1000! More than I paid for at day one! What kind of crazy world do we live in where outdated hardware cost more than the latest and greatest processors)) for your hexcore need.
 
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Rizen said:
Sigh. Times like this I wish AMD was competitive so Intel didn't just sit on their ass.
Click to expand...
i bet amd has some kind of agreement with intel to put out shitty cpus, old time monopolies are todays duopolies, there is an appearance of competition but really there is none...
same with video cards, if they were really competing, their new products wouldn't have almost identical performance every time
 
Last edited:
Vielgus-Kutas said:
i bet amd has some kind of agreement with intel to put out shitty cpus, old time monopolies are todays duopolies, there is an appearance of competition but really there is none...
same with video cards, if they were really competing, their new products wouldn't have almost identical performance every time
Click to expand...

It all has to do with mobile.
 
Ultima99 said:
Fixed that for you. :D
Click to expand...
Not exactly. The Intel slide deck isn't fine grained enough to make that assertion, and it's not even aligned to quarters. There are still upcoming 8 series chipsets which may launch with the Haswell refresh (in the business segment), and are not necessarily tied to the 9 series chipsets launch. Either way, it looks like we're at least 5 or 6 months away from HSW-R and 9 series chipsets.

The X99 does look solidly in the late 2014 time frame on the slide deck, to get back on topic.
 
Rizen said:
I was interested in running my SSDs in RAID-0 since I have 2x Corsair Neutron 256GB SSDs. Is there any real world benefit to this? I really only using my computer for gaming, but I don't believe SATA2 would provide enough bandwidth to make RAID worthwhile.

I've seen some benchmarks that show PCI-E 3.0 making a different in multiple GPU setups, which I currently use (680 SLI), as well as at higher resolutions (I have a 5760x1200 setup, but I am currently using a 1440p single display).

But if I can make this work another year I am certainly open to it.
Click to expand...

The only thing RAID-0 would do on SSDs (other than making your two drives appear as one) is improve transfer rates due to it using two channels instead of one (the speed of each individual port is 300 MB/s, not total speed of controller). So theoretically, given that both of your SSDs can potentially max out a 300MB/s connection, you can transfer from your drives at a maximum speed of 600 MB/s, given that where you are writing to can actually write at 600 MB/s. It won't do anything for random seek times, which, again, is what improves the responsiveness of your computer.

Which benchmarks are you talking about, and what are they using? PCI-E 2.0 x8 SLI vs PCI-E 3.0 x8 SLI might make a difference, but I highly doubt PCI-E 3.0 x8 vs PCI-E 3.0 x16 SLI with two 680s will have any differences, and PCI-E 2.0 x16 is equivalent to PCI-E 3.0 x8.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top