• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Haswell Engineering Samples / Articles?

A

aphexcoil

Limp Gawd
Joined
Jan 4, 2011
Messages
322
Have any reviews or articles pertaining to engineering samples showed up in the wild yet? I'm really curious as to whether Haswell will be able to overclock better than Ivy.

Has anyone come across any leaks / articles / reviews / etc. recently pertaining to Haswell?

Thanks!
 
We'll probably start seeing ES reviews in 6-9 months, I'm speculating.
 
if you worry about your electric bill than 16 core cpu's are not for you.
 
DeathPrincess said:
Where are the 10ghz chips?! :D
Click to expand...

GHz is not the only way to speed things up, we have been going parallel, so a quad that's 4GHz in theoretical FLOPS is like having a single core at 16GHz if the 'parallelization' were perfect. (is that even a word? lol)

I still think there is no reason to upgrade a 4 core till we get more cores... and an OS that supports multi core better (windows 8???)
 
Relativist said:
GHz is not the only way to speed things up, we have been going parallel, so a quad that's 4GHz in theoretical FLOPS is like having a single core at 16GHz if the 'parallelization' were perfect. (is that even a word? lol)

I still think there is no reason to upgrade a 4 core till we get more cores... and an OS that supports multi core better (windows 8???)
Click to expand...

Except it's not perfect and never will be so a quad 4ghz will never be like a 16ghz single. Windows 7 scheduler handles multi cores quite well provided they are fully functional cores and not ones with a gimped fpu like bulldozer. Even them, win 8 is only marginally better.
 
TroyX said:
if you worry about your electric bill than 16 core cpu's are not for you.
Click to expand...

Not the bill, It is the heat and perfomance per watt.

Example: GTX 480s perfomance might be good but its heat and perfomance per watt is worst.
GTX 680 not only is a good GPU, its perfomance per watt and temprature is very good

From Pentium D to IB not only the perfomance has increased exponentally but its TDP and heat has gone down
 
maverick786us said:
Not the bill, It is the heat and perfomance per watt.

Example: GTX 480s perfomance might be good but its heat and perfomance per watt is worst.
GTX 680 not only is a good GPU, its perfomance per watt and temprature is very good

From Pentium D to IB not only the perfomance has increased exponentally but its TDP and heat has gone down
Click to expand...

It's 4 times the cores of an IB and less than 3 times the TDP, so what's the problem?
 
I dont care if it uses 900watts as long as I can water cool it and it is faster than anything else ever imagined.
 
Forceman said:
It's 4 times the cores of an IB and less than 3 times the TDP, so what's the problem?
Click to expand...

No probs. But just like the way Intel moved from 136W to 96W when it moved from single core Pentium D to Quad Core SB.

So I though by 2014 when the CPU Die shrinks to mere 14NM Broadwell its TDP might remain the same. Anyhow for me 16 cores will always be an overkill, will see what Quad and Hex cores offer
 
maverick786us said:
From Pentium D to IB not only the perfomance has increased exponentally but its TDP and heat has gone down
Click to expand...

Can I give you a little advice; wait till the processor is close to being released before you rush to say that we are doing away with TDP. We are almost a year out till our next generation processors you might want to give them a little time to see what they bring to the table.
 
IntelEnthusiast said:
Can I give you a little advice; wait till the processor is close to being released before you rush to say that we are doing away with TDP. We are almost a year out till our next generation processors you might want to give them a little time to see what they bring to the table.
Click to expand...

Isn't the TDP of Haswell already known? At least the desktop chips.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell_(microarchitecture)

http://news.softpedia.com/news/Inte...ailed-in-Series-of-Leaked-Slides-233364.shtml

Considering the improvements are mostly GPU side again we can expect that most of the full load TDP to be rationed differently and more GPU heavy.

There's some recent rumors of the IB-E and HW-E as well as server chips with higher TDP, the ~140W range.
 
So, what I would suggest given the rumors is that Intel is increasing the parallezation of their cores while allowing for 'official overclocking' by raising the TDP ceiling they design to.
 
Jorona said:
Just make the extreme editions Skywalkers.
Click to expand...


or how about

White Walkers

WhiteWalker_2x10.jpg
 
I am wondering if the FMA3 support will get single precision floating point flops up to a teraflop? We should be getting really close to the teraflop on a chip shortly.

(Why did AMD choose FMA2 and Intel FMA3?)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top