Waiting for Haswell?

I'm holding out for Haswell, my QX6850 is starting to feel it. My 7870 is not hitting more than like 80% usage.
 
I saw a review over at anandtech and it looks like Haswell is somewhat of a disappointment more or less.
 
He's referring to the Chinese review linked in forums. Who knows if its accurate. If it is, not all bad, looks like they oc'ed it to 5ghz on less volts than stock 3770k. IPC looks like the typical 5-7%.
 
Cmustang87 said:
I'm holding out for Haswell, my QX6850 is starting to feel it. My 7870 is not hitting more than like 80% usage.
Click to expand...

I'm seeing sub 50% at times in some games on my 7870, with an overclocked Q6600. It's been a good run but it's definitely time.

I have one of the older 120hz viewsonic monitors so 1680x1050 doesn't help either.
 
wadec22 said:
He's referring to the Chinese review linked in forums. Who knows if its accurate. If it is, not all bad, looks like they oc'ed it to 5ghz on less volts than stock 3770k. IPC looks like the typical 5-7%.
Click to expand...

Yeah who knows how accurate indeed.

I am patiently waiting for reputable sites to release their reviews.

Maybe soon???
 
socK said:
I'm seeing sub 50% at times in some games on my 7870, with an overclocked Q6600. It's been a good run but it's definitely time.

I have one of the older 120hz viewsonic monitors so 1680x1050 doesn't help either.
Click to expand...

Neverwinter Online my CPU is pegged 90% usage, my GPU in town is 20%. I'm getting around 20 FPS.
 
dandragonrage said:
My point is that very, very few people (including people here) will ever notice the extra CPU power and memory bandwidth over the mainstream setup, except in synthetic benchmarks and video processing. Even most of you who will quote me and tell me to go hang out at casualcomputerforum in reality won't even notice the difference. Yes for those who want to run 72 Geforce Titans it matters. Yes perhaps to those looking to use RAID cards and SLI or other complex setups like that. But for 99% of us we could just pay a bunch less money for the mainstream setup - and stop kidding yourselves that you need the top-level motherboards with every single feature - and the money we save could be used to buy a new mainstream platform the next year or the year after, and by then 2011 will be dead.

If you need the extra stuff, fine. If you don't need it and don't mind spending extra money anyway, fine. But a cost effective decision for the rest of us it is not.
Click to expand...

As posted here:
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-inside-killzone-shadow-fall

The inference we can draw right now is that while OS reservation hasn't been locked down, developers have access to at least six of the eight cores of the PS4's CPU.
Click to expand...

So investing in a 6+ core system isn't going to be a waste.
 
What are you guys planning to do with your i7-920s? Seems like a lot of 920 owners including myself plan to make the leap to Haswell. I have to admit, having owned nearly everything from the 8086 on up, I have never had a PC stand the test of time as long as Nehalem. I'm not sure what to do with it; it's the first time my 4-year-old computer doesn't feel 4 years old.
 
sphinx99 said:
What are you guys planning to do with your i7-920s? Seems like a lot of 920 owners including myself plan to make the leap to Haswell. I have to admit, having owned nearly everything from the 8086 on up, I have never had a PC stand the test of time as long as Nehalem. I'm not sure what to do with it; it's the first time my 4-year-old computer doesn't feel 4 years old.
Click to expand...

I hear ya. I resisted Sandy,resisted Ivy...I've resisted until I can't resist no more! It's time and I'm going to drop some decent cash in it. My 920 will probably get passed down to my wife and her (used to be my) Q6600 will be...sold here?
 
BatJoe said:
So investing in a 6+ core system isn't going to be a waste.
Click to expand...

Meh, I don't agree with the correlation. I'd still much rather have (and am 99.9% sure the average user will be better off with) 4 significantly faster cores than 6 slower ones.
 
Parja said:
Meh, I don't agree with the correlation. I'd still much rather have (and am 99.9% sure the average user will be better off with) 4 significantly faster cores than 6 slower ones.
Click to expand...

Indeed. I would never "upgrade" to an Extreme-type CPU if it doesn't win single core performance. Single core speed is still far too important in far too many things.
 
EODetroit said:
Indeed. I would never "upgrade" to an Extreme-type CPU if it doesn't win single core performance. Single core speed is still far too important in far too many things.
Click to expand...

When more games start using 4+ cores (which will be sooner than later) you will be wishing you had a 6 core+ system.
 
BatJoe said:
When more games start using 4+ cores (which will be sooner than later) you will be wishing you had a 6 core+ system.
Click to expand...

Wishful thinking. By that time, most people would have upgraded to faster, better hardware.
 
If you're basing that off next gen consoles, think again. Both of those systems will have low clocked, but efficient AMD cores. If anything, one can assume that they will run better with amd based systems.
 
This falls quite a bit short of the 7 + Ghz overclocks people were talking about. Glad I pulled the trigger on a 3930K instead of waiting this.

Hopefully we see some more improvements with Haswell E.
 
I was always wary of IGP especially since all who use dedicated video do not use it. Basically intel is getting us to pay for their development in a field where we would almost all rather have nVidia or AMD. Well if the info is true then more enthusiasts might see things the way I do and will stop paying for integrated GPUs they don't use.

Alas his may be AMDs chance. Otherwise anyone thinking 3770 may want to consider 3820 instead.
 
I know those benchmarks are iffy, but the fact that it shows World of Warcraft as actually running slower on the 4770K has me a bit worried.

World of Warcraft uses mainly one CPU core, with a few auxiliary tasks taking place on additional cores. Total CPU usage on a quad-core CPU (no-HT) almost never exceeds 50%. It is incredibly IPC sensitive for those first two cores. Why the hell would it actually perform slower on haswell?
 
9+ second superpi 1m scores? Seems slow my 2 year old 2600k at 4.6 is still over a second faster. Maybe with the release the price on the 3930k or 3770k will drop.
 
Coming from a Q6600 (yes I'm still using that), would there be much of a difference between the i7-3770 or the Haswell equivalent? My main CPU use is rendering, with Maya 2014.
 
maverick212 said:
Coming from a Q6600 (yes I'm still using that), would there be much of a difference between the i7-3770 or the Haswell equivalent? My main CPU use is rendering, with Maya 2014.
Click to expand...

Probably not a whole lot, but you might as well hold out for the newer chip at this point. Then again, if Maya uses AVX2 there could be a significant difference.
 
GotNoRice said:
I know those benchmarks are iffy, but the fact that it shows World of Warcraft as actually running slower on the 4770K has me a bit worried.

World of Warcraft uses mainly one CPU core, with a few auxiliary tasks taking place on additional cores. Total CPU usage on a quad-core CPU (no-HT) almost never exceeds 50%. It is incredibly IPC sensitive for those first two cores. Why the hell would it actually perform slower on haswell?
Click to expand...

My guess is on Intel's crap iGPU drivers.
 
maverick212 said:
Coming from a Q6600 (yes I'm still using that), would there be much of a difference between the i7-3770 or the Haswell equivalent? My main CPU use is rendering, with Maya 2014.
Click to expand...

I went from Q6600 to a used Q9550. Having SSE 4 makes a big difference. Otherwise I just want to upgrade because my system is old lol. Plus the extra OC that the Q9550 is capable of helps. Ga,ing is fine for my main pastime, BF3.
 
Sticking with my 3770k for now until the Haswell motherboards mature. I waited close to a year before upgrading to Ivy Bridge because I choose not to be an early adopter.
 
Ugh. I'm on a 920 and convinced myself last year that after the disappointing Ivy Bridge launch to wait for Haswell to upgrade. I really want to upgrade, but at this point it seems to be like throwing good money after the bathwater.
 
Rendon said:
Ugh. I'm on a 920 and convinced myself last year that after the disappointing Ivy Bridge launch to wait for Haswell to upgrade. I really want to upgrade, but at this point it seems to be like throwing good money after the bathwater.
Click to expand...

I don't know... 920 to Haswell is quite a big jump in performance and quite a big drop in power consumption.
 
Rendon said:
Ugh. I'm on a 920 and convinced myself last year that after the disappointing Ivy Bridge launch to wait for Haswell to upgrade. I really want to upgrade, but at this point it seems to be like throwing good money after the bathwater.
Click to expand...

This is exactly where I'm at. I was planning a new build around haswell but in all honesty I wanted to see a bigger improvment in haswell.
 
RamonGTP said:
I don't know... 920 to Haswell is quite a big jump in performance and quite a big drop in power consumption.
Click to expand...

It's a decent jump in performance yes, but how can I justify buying haswell over Ivy/sandy if some games I will get slightly less performance? I know it's too early to say but those wow benchmarks are hard to swallow if true. As far as power consumption heh I could care less.
 
Savoy said:
It's a decent jump in performance yes, but how can I justify buying haswell over Ivy/sandy if some games I will get slightly less performance? I know it's too early to say but those wow benchmarks are hard to swallow if true. As far as power consumption heh I could care less.
Click to expand...

Its the graphics drivers, not the cpu. Look at the 1080p WOW benchmark people, theres 2 of them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top