• 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.

What is wrong with Intel?

What Haswell chips compared to what Ivy Bridge chips and at what clock frequencies? "Haswell takes the same amount of power when overclocked" is a stunningly vague statement.
 
I'm waiting for DDR4 and SATA Express before making any more upgrades. :)

CPU performance increases don't impress me much these days because a modern chip hardly ever fails to deliver for my needs.

Talk to me about
- smallest form factor possible; and
- quiet as humanly possible

And I start to get a bit excited.

Otherwise for me the biggest long pole in the tent (in terms of latency) is the network... and then maybe the disk.
 
hah, I was talking about latency for several minutes today... we were talking about sound cards. :p not that anyone cares
 
Trackr said:
So, let me get this straight..

I've had my 2600k for 2.5 years now. It's clocked at 5.0Ghz.

Two-and-a-half years later, Intel release a CPU, the 4770k, that is 10% faster (just by itself, that is disappointing to the point of nausea), and.. can only be clock at 4.6Ghz max, as in.. 10% lower?

So, in 2.5 years, we've gained absolutely nothing?? :mad:
Click to expand...

In Intel's view, any untapped clockspeed is wasted power. Running a CPU capable of 5 GHz at 130W at only 3.0 GHz is inefficient. If the architecture is optimized for 3 GHz and 20W, it can be made more efficient at that speed, at the expense of overclocking potential. Haswell is optimized for <20W mobile devices. It's not optimized for desktops and certainly not for overclocking.
 
Trackr said:
Where are you guys getting this shit from?

http://www.techspot.com/review/679-intel-haswell-core-i7-4770k/page13.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-4770k-haswell-review,3521-18.html
Click to expand...

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7003/the-haswell-review-intel-core-i74770k-i54560k-tested/2

Anand said:
Under load, there’s no escaping the fact that Haswell can burn more power in pursuit of higher performance:
Here I’m showing an 11.8% increase in power consumption, and in this particular test the Core i7-4770K is 13% faster than the i7-3770K. Power consumption goes up, but so does performance per watt.
Click to expand...
 
wonderfield said:
You don't appear to be following the conversation here.


Yes, it does. But third-party USB 3.0 controllers aren't native USB 3.0 controllers.
Click to expand...

I followed it - you *can* use Sandy Bridge CPUs with Z77 due to Sandy and Ivy being in the same LGA (1155) - I had, in fact, recommended exactly that for reasons *other* than PCI Express 3.0. However, you can't use either with Z87 due to socket/LGA differences (Haswell is LGA1150).
 
Neb said:
Rolleyes or not, Zangmonkey is correct in saying that performance per watt was increased.
Click to expand...

I'll say it again..

If you overclock, it is 11.8% more powerful and takes 13% less power.

How can you not roll you eyes at that?
 
Nothing wrong with intel its something wrong with consumers, there is no need to push power because everyone just wants an iPad and is happy to use one flash quality app at time. The only thing they care about is battery life. Ultimately in all markets the consumers forces its will. That said each CPU makes gains, unfortunately those gains just aren't in the area you care about, the main push has been on battery life and integrated graphics so Intel can kill AMD and NVidia. All that comes at a cost to performance / die space.
 
Trackr said:
Where are you guys getting this shit from?

http://www.techspot.com/review/679-intel-haswell-core-i7-4770k/page13.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-4770k-haswell-review,3521-18.html
Click to expand...

I know right?!

Neb said:
Rolleyes or not, Zangmonkey is correct in saying that performance per watt was increased.
Click to expand...

Well no shit it takes more power, SB and IB also take more power when overclocked.

The fact remains that Haswell still uses less power than both of them, even when at the same clock.
 
Skillz said:
Well no shit it takes more power, SB and IB also take more power when overclocked.

The fact remains that Haswell still uses less power than both of them, even when at the same clock.
Click to expand...

I think you and I are agreeing...
 
1. No competition.

2. Shifting priorities to mobile space. Enthusiast desktops aren't profitable anymore; not due to shrinking margins, but dramatically shrinking sales volume. I'd be surprised if we ever see another architecture that we could call "great", by our standards.
 
wabbitseason said:
1. No competition.

2. Shifting priorities to mobile space. Enthusiast desktops aren't profitable anymore; not due to shrinking margins, but dramatically shrinking sales volume. I'd be surprised if we ever see another architecture that we could call "great", by our standards.
Click to expand...

1A. Exactly - AMD isn't even really playing in the mainstream space with either CPUs or APUs.

2A. Everyone and their brother is shifting to mobile for economic reasons - for the most part, whether we want to admit it or not, why upgrade an existing desktop? I'm running on Q6600 (LGA775 - four years dead), yet despite that, what's pushing my upgrade is an outlier - desktop virtualization. Even more telling, I *know* that it's an outlier - I'm not going to sit here and blow smoke and say it's not. And to head off at the pass those that may be thinking I'm not running current software, what about Windows 8 and Windows Server 2012 isn't current? The very fact that I can run a current desktop OS and a curtrent *server* OS in dual-boot on dead hardware doesn't say much for the state of current software.
 
wonderfield said:
He seems to have confused himself.
Click to expand...

Pointing out that I'm confused by itself is not helpful.

wabbitseason said:
1. No competition.

2. Shifting priorities to mobile space. Enthusiast desktops aren't profitable anymore; not due to shrinking margins, but dramatically shrinking sales volume. I'd be surprised if we ever see another architecture that we could call "great", by our standards.
Click to expand...

Thank you. That seems like the appropriate answer.

But then, why release the 4770k at all, if you've got nothing to show? Might as well call it the 3790k.
 
Honestly you should be delighted you jumped on a 2600k. A 920/2500k/2600k, really any of them at launch, were all brilliant buys given what we now know about Ivy and Haswell.

There's been no significant benefit to waiting for the next architecture since SB, and really since Nehalem if power isn't a huge concern. This will be the status quo indefinitely, unless AMD makes a show-stopper (not likely), until tech gets off silicon.
 
mknlb50 said:
No money to be made in desktop computers nowadays compare to other platforms.
Click to expand...

That's the truth. We're reaching an age in computers where, within 10 years, there simply won't *be* a desktop market. Portable computing is becoming so powerful, that it doesn't make sense to have desktops anymore.

Oh? So a desktop is 25% faster? Well, when your high-end in the mobile platform is approaching hyper extreme, that last 25% isn't worth being stuck in one locale.

My prediction is that desktops will completely disappear for the mainstream market. The only "desktops" that will be left will probably be ultra-high end servers that could be rigged as a home computer for people like us who love that last bit of speed.

But for the rest of the world, in ten years they'll be wearing watches faster than current top-of-the-line computers and carrying around god knows what while wearing their Google Glasses v3.0.

ASUS saw the writing on the wall -- why do you think they pressed so hard into the mobile and tablet arena when they used to be the king of motherboards? They know it's a dying breed.

In ten years, we'll probably have watches that transmit the video directly to a viewscreen. It will connect wirelessly to everything (keyboards, WiFi, etc.) That watch will be the "ultra-laptop" of the future.

Imagine just waving your watch next to someone else's and instantly exchanging contact information. Imagine carrying around 2 terabytes of storage with 64 gigs of ram and a processor that could out-compete Haswell -- all contained in your watch. That's what's going to happen. You will walk down the street and have a phone, a GPS, a powerful computer, a translator, a medical monitor that will wirelessly call for help if it detects any type of health issue ... It will serve as your wallet (by waving it over a money pad to make purchases). It will have bio-enhancements so that only your DNA can operate it. If you think I'm crazy, let's check back in 10-20 years.

Imagine workstations that provide you all the I/O needed to work, but everything is on your wrist. You could go anywhere, sit down at a desk and start typing out an e-mail on YOUR computer -- the one that is always with you. The one that even recharges wirelessly. I would bet money on this type of future.
 
Last edited:
Trackr said:
Pointing out that I'm confused by itself is not helpful.



Thank you. That seems like the appropriate answer.

But then, why release the 4770k at all, if you've got nothing to show? Might as well call it the 3790k.
Click to expand...

Because even though the desktop market is shrinking, there is still a market for high-end desktops (including pre-overclocked models from smaller dealers), and the 4770k will be the centerpiece of new systems to fill that demand.

It doesn't matter if the processor is imperfect --- it simply has to be MOAR BETTAR! Naming Haswell in the 3000 series would be detrimental to this, and it's also inaccurate when you consider how many improvements it features.
 
this is whats wrong:

http://vr-zone.com/articles/long-li...-a-midterm-refresh-is-on-the-cards/33920.html

Even with only the incremental CPU performance gain over the Ivy Bridge, Haswell still firmly rules the mainstream desktop CPU world. The substantially higher GPU performance and the improved power bill do help as well. So, since the tick tock model from 2008 is anyway a thing of the past now, why not extend the new CPU&#8217;s shelf life too, and maximise the return on the investment? After all, it&#8217;s not the case like some eight years ago when the competition was actually having a better performing product, and it won&#8217;t be the case for a while &#8211; read end 2014 at least.

Read more: http://vr-zone.com/articles/long-li...resh-is-on-the-cards/33920.html#ixzz2VSEyBV4F
Click to expand...
 
I wanted to upgrade to Haswell from SB, I guess it wont make a difference. :(

I will have to wait for a few more ticks/tocks to see a difference.
 
drescherjm said:
I thought Broadwell was the Haswell refresh.
Click to expand...



It is and it will be a major snoozefest for desktop users as has been pretty much recognized since we first heard about Haswell and Broadwell years ago. Only major thing really known is that it'll be a smaller shrink and Intel's first SoC chip. Unless you're into mobile computing processors it really is nothing to anticipate.
 
defaultluser said:
Because even though the desktop market is shrinking, there is still a market for high-end desktops (including pre-overclocked models from smaller dealers), and the 4770k will be the centerpiece of new systems to fill that demand.

It doesn't matter if the processor is imperfect --- it simply has to be MOAR BETTAR! Naming Haswell in the 3000 series would be detrimental to this, and it's also inaccurate when you consider how many improvements it features.
Click to expand...

Yes, but performance-wise it is not worthy of a 4 in the beginning of its name.
 
What's wrong with Intel? They are way overpriced. Their lowest binned quad is like 180 dollars. Insane. Amd has had 99 dollar quads for 4 years now.
 
ZodaEX said:
What's wrong with Intel? They are way overpriced. Their lowest binned quad is like 180 dollars. Insane. Amd has had 99 dollar quads for 4 years now.
Click to expand...

However since AMDs quads perform like Intel's dual core processors should we count the cores as equal?

How about when Intel releases the 8 core atom for well under $100? Shall we complain that the FX 83XX processors are way too expensive since Intel has 8 cores for much cheaper.
 
Last edited:
ZodaEX said:
What's wrong with Intel? They are way overpriced. Their lowest binned quad is like 180 dollars. Insane. Amd has had 99 dollar quads for 4 years now.
Click to expand...

Yes, but in comparison, AMD puts the Quad in Quadriplegic.
 
Trackr said:
So, let me get this straight..

I've had my 2600k for 2.5 years now. It's clocked at 5.0Ghz.

Two-and-a-half years later, Intel release a CPU, the 4770k, that is 10% faster (just by itself, that is disappointing to the point of nausea), and.. can only be clock at 4.6Ghz max, as in.. 10% lower?

So, in 2.5 years, we've gained absolutely nothing?? :mad:
Click to expand...

why would this disappoint anybody?

you're complaining that your chip is still hella good :p

my 2500k is KILLIN it in gaming. absolutely killingggg it. and its only at 4.2.

i couldnt be happier that a piece of hardware this old is this good STILL.
 
The $750/800 buxs is best spent on another upgrade really like a 780GTX..
 
Haswell is the result of the lack of competition from AMD.
I have no interest in upgrading my 3770K for now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top