• 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?

Intel just shows, that the desktop market will be totally an enthusiast niche. Mobile market is now the key. If Haswell CPUs work magic on battery and power in ultrabooks or cheap latpops, then the companies will get rid of desktop terminals, and swap those stations for more powerful, yet more mobile computers.

Also, when you can get the ultrabook with detachable keyboard and make a tablet from it, there is no need to buy desktop PC, if you are not a professional that needs horsepower for rendering/CAD or a gamer.
 
Its actually cheaper to buy a laptop now, they have less costs associated with them due to having less materials. And for companies its a win all around because they tie everything together and you have to buy all new each time. Vs before you might not buy a new monitor with a desktop, keyboard etc..
 
rudy said:
Its actually cheaper to buy a laptop now, they have less costs associated with them due to having less materials. And for companies its a win all around because they tie everything together and you have to buy all new each time. Vs before you might not buy a new monitor with a desktop, keyboard etc..
Click to expand...

That depends on what kind of laptop is purchased. I can spec out a laptop with an i7, SSD, 17" IPS, and SLI 675M for a higher price than a comparable performance DIY desktop.
 
Put it this way OP, my 4770K @ 4.55GHz is ~40% faster than my 4 year old i7 920 D0 @ 4GHz.
Am I pissed? Yes, but it's about what I expected. Was hoping for about a 6GHz i7 920 equivalent (so +50%) once OCed, but ~40% is good enough for the platform upgrade.
 
MorgothPl said:
Intel just shows, that the desktop market will be totally an enthusiast niche. Mobile market is now the key. If Haswell CPUs work magic on battery and power in ultrabooks or cheap latpops, then the companies will get rid of desktop terminals, and swap those stations for more powerful, yet more mobile computers.

Also, when you can get the ultrabook with detachable keyboard and make a tablet from it, there is no need to buy desktop PC, if you are not a professional that needs horsepower for rendering/CAD or a gamer.
Click to expand...

If that happens then there will be no way to overclock the chips, since there will be no room to put in water cooling in the small spaces of mobiles and laptops..
 
fuzchunk said:
need more competition or intel will rest on their laurels
Click to expand...

well they're moving their focus on to the mobile sector... where they aren't king yet

can't imagine what would happen if one of those mobile cpu makers successfully made and sold a desktop/laptop cpu
 
RadXge said:
Haswell is the result of the lack of competition from AMD.
I have no interest in upgrading my 3770K for now.
Click to expand...

I still don't see a reason to upgrade my q9550. Then again, I do mostly programming work and really just need a faster SSD more than anything.
 
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...

I've got a 2008 I7-920 that has been running at 4.0ghz stable for about 5 years.

I'm not giving up much either. :p
 
MorgothPl said:
Intel just shows, that the desktop market will be totally an enthusiast niche. Mobile market is now the key. If Haswell CPUs work magic on battery and power in ultrabooks or cheap latpops, then the companies will get rid of desktop terminals, and swap those stations for more powerful, yet more mobile computers.

Also, when you can get the ultrabook with detachable keyboard and make a tablet from it, there is no need to buy desktop PC, if you are not a professional that needs horsepower for rendering/CAD or a gamer.
Click to expand...

A mobile pc/laptop will never be as powerful as its desktop counterpart.

rudy said:
Its actually cheaper to buy a laptop now, they have less costs associated with them due to having less materials. And for companies its a win all around because they tie everything together and you have to buy all new each time. Vs before you might not buy a new monitor with a desktop, keyboard etc..
Click to expand...

Don't forget the 1 year warranty thats standard with all if not most laptops now.
 
Well, if what Apple says it's true, then 12 hours video playback on MacBook Air on Haswell CPU is effing impressive - even if in reality it goes down to like 9 hours, it still shows how excellent are the mobile versions of Haswells.
 
A ton of intels r&d is going to power savings on all of their chips. We wont see massive performance increases in the desktop market unless we start seeing more demand for single cpu performance and less on power saving (GO GRRREEEEEN!).
 
I wish Intel would drop the non-Xeons, and standardize on it. They could save money that way, and deliver the savings as more "altruism" in terms of releasing speed-without-competition.
 
Back in the days when Intel released the 386 ..
the 486 ..
the Pentium!

Where the hell was the competition?

There was none! The P-Pro core was amazing, without competition!

So before you necessarily believe the theory about competition, think about the far past first.

Something has changed on our earth, the era has changed.
 
In 4 years, has Intel made as much of a leap as going from a Pentium-66 to a Pentium-100 was?
 
Really said:
Back in the days when Intel released the 386 ..
the 486 ..
the Pentium!

Where the hell was the competition?

There was none! The P-Pro core was amazing, without competition!

So before you necessarily believe the theory about competition, think about the far past first.

Something has changed on our earth, the era has changed.
Click to expand...

The P-Pro was a different beast and it was not something most home consumers would buy. IMO P-Pro tried to take on a space that was pretty much dominated by UNIX back then - SPARC, DEC, IBM, etc. and really made a big push for MS in the back office.
 
WillC310 said:
The P-Pro was a different beast and it was not something most home consumers would buy. IMO P-Pro tried to take on a space that was pretty much dominated by UNIX back then - SPARC, DEC, IBM, etc. and really made a big push for MS in the back office.
Click to expand...

Pentium II and Pentium III were "P-pro" (P6) core CPUs, and I believe those are the CPUs he's referring to. K6 and K6-2 were no match for P2, but was cheap enough to compete on lower end systems. It wasn't until the Athlon arrived that Intel finally had some competition. What did that competition give us? Five years of Netburst.

ZodaEX said:
IM not following your logic?
Click to expand...

With the focus on mobile technology, there may not be "desktop" counterparts in the future. So as long as the mobile components keep progressing, they will at some point be more powerful than current desktop components. For instance. the 45w i7-2760QM in my laptop is quite a bit faster than the 95w Q9550 in the desktop I had before it; even the GTX 555M in the same laptop does well to keep up with the GTX 260 I had before. And the laptop runs off a 150w power brick compared to the 400w or so the desktop pulled from it's powers supply..
 
Last edited:
ryan_975 said:
Pentium II and Pentium III were "P-pro" (P6) core CPUs, and I believe those are the CPUs he's referring to. K6 and K6-2 were no match for P2, but was cheap enough to compete on lower end systems. It wasn't until the Athlon arrived that Intel finally had some competition. What did that competition give us? Five years of Netburst.
Click to expand...
I had celeron that overclocked to 3.6 GHz (or was it 3.8?) without rising voltage. So why should I complain?

Upgraded to P5K and E4500, which overclocked to 2.7 before it hit FSB wall. Upgraded to E7200 (that version where Intel tested that Ivy Thermal Insulation Material) which was overclocked 24/7 to 3.2 GHz (These 500 MHz was all that was necessary to have playable PCSX2 games) and came with a sticker which said it shouldn't have higher voltage that xxx which was SIGNIFICANTLY lower than what Intel wrote at its website.

Lets hope Tegra5 would be powerful, on time, and cheap.
 
Raghar said:
I had celeron that overclocked to 3.6 GHz (or was it 3.8?) without rising voltage. So why should I complain?
<snipped>.
Click to expand...

Because even at 3.8GHz it still sucked? :D I hope you had at least a slightly faster Prescott Celeron-D rather than a cache-starved slow-ass Northwood Celeron.
 
aphexcoil said:
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.
Click to expand...

I've been saying the same thing recently as well. I don't even care about desktop performance anymore. Our current desktops are so insanely fast. The software just hasn't caught up, and it will take years before it ever does.

I'm glad Intel (And everyone else) are focusing on power improvements and shrinking the size.

To me, the ultimate computer is one that I wear on my wrist and can use anywhere. We'll no longer have desktops. We'll just have docking stations for what you are wearing on your wrist.
 
seems like a good time to work for intel :)

What we need is faster internet, not CPUs.

That said I wont feel bad upgrading x48 needs to be pushed to a server.
 
RadXge said:
Haswell is the result of the lack of competition from AMD.
I have no interest in upgrading my 3770K for now.
Click to expand...

I agree with this. Even though I jumped into the haswell bandwagon, I do regret it since my Q9550 still performs like a champ and it's like 5 years old now. I only upgrade when its needed. I could have done the cheaper route and just gotten an ssd and a newer graphics card. Oh well.
 
ryan_975 said:
Because even at 3.8GHz it still sucked? :D I hope you had at least a slightly faster Prescott Celeron-D rather than a cache-starved slow-ass Northwood Celeron.
Click to expand...

Well I carefully selected it for SSE2 instructions and to act as a heater because I have cold room, and I like 32 C degree warmth. It worked for both and allowed to run games that needed SSE2 instructions. I also selected the version where Intel in its infinite wizdom reintroduced barrel shifter.
 
The problem into blaming haswell inst the biggest issue.... really, its that intel is getting away with it. Broadwell will be the same, and probably skylake. We will see less overclocking potential as more gens come on, intel will slowly milk us with 5-10% stock performance increments, to the point, that we will upgrade not because of CPU innovation but stuff that being offer by the chipsts/manufacturers, like Sata Express, DDR4, PCIe 4.0, USB 4, etc. But the worst news is that this is the reality that we desktop users will have to accept and stop to QQ about it, its just how things will be until someone pressures Intel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top