- Status
ericjohn004
Honorable
- Oct 26, 2012
- 651
- 0
- 11,010
Man, I was really hoping for some Cinebench 11.5, or Passmark8, or Super Pi 1m, or Fritz Chess Benchmark, or at least PCMark7 or 3DMark11 physics results. Something Tangible. Not these synthetic benchmarks like SiSoft Sandra that doesn't even really show real world performance at all. I didn't really get much out of this review. And being that it's the first review of the new Haswell chips I'm kind of disappointed in Tom's. I didn't learn anything new really.
All I know now is that Haswell is suppose to be faster than Ivy during real world usage. But I knew that before hand. The very least they could have done is test it with PCMark7 or Cinebench 11.5.
Come on Tom's, you can do a lot better than this. I liked a lot of the information provided I just didn't get much out of the benchmarks that you ran.
All I know now is that Haswell is suppose to be faster than Ivy during real world usage. But I knew that before hand. The very least they could have done is test it with PCMark7 or Cinebench 11.5.
Come on Tom's, you can do a lot better than this. I liked a lot of the information provided I just didn't get much out of the benchmarks that you ran.
ojas
Distinguished
- Feb 25, 2011
- 2,924
- 0
- 20,810
[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]1) There's an on-package VRM likely contributing to this, which used to be on the motherboard, along with a more complex graphics engine.Don't have answers for the other questions--the specs at my disposal are pretty limited, and I no longer have access to the processor, unfortunately.[/citation]
Thanks, though do i infer by what you're saying that the 65w and below processors like the 4770S don't have on-package VRM? And isn't the graphics engine the same across the entire table? :O
Thanks, though do i infer by what you're saying that the 65w and below processors like the 4770S don't have on-package VRM? And isn't the graphics engine the same across the entire table? :O
ojas
Distinguished
- Feb 25, 2011
- 2,924
- 0
- 20,810
FOR THOSE OF YOU WONDERING ABOUT UPGRADING FROM THE CORE 2 GENERATION
I benchmarked my Q8400 using Sandra 2013 SP2, and used Tom's numbers from this review for the 4770K to make charts. Here's the pdf export:
http://bit.ly/15VXs8b
Note: I HAVE mentioned that the 4770K numbers have been taken from Tom's (in the pdf), so if it's still a copyright violation of some sort, i'll make whatever changes are required.
Note 2: The L3 cache bandwidth numbers are missing because the Q8400 doesn't have L3 cache.
I benchmarked my Q8400 using Sandra 2013 SP2, and used Tom's numbers from this review for the 4770K to make charts. Here's the pdf export:
http://bit.ly/15VXs8b
Note: I HAVE mentioned that the 4770K numbers have been taken from Tom's (in the pdf), so if it's still a copyright violation of some sort, i'll make whatever changes are required.
Note 2: The L3 cache bandwidth numbers are missing because the Q8400 doesn't have L3 cache.
ojas
Distinguished
- Feb 25, 2011
- 2,924
- 0
- 20,810
[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]Hahaha, A LOT, its not even quantifiable in that wide a context. 30-50% my guess...You could have upgraded at Sandy already and seen massive improvement.[/citation]
No more like 100% to over 1000% in synthetics like Sandra 😀
No more like 100% to over 1000% in synthetics like Sandra 😀
CaedenV
Splendid
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,829
- 3
- 23,465
[citation][nom]Cryio[/nom]I'm still wondering wether to hold on to my 3.5/4 Ghz Intel Q9550 or to get a non-K 2500/3570/4570.Is it really worth it? Like, how much would be the improvements in applications and games in percentages?[/citation]
I am really beginning to hate these questions. Do some research! Tom's has some interesting (though annoying to navigate) charts where you can make comparisons. Anandtech.com has some less detailed but much more user friendly benchmark options, and there are 100 other sites that do similar things. Also, these are not final builds for drivers, and possibly not even a final build on hardware, so the final performance will probably vary a little bit.
Also 'is it worth it' is a really odd question. There are so many factors there that it is hardly worth answering. It all depends on what you are doing with your computer, what your performance expectations are, and what you are willing to pay to meet those expectations. For my wifes PC we recently 'upgraded' from a Cre2Duo to an i3 computer for her. It was not much of an upgrade as the actual performance is roughly the same for what she is doing (because her performance is mostly bottlenecked by the internet connection), but it was a huge power and noise upgrade. Moving from an average usage power load of ~250W down to ~70W, and from a hot and noisy system to a dead silent system, and from a system that collected lots of dust (due to lots of air movement) to a system that I don't have to clean out every few months, all made that a worthy investment for us to spend ~$200 for the upgrade. That was worth it to us simply from a convenience and power standpoint even though there are minimal performance increases (and actually a decrease on GPU performance), but some people would not think that worth it.
I did a major upgrade to a Sandy Bridge processor ~2 years ago. It was worth it to me to spend ~$800 in hardware to move from my old C2Duo to a SB i7 and a decent GPU so that I could do HD video editing and play high end PC games again. The video editing business paid for the hardware, and helped me take a few video editing gigs that I would not have been able to do on the C2Duo system, so that was worth it. If I did video editing full time rather than 1-3 projects a year then I would probably upgrade to a much larger system, but because that is not my full time job I got something that was right on the boarder of overkill for what I do, but without paying an arm and a leg for truly high end equipment. It is all up to you and your needs vs value system.
You know what SB and IB are capable of compared to a C2Q, and while Haswell is a larger improvement over IB than I was expecting, it is not a HUGE improvement by any stretch of the imagination, so if SB or IB was not worth upgrading to, then most likely Haswell is not going to change that at all. More likely than not your system would see more noticeable performance gains by moving up to a SSD system drive than moving to a more modern processor. But at the same time, if your system was stolen, or died then a haswell system would be a nice upgrade to have.
Lets look at it another way: Intel is not competing with AMD any longer. Intel is competing with ARM and nVidia, while still trying to keep it's large corporate server customers happy. So we are seeing some CPU enhancements, but most of the focus is getting the TDP down, and iGPU performance up to par. Somewhere in the Haswell/Broadwell range of chips I think Intel will have finally caught up with where they want to be on the TDP and iGPU front, and then we will see a small return to performance and more interesting architecture improvements with the Skylake/Skymont series of chips. But then again, if there is no longer any major competition, and if chips are beginning to be small enough to be ubiquitous then there may not be any major reason for Intel to push the performance envelope any longer other than to compete with themselves in getting people to upgrade their old Intel chips.
I am really beginning to hate these questions. Do some research! Tom's has some interesting (though annoying to navigate) charts where you can make comparisons. Anandtech.com has some less detailed but much more user friendly benchmark options, and there are 100 other sites that do similar things. Also, these are not final builds for drivers, and possibly not even a final build on hardware, so the final performance will probably vary a little bit.
Also 'is it worth it' is a really odd question. There are so many factors there that it is hardly worth answering. It all depends on what you are doing with your computer, what your performance expectations are, and what you are willing to pay to meet those expectations. For my wifes PC we recently 'upgraded' from a Cre2Duo to an i3 computer for her. It was not much of an upgrade as the actual performance is roughly the same for what she is doing (because her performance is mostly bottlenecked by the internet connection), but it was a huge power and noise upgrade. Moving from an average usage power load of ~250W down to ~70W, and from a hot and noisy system to a dead silent system, and from a system that collected lots of dust (due to lots of air movement) to a system that I don't have to clean out every few months, all made that a worthy investment for us to spend ~$200 for the upgrade. That was worth it to us simply from a convenience and power standpoint even though there are minimal performance increases (and actually a decrease on GPU performance), but some people would not think that worth it.
I did a major upgrade to a Sandy Bridge processor ~2 years ago. It was worth it to me to spend ~$800 in hardware to move from my old C2Duo to a SB i7 and a decent GPU so that I could do HD video editing and play high end PC games again. The video editing business paid for the hardware, and helped me take a few video editing gigs that I would not have been able to do on the C2Duo system, so that was worth it. If I did video editing full time rather than 1-3 projects a year then I would probably upgrade to a much larger system, but because that is not my full time job I got something that was right on the boarder of overkill for what I do, but without paying an arm and a leg for truly high end equipment. It is all up to you and your needs vs value system.
You know what SB and IB are capable of compared to a C2Q, and while Haswell is a larger improvement over IB than I was expecting, it is not a HUGE improvement by any stretch of the imagination, so if SB or IB was not worth upgrading to, then most likely Haswell is not going to change that at all. More likely than not your system would see more noticeable performance gains by moving up to a SSD system drive than moving to a more modern processor. But at the same time, if your system was stolen, or died then a haswell system would be a nice upgrade to have.
Lets look at it another way: Intel is not competing with AMD any longer. Intel is competing with ARM and nVidia, while still trying to keep it's large corporate server customers happy. So we are seeing some CPU enhancements, but most of the focus is getting the TDP down, and iGPU performance up to par. Somewhere in the Haswell/Broadwell range of chips I think Intel will have finally caught up with where they want to be on the TDP and iGPU front, and then we will see a small return to performance and more interesting architecture improvements with the Skylake/Skymont series of chips. But then again, if there is no longer any major competition, and if chips are beginning to be small enough to be ubiquitous then there may not be any major reason for Intel to push the performance envelope any longer other than to compete with themselves in getting people to upgrade their old Intel chips.
Novuake
Champion
- Aug 27, 2011
- 14,302
- 0
- 56,960
ojas :
FOR THOSE OF YOU WONDERING ABOUT UPGRADING FROM THE CORE 2 GENERATION
I benchmarked my Q8400 using Sandra 2013 SP2, and used Tom's numbers from this review for the 4770K to make charts. Here's the pdf export:
http://bit.ly/15VXs8b
Note: I HAVE mentioned that the 4770K numbers have been taken from Tom's (in the pdf), so if it's still a copyright violation of some sort, i'll make whatever changes are required.
Note 2: The L3 cache bandwidth numbers are missing because the Q8400 doesn't have L3 cache.
I benchmarked my Q8400 using Sandra 2013 SP2, and used Tom's numbers from this review for the 4770K to make charts. Here's the pdf export:
http://bit.ly/15VXs8b
Note: I HAVE mentioned that the 4770K numbers have been taken from Tom's (in the pdf), so if it's still a copyright violation of some sort, i'll make whatever changes are required.
Note 2: The L3 cache bandwidth numbers are missing because the Q8400 doesn't have L3 cache.
Interesting. but those are still only synthetics. Thanks anyway.
ingtar33
Glorious
- Dec 17, 2012
- 9,079
- 311
- 46,040
about what we were expecting. a 10% improvement across the board, and a 20%-40% gpu improvement; pretty respectable. However, not really earthshattering.
Perhaps this chip will overclock well and turn some heads that way.
I have a feeling though, that this leaves the door open for AMD. This is now a 4 year stagnation on CPUs. With no real competition coming from AMD, i fear this will be more of the new normal as intel just rearranges the furniture, moves more functions onto the CPU, and works on its mobile/tablet/phone parts.
It will be interesting to see if Haswell can actually compete with the year old Trinity on laptops. Trinity laptops sorta curb stomped the i5,i7 offerings for onboard GPU and general power draw last time around (the power numbers were pretty similar actually, however, for an intel to compete with graphics it needed a gpu, which tended to brutalize the battery numbers).
Sad the only place left AMD is forcing intel to innovate is in the laptop market. All their innovation is going there, because its the only field AMD is competitive. Hopefully AMD will use this stagnation to get competitive in desktops again... to force some innovation into that part of the market again.
Perhaps this chip will overclock well and turn some heads that way.
I have a feeling though, that this leaves the door open for AMD. This is now a 4 year stagnation on CPUs. With no real competition coming from AMD, i fear this will be more of the new normal as intel just rearranges the furniture, moves more functions onto the CPU, and works on its mobile/tablet/phone parts.
It will be interesting to see if Haswell can actually compete with the year old Trinity on laptops. Trinity laptops sorta curb stomped the i5,i7 offerings for onboard GPU and general power draw last time around (the power numbers were pretty similar actually, however, for an intel to compete with graphics it needed a gpu, which tended to brutalize the battery numbers).
Sad the only place left AMD is forcing intel to innovate is in the laptop market. All their innovation is going there, because its the only field AMD is competitive. Hopefully AMD will use this stagnation to get competitive in desktops again... to force some innovation into that part of the market again.
CaedenV
Splendid
- Jun 14, 2011
- 4,829
- 3
- 23,465
[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]1) There's an on-package VRM likely contributing to this, which used to be on the motherboard, along with a more complex graphics engine.Don't have answers for the other questions--the specs at my disposal are pretty limited, and I no longer have access to the processor, unfortunately.[/citation]
According to the Anandtech Podcast the on-board VRMs are supposed to add a minimal hit to the overall wattage, and being somewhere in the neighborhood of 5W or less. Most of the power increase is in the onboard GPU, but considering what you are getting for that extra wattage it would strike me as being a fair trade. But then again they were just making an educated guess as they have no actual numbers to back that up, so perhaps the VRMs eat more power than once thought?
According to the Anandtech Podcast the on-board VRMs are supposed to add a minimal hit to the overall wattage, and being somewhere in the neighborhood of 5W or less. Most of the power increase is in the onboard GPU, but considering what you are getting for that extra wattage it would strike me as being a fair trade. But then again they were just making an educated guess as they have no actual numbers to back that up, so perhaps the VRMs eat more power than once thought?
masterasia
Distinguished
- Feb 9, 2009
- 1,128
- 0
- 19,360
The Scion of Balance
Honorable
- Sep 12, 2012
- 10
- 0
- 10,510
CaptainTom
Honorable
- May 3, 2012
- 1,563
- 0
- 11,960
Honestly at this rate someone with an i5-2500k is set for another 4 years and IB is set for longer since it has PCIe 3.0, USB 3.0, and SATA III.
I mean it was only late 2012 where I would say that Core 2 Quads were starting to create some problematic bottlenecks, and there is a huge difference in power between a C2Q and an SB/IB i5.
I have had my i5-3570k for almost a year, and I think I will have it for another 5.
Kyren Skrumeda
Honorable
- Mar 18, 2013
- 1
- 0
- 10,510
stickmansam
Splendid
- Oct 30, 2011
- 3,719
- 0
- 23,460
[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]FOR THOSE OF YOU WONDERING ABOUT UPGRADING FROM THE CORE 2 GENERATIONI benchmarked my Q8400 using Sandra 2013 SP2, and used Tom's numbers from this review for the 4770K to make charts. Here's the pdf export:http://bit.ly/15VXs8bNote: I HAVE mentioned that the 4770K numbers have been taken from Tom's (in the pdf), so if it's still a copyright violation of some sort, i'll make whatever changes are required. Note 2: The L3 cache bandwidth numbers are missing because the Q8400 doesn't have L3 cache.[/citation]
Here's an old toms article with everything clocked at 3ghz, the C2Q can clock up quite high if you ahve the right board and ram
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/processor-architecture-benchmark,2974-10.html
and same results in chart form
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/x86-core-performance-comparison/benchmarks,128.html
Going to be siting on my 3570k for quite a while it seems
Here's an old toms article with everything clocked at 3ghz, the C2Q can clock up quite high if you ahve the right board and ram
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/processor-architecture-benchmark,2974-10.html
and same results in chart form
http://www.tomshardware.com/charts/x86-core-performance-comparison/benchmarks,128.html
Going to be siting on my 3570k for quite a while it seems
ericjohn004
Honorable
- Oct 26, 2012
- 651
- 0
- 11,010
It seems to me that Ivy Bridge owners really have nothing to worry about and neither do Sandy Bridge owners really. All this means is that my 3570k@4.6Ghz will be just as fast as a 4670k@4.4Ghz. Once you take overclocking into considerations we're talking about peanuts.
The only real upgrade was when they came out with Sandy Bridge. Now, next year when they come out with something even newer it may be worth it to upgrade from Sandy Bridge. I only find it worthy of upgrading if you can get at least a 25% improvement in performance across the board. So it's looking like every 3-4 years I'll be upgrading.
Hopefully by next year or the year after we'll start getting some really solid 10-15% increases in performance from one gen to the other. Or maybe AMD will get a clue and start beefing up their single threaded performance because that's what it'll take. But since they are obsessed with multithreading and want nothing to do with x86 performance I dought we'll ever see an AMD that can score over a 1.0 in Cinebench.
The only real upgrade was when they came out with Sandy Bridge. Now, next year when they come out with something even newer it may be worth it to upgrade from Sandy Bridge. I only find it worthy of upgrading if you can get at least a 25% improvement in performance across the board. So it's looking like every 3-4 years I'll be upgrading.
Hopefully by next year or the year after we'll start getting some really solid 10-15% increases in performance from one gen to the other. Or maybe AMD will get a clue and start beefing up their single threaded performance because that's what it'll take. But since they are obsessed with multithreading and want nothing to do with x86 performance I dought we'll ever see an AMD that can score over a 1.0 in Cinebench.
warezme
Distinguished
- Dec 18, 2006
- 2,453
- 57
- 19,890
[citation][nom]demonhorde665[/nom]The nubmers arnt that stunning really , I'm more stunned by the fact that intel still has yet to release an 8 core cpu for general consumers. normally an AMD fan because of pricing , but i'd love to see what an intel 8 core could do. i8 any one ?[/citation]Why would they? That would directly undercut their server class xeon cash cow.
ojas
Distinguished
- Feb 25, 2011
- 2,924
- 0
- 20,810
[citation][nom]stickmansam[/nom]Here's an old toms article with everything clocked at 3ghz, the C2Q can clock up quite high if you ahve the right board and ramhttp://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 74-10.htmland same results in chart formhttp://www.tomshardware.com/charts [...] s,128.htmlGoing to be siting on my 3570k for quite a while it seems[/citation]
FACT: I'm not investing in the mobo and/or RAM for a 5 year old processor, i've already switched from a DDR2 mobo/ram combo to what i have. I'm sure most people will be in my situation. I had to import my current board from the US, local supplies were out.
And wait, that article covers Core 2 Duo. Wolfdale chips clock like mad. On the present board, with my CPU, a 4% OC is the limit.
And bottlenecks galore.
Frankly, I'm upgrading to Haswell by the end of the year, so that any teething troubles are sorted and prices fall. I'm thinking of getting the 4770K instead of the 4670K simply because i'm not sure what'll happen after this. If my Q8400 lasted this long, I'm pretty certain that a 4770K would outlast the next console generation (the PS4/Xbox 720 one).
Plus 8 threads seem to be the way to go forward, looking at the PS4's specs.
Oh and, real world example:
FreeSpace 2 SCP, on a certain custom mission i ask 60+ ships, including capitals, the Colossus and a Sathanas to jump in. On my current rig, the FPS falls to around 45.
On my friend's 3570K, solid 120 fps. It's single threaded, but there you have it.
I'm very bottlenecked in planetside 2, BF3 multiplayer and i think a bit in Far Cry 3 too, among others.
I think this is a good related article:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6670/dragging-core2duo-into-2013-time-for-an-upgrade
FACT: I'm not investing in the mobo and/or RAM for a 5 year old processor, i've already switched from a DDR2 mobo/ram combo to what i have. I'm sure most people will be in my situation. I had to import my current board from the US, local supplies were out.
And wait, that article covers Core 2 Duo. Wolfdale chips clock like mad. On the present board, with my CPU, a 4% OC is the limit.
And bottlenecks galore.
Frankly, I'm upgrading to Haswell by the end of the year, so that any teething troubles are sorted and prices fall. I'm thinking of getting the 4770K instead of the 4670K simply because i'm not sure what'll happen after this. If my Q8400 lasted this long, I'm pretty certain that a 4770K would outlast the next console generation (the PS4/Xbox 720 one).
Plus 8 threads seem to be the way to go forward, looking at the PS4's specs.
Oh and, real world example:
FreeSpace 2 SCP, on a certain custom mission i ask 60+ ships, including capitals, the Colossus and a Sathanas to jump in. On my current rig, the FPS falls to around 45.
On my friend's 3570K, solid 120 fps. It's single threaded, but there you have it.
I'm very bottlenecked in planetside 2, BF3 multiplayer and i think a bit in Far Cry 3 too, among others.
I think this is a good related article:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6670/dragging-core2duo-into-2013-time-for-an-upgrade
- Status
TRENDING THREADS
-
News AMD says Intel's 'horrible product' is causing Ryzen 9 9800X3D shortages- Started by Admin
- Replies: 75
-
-
-
News Jensen says DLSS 4 "predicts the future" to increase framerates without introducing latency
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 85
-
News Nvidia's GeForce RTX 5070 at $549 — How does it stack up to the previous generation RTX 4070?
- Started by Admin
- Replies: 77
-
Discussion PSU recommendations and power supply discussion thread - Tom's hardware- Started by Darkbreeze
- Replies: 2K
Latest posts
-
-
Question Upgrading a AMD Ryzen 5 2600 six-core processer with a RTX3060 12g
- Latest: drea.drechsler
-
-
-
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram