Intel 8-core Haswell-E Slated For 3Q 2014

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stimpack

Honorable
Mar 12, 2013
131
0
10,680
$1000 processors or not, if you plan to be at the front of the technological pack, then you'll need to plan to spend a good amount for it.
 

thundervore

Distinguished
Dec 13, 2011
1,030
1
19,460
I just finished building a Z77 machine December 2012. I will wait for DDR4, PCIe 4, USB 4.0 and SATA4 supported nativly on the same board before i upgrade. So i will skip Z97 and most likely ZX7 (if that the next name).

I am still kicking myself for not wating for Z87 to get all 6 native Intel SATA3 ports instead of just 2 on my Z77.
 

fonzy

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2005
398
1
18,785
wow I never would have thought when I bought my Q6600 that it would take this long almost another 7 years for Intel to come out with a 8 core desktop chip.

I will upgrade when they come down in price or wait for skylake.
 

Amdlova

Distinguished
Iam happy with z77 and the 3770k wih all fans disable (on only powersupply) i get 45W (idle) at stock speeds. I will buy another chip when I get 30 or less. I have the config. 1 - maximum OC 2 - Power saving. I can play with the havik 140 @ 4400mhz only with power supply fan. but when set 4.6ghz shutdown in few seconds after startup
 

jaghpanther

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2010
150
0
18,710
The thing that interests me is the difference between the K and X series. K if we keeping with tradition will have something(s) disabled, but what? X would be full feature but as OC'able as the K?
 

bison88

Distinguished
May 24, 2009
618
0
18,980
There goes the hopes and dreams of bringing an $500 8 core part. Very disappointing they are keeping it at the $1,000 price range. It isn't worth that and given every single 6 core part in the Extreme lineup technically is 8 cores with 2 disabled it's very insulting. The only positive is that it'll allow 6 core parts to go mainstream outside the regular high-end lineup by pushing a $300 6 core part out and expanding the LGA2011 segment.
 

atminside

Distinguished
Mar 2, 2011
134
0
18,680
other than video and autocad.......what does a 8 core or 4 core core do better than a 2 core cpu? And Jesus H Christ.....1000 for a cpu? I remember when intel tried to do that with the Pentium 4 extreme edition.
 

bochica

Distinguished
Oct 7, 2009
146
0
18,680


Do you live under a rock? Even the majority of gaming computers today are quad core. There is a substantial boost of the quad cores today vs. the Core 2 Quad age when comparing each to dual cores. Especially with the "Turbo Boost" clocks in the CPUs today (which enable when less cores are used) have a higher clock speed than that of the older dual cores.
 

fonzy

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2005
398
1
18,785
wow I never would have thought when I bought my Q6600 that it would take this long almost another 7 years for Intel to come out with a 8 core desktop chip.

I will upgrade when they come down in price or wait for skylake.
 


they did you a favor, no apps have started using much of 8 cores till recently and beyond 4 cores are still not utilized in most apps, so your getting better overall performance with a fast quad core.
 

fonzy

Distinguished
Dec 23, 2005
398
1
18,785
wow I never would have thought when I bought my Q6600 that it would take this long almost another 7 years for Intel to come out with a 8 core desktop chip.

I will upgrade when they come down in price or wait for skylake.
 

dweezled

Distinguished
Dec 8, 2011
18
0
18,510
Snooze...

Meanwhile the technology has moved to HSA. Sorry Intel. Your days of high priced chicanery have come and gone.

Intel starting its downward death spiral. Outdated Fabs producing yesterday's tech

 
Status
Not open for further replies.