Report: Haswell-E CPUs to Debut in September

Status
Not open for further replies.

tom10167

Honorable
Apr 9, 2014
121
1
10,685
0
The 5960x is marketed as having 500MHz slower clock speed, the same number of lanes, same number of cores, but 5MB more cache, and it's 70% more money? lol, well that makes that decision easy
 

hardcore_player

Distinguished
Apr 11, 2011
44
0
18,530
0
the 5960x has 8 cores , 16 threads 20mb of cash and runs at approximately 3GHz whereas the 5930k has 6 cores , 12 threads , 15mb of cash and runs at 3.5GHz , i believe that the 5930k will be the favorite choice among hardcore gamers because of the higher clock speed compared to 5960x , it has less cores , but who cares even the most demanding games can't utilize all 8 cores , so definitely the 5930k will be all about hardcore gamers and professional 3d designers .
the 5960x will be for the people who need the power of the extra 2 cores provided , for rendering and video production where every second counts , yeah time=money.
i definitely will buy one of them but only the benchmarks can tell , can't wait for release date .
 

deadbc77

Distinguished
Sep 23, 2011
58
0
18,660
6
I'm sure glad i fought off my temptation to buy Z97.Can't wait to do a X99 build,but i guess i'll have to.Time to get all my ducks in a row.
 

bison88

Distinguished
May 24, 2009
618
0
18,980
0
The 5960x is marketed as having 500MHz slower clock speed, the same number of lanes, same number of cores, but 5MB more cache, and it's 70% more money? lol, well that makes that decision easy

Not to mention an extra $500 for 2 extra CPU cores that have been on Extreme parts for quite some time, alas disabled intentionally. Intel continues to bore the market.
 

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
212
How are the motherboard manufacturers supposed to handle the fewer PCIe lanes in the 5820k? Is it going to be a different socket, like the Xeon E5-2400 series? If so, that is a big mistake. Besides, putting fewer PCIe lanes on that chip, without the IGP, when the socket 1150 is already anemic and unworkable with more than two video cards, is another mistake. That 5820k sounds like a huge series of compromises that render it a chip without a market.
 

dstarr3

Honorable
Mar 18, 2014
1,527
0
11,960
52
Can't wait to see what the new T processors are about. If the TDP is still 35W or even less, they would be perfect for an SSD-based, fanless, totally silent HTPC.
 

SuperVeloce

Distinguished
Aug 20, 2011
154
0
18,690
1
The 5960x is marketed as having 500MHz slower clock speed, the same number of lanes, same number of cores, but 5MB more cache, and it's 70% more money? lol, well that makes that decision easy
Not to mention an extra $500 for 2 extra CPU cores that have been on Extreme parts for quite some time, alas disabled intentionally. Intel continues to bore the market.
Actually no, as far as we know, dies used for i7 49x0 and 4820 cpu are 6 core versions, 4820k was the only one with disabled cores.
 

CaedenV

Splendid
Moving from my old Sandy Bridge quad core to modern quad core chips is really more of a step sideways rather than an upgrade... but being able to move up to a 6 core part for under $400 that can fully populate 2 PCIe graphics ports? Sounds like an E series chip just might be in my future yet. Granted I need to get through school first, so it will still probably wait until Skylake, but it is good to know that 6 core parts are starting to come down in price!
 

bison88

Distinguished
May 24, 2009
618
0
18,980
0
The 5960x is marketed as having 500MHz slower clock speed, the same number of lanes, same number of cores, but 5MB more cache, and it's 70% more money? lol, well that makes that decision easy
Not to mention an extra $500 for 2 extra CPU cores that have been on Extreme parts for quite some time, alas disabled intentionally. Intel continues to bore the market.
Actually no, as far as we know, dies used for i7 49x0 and 4820 cpu are 6 core versions, 4820k was the only one with disabled cores.
Yeah, they fixed that error with Ivy Bridge, but the original error stemmed from Sandy Bridge.

http://ixbtlabs.com/articles3/cpu/intel-ci7-39x0-lga2011-p1.html

The x820 versions have always usually been there own thing with some originality behind them.
 

JOSHSKORN

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2009
2,380
17
19,795
1
I'm willing to bet, in terms of gaming performance, that the 4790k will out-perform the 5960x, due to the 1Ghz in clock speed differential. 4-cores vs 8 cores would be meaningless.
 

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
212


At first, yes, you're probably right, but there are many games in development now that are being designed around the new consoles, and that means designing around 8 cores. There will be a significant shift over to more heavily threaded games over the next year or so, specifically because of the new consoles, and 6 and 8 core PCs will have a major advantage because of that.
 
wow intel has too many CPU classes now. it used to be pentium was flagship and celeron was value. now you have celeron, pentium,and core i3, i5, i7. so 3 value chips ( celeron., pentium core i3) i5 is mainstream and i7 is gaming. if anyone wants to correct me go ahead i am just trying to understand intel's madness here
 

Tanquen

Distinguished
Oct 20, 2008
241
4
18,685
0
But my old 6 core 3930k run fine at 4.5GHz. Still no games or apps that really use it. My VMware stuff runs a bit better with more cores but not much else.
 

JOSHSKORN

Distinguished
Oct 26, 2009
2,380
17
19,795
1


At first, yes, you're probably right, but there are many games in development now that are being designed around the new consoles, and that means designing around 8 cores. There will be a significant shift over to more heavily threaded games over the next year or so, specifically because of the new consoles, and 6 and 8 core PCs will have a major advantage because of that.
It'll be more than a year. More like 2-3 years. It won't happen until 8 core CPUs become part of the mainstream cycle, and then 6 months after that.
 

Draven35

Distinguished
Nov 7, 2008
806
0
19,010
9
But my old 6 core 3930k run fine at 4.5GHz. Still no games or apps that really use it. My VMware stuff runs a bit better with more cores but not much else.
\

I can point out many apps that will eat your six cores for lunch.
 

dgingeri

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2009
2,123
1
20,460
212


Guess what, with the new consoles now released, 8 cores is mainstream.
 

rishiswaz

Honorable
Mar 10, 2012
564
0
11,060
31
wow intel has too many CPU classes now. it used to be pentium was flagship and celeron was value. now you have celeron, pentium,and core i3, i5, i7. so 3 value chips ( celeron., pentium core i3) i5 is mainstream and i7 is gaming. if anyone wants to correct me go ahead i am just trying to understand intel's madness here
Well that is partially true. Pentium and Celeron are value processors, the i3 is varied between value and mainstream, the i5 is between mainstream and gaming, and the i7 is overkill for gaming and more for professional applications. If you want to get an i7 to game there is no problem with that at all, you will get great performance, but the price/performance difference between the i5s and the i7s for gaming is skewed toward the i5. That is my take on it, it seems more reasonable because for gaming the hyperthreading on the i7 really doesn't give much more performance.
 

laststop311

Distinguished
Nov 8, 2010
281
0
18,790
2
hrm.. 5930x @ 3.5ghz sounds like it "might" be an upgrade to my i7 980x. only time and benchmarks will tell
That's the same boat I'm in. I have an i7-980x with a modest overclock of 4.2ghz base clock on all cores @ 1.3v. Temps never go above 65C. I can push it to 4.6Ghz if i really wanted to but i prefer preserving the longevity of my chip. I realize I could upgrade to the 8 core chip but i really have to see how well it overclocks first. 3.0ghz base clock is pretty poor. As much as I'd love to upgrade, an i7-980x on x58 is still very sufficient for all my needs. I will most likely be waiting for the next tock skylake-e. pci express 4.0 is a pretty big deal and sata express and x4 m2 slots will be plentiful and commonplace. DDR4 will be common in all markets and much cheaper. There will probably be 1 6 core and 2 8 cores on skylake meaning we can grab a slightly lower clocked unlocked 8 core for the much cheaper i7-x930k slot and overclock it to the same speed that the highest end i7-x960k would overclock just a little less cache most likely.

So my recommendation is if you have an i7-980x just wait for skylake-e. Your system should be able to power through everything just fine until then and you will get a lot more for your money with skylake-e than jumping on all these new standards this quickly and going with haswell-e. I would only upgrade to haswell-e if you are rocking an i7-920 or older. If your chip is 32nm or smaller from intel you probably can wait till skylake.
 

urbanman2004

Distinguished
Aug 17, 2012
205
7
18,695
1
Intel's logic behooves me that they would price the 5960X @ $600 when it comes w/ 8 cores and a base clock of 3.0 vs. the i7-5820K @ $400 when it comes w/ 6 cores and a base clock of 3.5. The difference of two cores = $200??? Really? U can't play me for a fool this time.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS