I have a feeling that the enthusiast platform is going to severely lag behind the mainstream platform in single-threaded performance. I know that Ivy is already faster single-threaded compared to Sandy-E, but that's just a small amount due to a smaller manufacturing process. A new architecture is going to make the discrepancy a lot bigger. Even with all of that, at least the 4930k and 4960k make sense for some buyers. The 4820k is just going to be an odd product. This chip going to be reserved for a very small group of people that don't want to drop ~800 on a mobo/CPU combo, but still managed to exhaust the bandwidth provided by 16 lanes of PCIe 3.0 to the point where an inferior CPU architecture with more lanes will yield better performance.
[citation][nom]A Bad Day[/nom]When there's a sudden downpour of games ported from the PS4 that natively support octo-cores.[/citation]
Even when PS4 ports come to PC, desktop quads run at ~2.1X the PS4's CPU clock rate and should easily make up for the lack of octo cores. Ports will likely get optimized for that by folding some threaded bits back into their main threads to avoid unnecessary threading overhead for trivial code.
[citation][nom]InvalidError[/nom]Even when PS4 ports come to PC, desktop quads run at ~2.1X the PS4's CPU clock rate and should easily make up for the lack of octo cores. Ports will likely get optimized for that by folding some threaded bits back into their main threads to avoid unnecessary threading overhead for trivial code.[/citation]
But that's too much work. If many ported games still only went up to DX9, what makes you think they'll put in extra effort to "fold" back in the threads?
Also, folding threads into one giant one? You should play Cities XL sometime. It's a single-threaded game first released in 2010 and so far received a 2011, 2012, and 2013 DLC, but that doesn't mean it won't try to process a metropolis's hundreds of thousands of commuters.
God that game is horrific even on an i5... A friend of mine had to disable three of his i5 2500k's cores and clocked the heck out of the one core to delay the inevitable bog-down of the traffic simulator.
EDIT: And the FX processors (along with the IB-E) would greatly benefit from native octocore support. Crysis 3 is one of the newer heavily threaded games, and the FXes actually come quite close to the i5s and i7s, unlike Starcraft 2 or Skyrim where only two cores are supported.
[citation][nom]anxiousinfusion[/nom]Remember the claims that Ivybridge-E would have between 8-15 cores? Lies.[/citation]
From what I've heard Ivy Bridge-E has 12-cores and 30MB L3, it's just a question of how many cores are fused off in the i7 versions.
Those rumored specs seem a little suspicious to me, but if they do turn out to be true then it's going to be pretty disappointing having half the cores on die disabled. I was kind of expecting Intel to increase the active core count to ~8 while maintaining similar clocks and TDP, or something along those lines.
core i7 3820 does not have a k suffix as it's not fully unlocked like 3930k and 3960/70x. intel offering a fully unlocked quadcore for ivb e(4820k) might eat into core i7 4770k sales both are 22nm cpus but 4820k will have the advantage of supporting multiple gpus on multiple x16 slots without needing a plx chip as well as being backwards compatible with x79 mobos. i doubt intel will allow that.
I bet we'll have to wait at least until the XBOX 720/PS4 are released to see Intel come out with 8-core processors. Haswell probably won't have it. Broadwell-E, maybe. That's my prediction. Sad, but possibly true.
[citation][nom]tomfreak[/nom]Seriously intel, the X version CPUs should have been 8 core already.[/citation]
Right... Because of that overwhelming demand for 8 cores on the desktop. I know that Intel's stock price has been melting due to their lack of response to the marketplace.