The Core i7-4770K Review: Haswell Is Faster; Desktop Enthusiasts Yawn

[tom31337]

[citation][nom]InvalidError[/nom]There may be a perfectly reasonable engineering reason behind this: TSX likely adds a fair amount of logic along critical cache/memory paths so Intel may be disabling it on K-chips to improve timing margins.[/citation]

If that were the case, they could still have an option to enable TSX in the BIOS. We already know that TSX works at 3.9Ghz because that is what the i7-4770 is clocked up to by a performance BIOS. And it would work fine for underclocks, so there is no need to remove the option completely.

 

[Novuake]

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]HD4600 Iris Pro comparison VS AMD GCN APUs... That should be obvious to you...[/citation]
The APU isn't GCN, it's VLIW4, GCN comes out later this year like, Kaveri, Septemberish IIRC and what I'm recalling was accurate.

LOL yeah, I had kebini in mind... Just read that review through. My bad... I am spouting to much junk today. Same thing applies though.

 

[tom31337]

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]Ah yes, Iris then. Iris Pro is BGA platform only. LOLI do not find it odd at all. This allows people to SEE that 5800K is not a good buy for any performance orientated build.[/citation]

Iris is HD5100. Iris Pro is HD5200. Both are BGA only.

It should be obvious that a $100 part is not going to beat a $350 part in all areas. I was surprised that it beats it in GPU, especially since Intel have been making such a big deal about the Haswell GPU being 2x-3x faster than Ivy Bridge. Right now, for gaming, the $100 AMD part wins, so it's not exactly fair to say it "is not a good buy for any performance" (unless you don't count GPU as performance).

 

[Novuake]

[citation][nom]Novuake[/nom]Ah yes, Iris then. Iris Pro is BGA platform only. LOLI do not find it odd at all. This allows people to SEE that 5800K is not a good buy for any performance orientated build.[/citation]

Iris is HD5100. Iris Pro is HD5200. Both are BGA only.

It should be obvious that a $100 part is not going to beat a $350 part in all areas. I was surprised that it beats it in GPU, especially since Intel have been making such a big deal about the Haswell GPU being 2x-3x faster than Ivy Bridge. Right now, for gaming, the $100 AMD part wins, so it's not exactly fair to say it "is not a good buy for any performance" (unless you don't count GPU as performance).

Context... HD79xx coupled with a 5800K = BAD! I really need to go to sleep now... I think I am sleep forumming already...

 

[Sakkura]

HD4600 is not Iris Pro: Iris Pro is HD5200. Ok, I suppose it is interesting that the $100 AMD chip beats the $350 Intel chip in GPU performance. I guess that is why Microsoft and Sony have chosen AMD for their next gaming platforms. But it still seems an odd comparison given the huge price difference, is A10-5800k really an enthusiasts part? At that price, it seems like it competes against i3, so let's see Haswell-i3 versus A10-5800k.

I'm sure they would have sawed off the iGPU and tested it as a dGPU if such a thing were possible. The HD Graphics 4600 in the Core i7-4770K is the same (apart from clocks) as those in cheaper Haswell CPUs which might more reasonably go up against AMDs APUs. Of course, that means you have to watch out for results where the APU is held back by x86 performance, when trying to compare the performance of the iGPUs. That's what Chris points out in the WoW benchmark.

 

[The_Trutherizer]

What makes me yawn is the 'Flagship' bit. Intel makes some great chips no doubt, but they seem to think that little word is worth several hundred dollars when slapped on a CPU. Hyper enthusiast class! Big dollah buy big performance! But honestly wtf?! It's just another silicone based chip...

And this while desktop sales are falling. I wonder the hell why -_-

 

[The_Trutherizer]

Them desktop sales they keep on falling. I wonder why... Because the word "flagship" seems to be worth $100s these days. And it's just another silicone chip and so much BS.

This is not how you fix the desktop industry's problems.

 

[jrgray93]

I was hoping to see some gaming results with a dedicated GPU. Few people care about integrated graphics on desktop CPUs. Nonetheless, I found some elsewhere, and Haswell is just a big pile of disappointment.

 

[ojas]

[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]Remember that Intel disables TSX with the K-series SKUs. Another terrible example of differentiation for no good reason. I was particularly disappointed at this one.[/citation]
Yeah yeah, i meant 4770K vs 4770, does it make a difference?

 

[ojas]

Another thing: Haswell "Refresh" is out next year for the desktop.

I'm getting the feeling that they're pulling an Nvidia here, so if there's ever a 4780K, it'll probably be what the 4770K should have been today. Maybe it'll be a part with a disabled GPU, who knows.

 

[ingtar33]

I was hoping to see some gaming results with a dedicated GPU. Few people care about integrated graphics on desktop CPUs. Nonetheless, I found some elsewhere, and Haswell is just a big pile of disappointment.

the i7-4770k and i7-3770k when locked at the same ghz in gaming produce identical FPS across pretty much every title. not even a 1FPS variation for the most part.

there is no improvement.

There is also some discussion online that the turbo works differently from the i7-3700k and i7-4700k, and that might be the performance difference at stock... that there is almost no performance increase when the turbos are off and the chips are locked at the same ghz rating.

I'd like Toms to test this for verification... or someone. Because as far as i can tell only one website has claimed this to be true.


One other question. Does Intel need a new way to measure TDP? clearly the new chip isn't particularly power hungry. Yet it seems even the best cpu coolers have a harder time keeping it cool then a fx8350... remember, TDP isn't power draw. TDP is how much heat energy the cooling system needs to dissipate. People associate them as one and the same, yet by moving the power regulators onto the chip, i think they broke the formula.

I mean think of it this way... an FX8350 will need more power and need to be kept cooler (65C max for the most part) then the intel chip, so you need a robust cooling solution. Yet even when pulling more power from the wall, and using the same cooling system as the intel, it's kept far cooler then these i7-4770ks... which means in reality the intel have a higher practical TDP then the 125 TDP AMD

 

[dragonsqrrl]

[citation][nom]tom31337[/nom]I don't understand why the top end Intel $320 4770k is being compared to the budget $100 AMD A10-5800K in the benchmarks here and on other sites?[/citation]
It seems like an obvious comparison to make to me. The A10-5800K is the highest performing CPU/GPU package AMD has to offer. If your goal is to give your readers a well rounded picture of where Intel stands against the competition why not throw it in?

 

[Sakkura]

Another thing: Haswell "Refresh" is out next year for the desktop.

I'm getting the feeling that they're pulling an Nvidia here, so if there's ever a 4780K, it'll probably be what the 4770K should have been today. Maybe it'll be a part with a disabled GPU, who knows.

We get Broadwell next year, so I don't see why they'd bother with a high-end Haswell SKU in 2014.

 

[vmem]

hmm, judging by all the horrible thermals from various reviews, I think Intel is recycling their cheap paste again. time for the Haswell delidding tutorials to begin!

 

[ingtar33]

Another thing: Haswell "Refresh" is out next year for the desktop.

I'm getting the feeling that they're pulling an Nvidia here, so if there's ever a 4780K, it'll probably be what the 4770K should have been today. Maybe it'll be a part with a disabled GPU, who knows.

We get Broadwell next year, so I don't see why they'd bother with a high-end Haswell SKU in 2014.

Broadwell will be a BGA only upgrade for mobile, there may be BGA only broadwells for desktop as well... We'll have to wait +1 extra generation to get a new LGA desktop chip from intel

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intels-Broadwell-Goes-BGA-Only-Implications-Future-Desktops

 

[ko300zx]

Want to get rid of my 965BE and I was thinking about heading to Microcenter and grabbing one of 4670k chips, but now I think I'll just grab a 3570k, and save the $100.

Was hoping Haswell would at least be a good OC'er, but I see no reason to spend that extra money for some casual gaming.

 

[Sakkura]

One other question. Does Intel need a new way to measure TDP? clearly the new chip isn't particularly power hungry. Yet it seems even the best cpu coolers have a harder time keeping it cool then a fx8350... remember, TDP isn't power draw. TDP is how much heat energy the cooling system needs to dissipate. People associate them as one and the same, yet by moving the power regulators onto the chip, i think they broke the formula.

I mean think of it this way... an FX8350 will need more power and need to be kept cooler (65C max for the most part) then the intel chip, so you need a robust cooling solution. Yet even when pulling more power from the wall, and using the same cooling system as the intel, it's kept far cooler then these i7-4770ks... which means in reality the intel have a higher practical TDP then the 125 TDP AMD

No. Intel's CPUs still generate a lot less heat than AMD CPUs. The heat generated is exactly equal to the electrical power consumed. If there is a problem, it's about getting the heat from its source inside the silicon, out to the top of the heat spreader, where the cooler can get rid of it. The best cooler in the world won't help you if the heat can't get to it.

There is potentially a fundamental barrier here, in that packing more transistors into less space leads to an ever higher thermal flux requirement inside the package itself, regardless of what cooler is mounted on top of it all. This is assuming that power draw doesn't drop as fast as the CPU shrinks (which seems to have been the case in general, but for all I know they might reverse that trend and solve the problem that way).

 

[omar farooq jan]

I dont Need To upgreate from i7 2600 i am happy with it.

 

[Sakkura]

Broadwell will be a BGA only upgrade for mobile, there may be BGA only broadwells for desktop as well... We'll have to wait +1 extra generation to get a new LGA desktop chip from intel

http://www.pcper.com/reviews/Processors/Intels-Broadwell-Goes-BGA-Only-Implications-Future-Desktops

Broadwell will include LGA 1150 SKUs as well as BGA SKUs. Try not to listen to link-bait articles that say the sky is falling (literally, even).

http://www.techpowerup.com/177817/intel-haswell-and-broadwell-silicon-variants-detailed.html

 

[dragonsqrrl]

[citation][nom]tom31337[/nom]I was surprised that it beats it in GPU, especially since Intel have been making such a big deal about the Haswell GPU being 2x-3x faster than Ivy Bridge. Right now, for gaming, the $100 AMD part wins, so it's not exactly fair to say it "is not a good buy for any performance" (unless you don't count GPU as performance).[/citation]
As you already mentioned, HD4600 is not Intel's highest-end Haswell GPU. Iris Pro is on the order of 2x faster than HD4000, and it accomplishes this in a 47W mobile package. In terms of performance it's in a completely different league than AMD's current gen mobile APU's. In fact, it even outperforms the HD7660D in the 100W A10-5800K.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6993/intel-iris-pro-5200-graphics-review-core-i74950hq-tested

It's in these sorts of low TDP and mobile SKU's that Haswell is really going to shine. It's already been mentioned many times, but this is where Intel has devoted the vast majority of its efforts this generation. Higher performance, lower power mobile solutions.

 

[gondor]

I am curious as to why Trinity APU (5800K) was used for OpenCL comparison when AMD has Richland (6800K) lined up for release in same time period (June 2013) which has been (p)reviewed already ?

 

[icemunk]

At the current rate of increases, I'll upgrade my 3570K in about 4-5 years... At least video cards are still competing for speed.

 

[Grandmastersexsay]

This is what Asus is saying about Haswell overclocking.

[citation]
70% of CPUs can clock to 4.5GHz

30% of CPUs can clock to 4.6GHz

20% of CPUs can clock to 4.7GHz

10% of CPUs can to 4.8GHz

Overall you will find most CPUs capable of reaching 44x to 45x with varying levels of voltage.

http://www.hardocp.com/article/2013/06/01/intel_haswell_i74770k_ipc_overclocking_review/6#.UauJhNgeoxa
[/citation]


That is quite a bit more promising than what you are reporting. You say a few are stable at 4.5Ghz and Asus says 70% of the hundreds of chips they tested are stable at 4.5Ghz.

They did use a closed loop cooler while you seem to have used a cooler not much better than a factory cooler. That might have something to do with it.

I get the feeling custom water cooling is going to get a lot more popular.

 

[falchard]

The Intel IGP HD4600 is a definite improvement over older Intel IGP. However, with Intel IGP comes lack of driver support and other issues people have had with Intel Graphics.. Still its an impressive improvement.
The Haswell improves in one area where they lost to AMD this recent generation. Software Rendering 3D graphics. AMD has an instruction set on its Piledriver CPUs that increases the speed of calculating workloads like Software Rendering 3D graphics. This generation Haswell gets the same instruction set.

 

[10tacle]

[citation][nom]daglesj[/nom]Well you just proved your colours didn't you? So you haven't yet woken up to the fact that the world doesn't revolve around PC enthusiasts and gamers anymore and in fact more and more kit will be made to appeal to Joe Average. More to life than Crysis you know. You enjoy your ever dwindling world and leave the rest of us to provide computing gear to people who will use it for more than just benchmarks in their bedrooms.[/citation]

You completely missed the point of my post. Who said the world revolves around PCs? I sure didn't. I clearly stated THIS WEBSITE is devoted to PC tech, specifically at the enthusiast level. Playing games like The Sims on integrated graphics IS NOT at the enthusiast level. You are more than welcome to go find a website out there that is NOT focused on PC tech, which INCLUDES high powered CPUs and GPUs that Tom's REVIEWS.

Oh and one other thing: the last time I looked, Tom's has PLENTY of non-gaming benchmarks for real world applications (ie: non-bedroom benchmarks). You called Toms out for not benchmarking games that belong on a tablet and I called you out for the irrelevance of it (on-die integrated graphics performance) for PC enthusiasts.

Class dismissed.