• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Core i7 "Ivy Bridge-E" and Core i3 "Haswell" Series Detailed

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,277 (7.69/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
We know from older reports that Intel will refresh its socket LGA2011 HEDT (high-end desktop) product family with three new parts, based on the new 22 nm "Ivy Bridge-E" silicon. A table detailing their clock speeds was leaked to the web. In addition, we got details of what Intel's entry-level Core i3 "Haswell" line of dual-core processors would look like, specs-wise. The Ivy Bridge-E silicon, is to a large part an optical shrink of the Sandy Bridge-E silicon, with a few improvements. The chip is fabricated on Intel's 22 nm node with tri-gate transistors, the IMC natively supports DDR3-1866 MHz, the PCI-Express root complex is gen 3.0 certified, and the CPUID features the new RdRAND instruction set. Aside from these clock speeds are increased across the board, although TDP isn't lowered from the previous 130W.

Leading the Core i7 "Ivy Bridge-E" pack is the Core i7-4960X Extreme Edition, with its 3.60 GHz core, 4.00 GHz maximum Turbo Boost, unlocked base-clock multiplier, and 15 MB L3 cache. This six-core chip will command a four-figure price. Next up, is the Core i7-4930K, with 3.40 GHz core, 3.90 GHz maximum Turbo Boost, unlocked base-clock multiplier, and 12 MB L3 cache. This chip could be 30-40 percent cheaper than the i7-4960X. The cheapest of the lot, though, is the Core i7-4820K. This quad-core part, interestingly, features unlocked base-clock multiplier, unlike its predecessor, the i7-3820. Perhaps Intel didn't want a repeat of Core i7-3770K cannibalizing the i7-3820. The i7-4820K features 3.70 GHz core, 3.90 GHz Turbo Boost, and 10 MB of L3 cache. The chip may be priced in the same range as the i7-4770K. All three parts feature quad-channel DDR3 integrated memory controllers, with native support for DDR3-1866.

Intel kicked its 4th generation Core "Haswell" desktop family off earlier this month, but only with quad-core parts spread across the Core i7 and Core i5 brand extensions. The entry-level is still stuck with Core i3 "Ivy Bridge," but it won't be for long. Before October, Intel plans to launch three Core i3 parts based on the "Haswell" micro-architecture. These dual-core chips lack Turbo Boost, but feature HyperThreading, which enables four logical CPUs, two out of three feature the same HD 4600 graphics core as other Core "Haswell" processors, while one of them features the slower HD 4400. HD 4600 is good enough for 4K Ultra HD desktop usage, while HD 4400 isn't recommended for desktop usage on displays higher than 1600p. The dual-channel IMCs of all three feature native support for DDR3-1600. TDP of all three chips is rated at 54W. The Core i3 "Haswell" lineup is led by the i3-4340, with its 3.60 GHz clock speed, HD 4600 graphics, and 4 MB L3 cache. Next up, is the Core i3-4330 with 3.50 GHz clock speed, HD 4600 graphics, and 4 MB L3 cache. The most affordable of the lot is the Core i3-4130, with its 3.40 GHz core, HD 4400 graphics, and 3 MB L3 cache.

The mystery of Core i7-4771 is cracked, too. While the unlocked Core i7-4770K features 3.50 GHz clock speed and 3.90 GHz Turbo Boost, the "locked" Core i7-4770 starts out at 3.40 GHz clock speed, and 3.90 GHz Turbo Boost. The Core i7-4771 is an intermediate. It features the clock speeds of the i7-4770K (3.50 nominal, 3.90 GHz Turbo Boost), while being "locked" like the i7-4770. We expect it to eventually replace the i7-4770 from the product stack.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Last edited:

Fourstaff

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
10,020 (1.91/day)
Location
Home
System Name Orange! // ItchyHands
Processor 3570K // 10400F
Motherboard ASRock z77 Extreme4 // TUF Gaming B460M-Plus
Cooling Stock // Stock
Memory 2x4Gb 1600Mhz CL9 Corsair XMS3 // 2x8Gb 3200 Mhz XPG D41
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro+ RX 570 // Asus TUF RTX 2070
Storage Samsung 840 250Gb // SX8200 480GB
Display(s) LG 22EA53VQ // Philips 275M QHD
Case NZXT Phantom 410 Black/Orange // Tecware Forge M
Power Supply Corsair CXM500w // CM MWE 600w
3.4Ghz i3? FX4300 is going to meet serious competition soon.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,645 (0.56/day)
Wow. That sucks.

Four figures for the 4960X. Let's assume that that means 1000USD.
30-40% reduction in price for the 4930k. We're looking at 600-700USD (where SB-e started).
4820 fully unlocked, and priced near the 4770k.
No PCH change, so absolutely no upgraded connectivity.


Intel, we know that increases in performance cost money to develop. We know that you're doing 99% of your research on the lower cost "mainstream" options, then rolling out the developments to your higher cost chips.

None of this makes it acceptable to have the same lackluster PCH running off of 3 generations (22-32-45-65nm) old process nodes making your high end boards run. It doesn't make it acceptable that the mainstream options are more than a generation ahead of your high performance lines. It doesn't make it acceptable to finally deliver on performance, because the thermal overhead forced you to use better processing technologies.

Intel, you're giving us the middle finger. It's time to give it right back. Have fun with all that expensive IB-e silicon.
 
Joined
Sep 15, 2011
Messages
6,457 (1.41/day)
Processor Intel® Core™ i7-13700K
Motherboard Gigabyte Z790 Aorus Elite AX
Cooling Noctua NH-D15
Memory 32GB(2x16) DDR5@6600MHz G-Skill Trident Z5
Video Card(s) ZOTAC GAMING GeForce RTX 3080 AMP Holo
Storage 2TB SK Platinum P41 SSD + 4TB SanDisk Ultra SSD + 500GB Samsung 840 EVO SSD
Display(s) Acer Predator X34 3440x1440@100Hz G-Sync
Case NZXT PHANTOM410-BK
Audio Device(s) Creative X-Fi Titanium PCIe
Power Supply Corsair 850W
Mouse Logitech Hero G502 SE
Software Windows 11 Pro - 64bit
Benchmark Scores 30FPS in NFS:Rivals
This is because there is no true competition from AMD side, so they keep the prices as up as possible with minor performance increase. This is what MONOPOLY is people!
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2009
Messages
3,505 (0.64/day)
This is because there is no true competition from AMD side, so they keep the prices as up as possible with minor performance increase. This is what MONOPOLY is people!

One good advantage to this. You can stay one tech behind without suffering too much while saving some dough.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.96/day)
Location
Concord, NH, USA
System Name Apollo
Processor Intel Core i9 9880H
Motherboard Some proprietary Apple thing.
Memory 64GB DDR4-2667
Video Card(s) AMD Radeon Pro 5600M, 8GB HBM2
Storage 1TB Apple NVMe, 4TB External
Display(s) Laptop @ 3072x1920 + 2x LG 5k Ultrafine TB3 displays
Case MacBook Pro (16", 2019)
Audio Device(s) AirPods Pro, Sennheiser HD 380s w/ FIIO Alpen 2, or Logitech 2.1 Speakers
Power Supply 96w Power Adapter
Mouse Logitech MX Master 3
Keyboard Logitech G915, GL Clicky
Software MacOS 12.1
No PCH change, so absolutely no upgraded connectivity.


Intel, we know that increases in performance cost money to develop. We know that you're doing 99% of your research on the lower cost "mainstream" options, then rolling out the developments to your higher cost chips.

None of this makes it acceptable to have the same lackluster PCH running off of 3 generations (22-32-45-65nm) old process nodes making your high end boards run. It doesn't make it acceptable that the mainstream options are more than a generation ahead of your high performance lines. It doesn't make it acceptable to finally deliver on performance, because the thermal overhead forced you to use better processing technologies.

Intel, you're giving us the middle finger. It's time to give it right back. Have fun with all that expensive IB-e silicon.

Or maybe Intel's intent was that you would use some of those 40 PCI-E lanes. The PCH is still on DMI 2.0 and like server boards, isn't going to offer everything that you want. So instead of complaining why don't you realize that you can get a lot out of a skt2011 board if you're willing to invest in the money to get decent add-on cards, like an 8-port SATA 6GB RAID card, if you really need it so badly. Also Intel doesn't care, you already invested in skt2011, they have your money. This is to get more people to invest in it, not to get people like you and I to upgrade.

This is because there is no true competition from AMD side, so they keep the prices as up as possible with minor performance increase. This is what MONOPOLY is people!

AMD still exists. This is what happens when Intel is dominating the market. We would see even less if Intel had no competition, and that is a monopoly.
 
Joined
Oct 5, 2010
Messages
861 (0.17/day)
System Name FragBox
Processor Intel Core i7 2600K @ 5.0GHz/1.45 volts
Motherboard Asus P8Z77 WS
Cooling Custom CPU loop
Memory Kingston 12GB DDR3 1600
Video Card(s) Galaxy GTX 680/Zotac GTX 680 in SLi/EVGA GTX 650Ti
Storage 2 Vertex 3 120's, raid 0, 2 Seagate Momentus XT 500GB's in raid 0, 1 Hitatchi 2TB for backup
Display(s) 3 Acer S232HLX2 in nvidia surround
Case Corsair C70 White
Audio Device(s) Onboard
Power Supply Corsair AX1200
Software Win 7 x64 Pro
That 4820k has me interested in moving from SB to IB-E, I'm running out of lanes as it is on Z68.
 

Fourstaff

Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Nov 29, 2009
Messages
10,020 (1.91/day)
Location
Home
System Name Orange! // ItchyHands
Processor 3570K // 10400F
Motherboard ASRock z77 Extreme4 // TUF Gaming B460M-Plus
Cooling Stock // Stock
Memory 2x4Gb 1600Mhz CL9 Corsair XMS3 // 2x8Gb 3200 Mhz XPG D41
Video Card(s) Sapphire Nitro+ RX 570 // Asus TUF RTX 2070
Storage Samsung 840 250Gb // SX8200 480GB
Display(s) LG 22EA53VQ // Philips 275M QHD
Case NZXT Phantom 410 Black/Orange // Tecware Forge M
Power Supply Corsair CXM500w // CM MWE 600w
AMD still exists. This is what happens when Intel is dominating the market. We would see even less if Intel had no competition, and that is a monopoly.

Intel has virtual monopoly north of 3770/4770/8350
 
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
478 (0.12/day)
System Name Desktop
Processor i5 3570k
Motherboard Asrock Z77
Cooling Corsair H60
Memory G Skill 8gb 1600 mhz X 2
Video Card(s) Sapphire Radeon 7850 X 2
Storage 1 TB Velociraptor, 240GB 840 Samsung
Display(s) 27" Samsung LED X 2
Case Thermaltake V9
Power Supply Seasonic 620 W, CX600M on stand by
Software Win 8.1 64
Benchmark Scores Benches are silly
Wow, is it just me or is this article harder to read than the usual. It just seems less organized.
 
Joined
Apr 19, 2012
Messages
12,062 (2.77/day)
Location
Gypsyland, UK
System Name HP Omen 17
Processor i7 7700HQ
Memory 16GB 2400Mhz DDR4
Video Card(s) GTX 1060
Storage Samsung SM961 256GB + HGST 1TB
Display(s) 1080p IPS G-SYNC 75Hz
Audio Device(s) Bang & Olufsen
Power Supply 230W
Mouse Roccat Kone XTD+
Software Win 10 Pro
Wow, is it just me or is this article harder to read than the usual. It just seems less organized.

I agree, needs compartmentalising. Having three processors mulched out into a paragraph without a table or line break is a little slow, but I got the information in the end.
 

AlienIsGOD

Vanguard Beta Tester
Joined
Aug 9, 2008
Messages
5,111 (0.89/day)
Location
Kingston, Ontario Canada
System Name Aliens Ryzen Rig | 2nd Hand Omen
Processor Ryzen R5 5600 | Ryzen R5 3600
Motherboard Gigabyte B450 Aorus Elite (F61 BIOS) | B450 matx
Cooling DeepCool Castle EX V2 240mm AIO| stock for now
Memory 8GB X 2 DDR4 3000mhz Team Group Vulcan | 16GB DDR4
Video Card(s) Sapphire Pulse RX 5700 8GB | GTX 1650 4GB
Storage Adata XPG 8200 PRO 512GB SSD OS / 240 SSD + 2TB M.2 SSD Games / 1000 GB Data | SSD + HDD
Display(s) Acer ED273 27" VA 144hz Freesync |TCL 32" 1080P w/ HDR
Case NZXT H500 Black | HP Omen Obelisk
Audio Device(s) Onboard Realtek | Onboard Realtek
Power Supply EVGA SuperNOVA G3 650w 80+ Gold | 500w
Mouse Steelseries Rival 500 15 button mouse w/ Razor Goliathus Chroma XL mousemat | Logitech G502
Keyboard Logitech G910 Orion Spark RGB w/ Romer G tactile keys | Logitech G513 Carbon w/ Romer G tactile keys
Software Windows 10 Pro | Windows 10 Pro
well im liking the i3 lineup, the 3.6 ghz 4340 looks like a nice chip compared to the current IB dual core lineup.
 

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,277 (7.69/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
Technically, it would cost Intel $0 to rebadge Z87 as X89. They're both just glorified southbridges anyway.
 
Joined
May 15, 2008
Messages
2,863 (0.49/day)
Location
Brasil
System Name Sovereign // HTPC
Processor i7 3770k 4.2 // i7 3770k 4.2
Motherboard Maximus V Gene // Sabertooth Z77
Cooling Noctua D14 // Intel HSF
Memory 16GB Samsung // 16GB VengeanceLP
Video Card(s) Deciding // 660 DC2
Storage OS (X25-M), Data (Seagate 1TB) // Samsung 840 120GB & bunch of drives
Display(s) Samsung T240HD // LG TV
Case TJ08e // Grandia GD08
Audio Device(s) DT880 Pro 250 ohm // TV speakers
Power Supply Seasonic Plat 1000 // Seasonic Gold 760
Software Windows 8 Pro x64 // Windows 7 Pro x64
So X89 coming? Where is that in the news?
 
Joined
Apr 21, 2008
Messages
5,250 (0.90/day)
Location
IRAQ-Baghdad
System Name MASTER
Processor Core i7 3930k run at 4.4ghz
Motherboard Asus Rampage IV extreme
Cooling Corsair H100i
Memory 4x4G kingston hyperx beast 2400mhz
Video Card(s) 2X EVGA GTX680
Storage 2X Crusial M4 256g raid0, 1TbWD g, 2x500 WD B
Display(s) Samsung 27' 1080P LED 3D monitior 2ms
Case CoolerMaster Chosmos II
Audio Device(s) Creative sound blaster X-FI Titanum champion,Creative speakers 7.1 T7900
Power Supply Corsair 1200i, Logitch G500 Mouse, headset Corsair vengeance 1500
Software Win7 64bit Ultimate
Benchmark Scores 3d mark 2011: testing
fu*k intel chipset every month
 

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
46,277 (7.69/day)
Location
Hyderabad, India
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard ASUS ROG Strix B450-E Gaming
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 8GB G.Skill Sniper X
Video Card(s) Palit GeForce RTX 2080 SUPER GameRock
Storage Western Digital Black NVMe 512GB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
So X89 coming? Where is that in the news?

No, there's no X89. I was commenting on how X79 feels ancient next to Z87, why people could still pick an i7-4770K over an i7-4820K (six SATA 6 Gb/s ports), and how easy it really is for Intel to fix the situation.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,645 (0.56/day)
Or maybe Intel's intent was that you would use some of those 40 PCI-E lanes. The PCH is still on DMI 2.0 and like server boards, isn't going to offer everything that you want. So instead of complaining why don't you realize that you can get a lot out of a skt2011 board if you're willing to invest in the money to get decent add-on cards, like an 8-port SATA 6GB RAID card, if you really need it so badly. Also Intel doesn't care, you already invested in skt2011, they have your money. This is to get more people to invest in it, not to get people like you and I to upgrade.


You make a few fair points. My counters to them are the simple ones.

1) X79 was originally specced out to have much more connectivity. Some boards actually had this connectivity enabled, but it didn't see general markets because the 65 nm process made the PCH get too hot. 65 nm PCH for a 32 nm CPU is like connecting your efficient 2010 engine to a transmission from 1980. It will work, but it's a huge loss.

2) 40 lanes is great, but Intel is forcing us to spend money that we didn't have to. I can see purchasing a $300 RAID card, but that's not the point. 40 lanes - 32 lanes for crossfire = 8 lanes from the CPU. Add in the lanes from the PCH, remembering to deduct extra items that use those lanes (such as SATA III controllers, USB 3.0 controllers, etc....), and we're left with a handful of extra lanes. Not a problem, unless lanes are dedicated to extra controllers because the PCH has been intentionally crippled.

3) Who sees IB-e now, and wants to rush out and buy it? If you're the slightest bit informed, and I assume this because of the huge price tag, then you know Haswell has released. Haswell is an improvement on IB, and will be a generally cheaper platform. If you need the performance of an enthusiast system then you've committed to being behind the curve, for extra processor cores. I could see that if you'd gotten a few months before it was old tech, but not when they were 3 months behind the release of the newest generation. That's some crappy PR.


Yeah, still disappointed in X79. The 3930k is acceptable, if over priced. There are arguments to be made for it, but this isn't about the need for LGA 2011 options. This is about IB-e, and why it exists. It came to the table late, it offers almost nothing new, and it's actually priced higher than its predecessor. Unless you're still rocking a high end LGA775 processor, IB-e offers no reasons for upgrade that SB-e didn't. That is the root of my disappointment.
 

sc

Joined
Mar 18, 2012
Messages
85 (0.02/day)
A big improvement over the mess the i3 lineup was with SB/IB but still I can't understand the purpose with an i3 with a IGPU less than HD5200 (nevermind the BGA packaging).
They should all have either the best IGPU Intel has to offer today or without any graphics at all.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Wow. That sucks.

Four figures for the 4960X. Let's assume that that means 1000USD.
30-40% reduction in price for the 4930k. We're looking at 600-700USD (where SB-e started).
4820 fully unlocked, and priced near the 4770k.
No PCH change, so absolutely no upgraded connectivity.


Intel, we know that increases in performance cost money to develop. We know that you're doing 99% of your research on the lower cost "mainstream" options, then rolling out the developments to your higher cost chips.

None of this makes it acceptable to have the same lackluster PCH running off of 3 generations (22-32-45-65nm) old process nodes making your high end boards run. It doesn't make it acceptable that the mainstream options are more than a generation ahead of your high performance lines. It doesn't make it acceptable to finally deliver on performance, because the thermal overhead forced you to use better processing technologies.

Intel, you're giving us the middle finger. It's time to give it right back. Have fun with all that expensive IB-e silicon.

Where SB-e Started? Look again, these are the same prices as SB-e when it was launched. The i7-3960X launched at over $1,000 and it is still there, and the i7-3970X came out and was even more expensive. And they were simply following in the Footsteps of Gulftown's i7-980X which also launched at $1,000. And those were following in all the other Extreme Edition processors footsteps which were all $1,000.

Seriously, the Extreme Edition processors have been $1,000 for as long as I can remember, all the way back to the P4 days when Intel was loosing to AMD. For some reason Intel just always prices them right at that price point, no matter what.
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,645 (0.56/day)
Where SB-e Started? Look again, these are the same prices as SB-e when it was launched. The i7-3960X launched at over $1,000 and it is still there, and the i7-3970X came out and was even more expensive. And they were simply following in the Footsteps of Gulftown's i7-980X which also launched at $1,000. And those were following in all the other Extreme Edition processors footsteps which were all $1,000.

Seriously, the Extreme Edition processors have been $1,000 for as long as I can remember, all the way back to the P4 days when Intel was loosing to AMD. For some reason Intel just always prices them right at that price point, no matter what.

Do you have a different point, or are we making the same one?

I said the exact same thing as you have repeated. My point was static pricing, with only a marginal increase despite nearly two years between releases. That is what I find depressing/sad.



Edit:
Changed wording to, hopefully, not sound so egotistical.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 11, 2013
Messages
1,237 (0.30/day)
Location
California, unfortunately.
System Name Sierra ~ Server
Processor Core i5-11600K ~ Core i3-12100
Motherboard Asus Prime B560M-A AC ~ MSI PRO B760M-P
Cooling CM 212 Black RGB Edition ~ Intel Stock Cooler
Memory 64GB (2x 32GB) DDR4-3600 ~ 32GB (4x 8GB) DDR4-3200
Video Card(s) XFX Radeon RX 6950 XT ~ EVGA GeForce GTX 970
Storage 4TB Samsung 990 Pro with Heatsink NVMe SSD ~ 2TB Kingston NV1 NVMe SSD + 500GB WD Blue SATA SSD
Display(s) 2x Dell S2721QS 4K 60Hz ~ N/A
Case Asus Prime AP201 - Open Frame Chassis
Power Supply Thermaltake GF1 850W ~ Thermaltake Smart 500W
Software Windows 11 Pro ~ Proxmox VE
Benchmark Scores Laptops: Dell Latitude E7270, Dell Latitude 14 Rugged 5420.
AMD is no competition to Intel. High end gaming and workstation computers? Intel i7 is the way to go? Cheap office-type computers? Intel Celeron is the way to go. HTPC? AMD APU.
Wow, one minority area where and AMD might be a better choice.
Of course, AMD could put it's crappy CPUs in those cheap $300 Best Buy laptops. But those even come with Intel CPUs now...

Intel can charge as much as people are willing to pay. Is it overpriced? Yes. But it's also worth it if you want the performance and efficiency.

My AMD FX-8350 computer is being sold to a friend who neded a computer for audio production. I'm sure the 8 cores at 4.0-4.2GHz will serve him well. It also came in cheaper than building him a new computer with an i7, so it's better "bang for the buck" but it's still not the best computer since it isn't running an Intel CPU.

Why is it that an old Intel i7 860 quad core 2.8GHz is equivalent in benchmarks to the latest AMD FX-8350 which runs at 4GHz and uses much more power??
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2012
Messages
3,475 (0.85/day)
System Name Skunkworks
Processor 5800x3d
Motherboard x570 unify
Cooling Noctua NH-U12A
Memory 32GB 3600 mhz
Video Card(s) asrock 6800xt challenger D
Storage Sabarent rocket 4.0 2TB, MX 500 2TB
Display(s) Asus 1440p144 27"
Case Old arse cooler master 932
Power Supply Corsair 1200w platinum
Mouse *squeak*
Keyboard Some old office thing
Software openSUSE tumbleweed/Mint 21.2
AMD is no competition to Intel. High end gaming and workstation computers? Intel i7 is the way to go? Cheap office-type computers? Intel Celeron is the way to go. HTPC? AMD APU.
Wow, one minority area where and AMD might be a better choice.
Of course, AMD could put it's crappy CPUs in those cheap $300 Best Buy laptops. But those even come with Intel CPUs now...

Intel can charge as much as people are willing to pay. Is it overpriced? Yes. But it's also worth it if you want the performance and efficiency.

My AMD FX-8350 computer is being sold to a friend who neded a computer for audio production. I'm sure the 8 cores at 4.0-4.2GHz will serve him well. It also came in cheaper than building him a new computer with an i7, so it's better "bang for the buck" but it's still not the best computer since it isn't running an Intel CPU.

Why is it that an old Intel i7 860 quad core 2.8GHz is equivalent in benchmarks to the latest AMD FX-8350 which runs at 4GHz and uses much more power??

the biggest reason is how the bulldozer cores are laid out. each module only has one FPU, or floating point unit. FPU performance is VERY important to cpu performance. now, amd's eight core processors have only four fpus, the same number as any quad core intel model. intel's architecture is also very efficient, being refined since the core 2 days, while amd has switched to a new design, and it is painfully optimized. for power consumption, amd's processors take way more juice. the 4 ghz fx 84350 runs at about 1.4v if i remember right, while the i5 only runs at 1.2v. and, amd's chips are on an older 32 nm process, while intel uses a 22nm 3d process. basically, amd is falling behind on EVERYTHING, with an arcitecture that is catering to a market that does not exist yet (a market that uses the gpu to do fpu calculations.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2010
Messages
335 (0.07/day)
I, for one, am excited about having a drop-in replacement for my 3820 (selling off my 3930K in anticipation of getting a 4930K). I have a Haswell chip and aside from the insane memory clocking capability, it doesn't offer anything over Ivy Bridge and in fact is harder to overclock to 4.5GHz+ in most cases especially while trying to run fast memory. The idea of a 4930K clocked at 4.5GHz or higher with quad channel DDR3-2666 or 2800 is pretty appealing to me.
 

newtekie1

Semi-Retired Folder
Joined
Nov 22, 2005
Messages
28,472 (4.25/day)
Location
Indiana, USA
Processor Intel Core i7 10850K@5.2GHz
Motherboard AsRock Z470 Taichi
Cooling Corsair H115i Pro w/ Noctua NF-A14 Fans
Memory 32GB DDR4-3600
Video Card(s) RTX 2070 Super
Storage 500GB SX8200 Pro + 8TB with 1TB SSD Cache
Display(s) Acer Nitro VG280K 4K 28"
Case Fractal Design Define S
Audio Device(s) Onboard is good enough for me
Power Supply eVGA SuperNOVA 1000w G3
Software Windows 10 Pro x64
Do you have a different point, or are we making the same one?

I said the exact same thing as you have repeated. My point was static pricing, with only a marginal increase despite nearly two years between releases. That is what I find depressing/sad.



Edit:
Changed wording to, hopefully, not sound so egotistical.

Sorry, I read your post as saying the SB-e Extreme Editions were only $600-700 and you were saying the prices have gone up.

Yeah, static pricing is Intel's game, but it has nothing to do with a Monopoly or the fact that they outperform AMD, because even when AMD was in the lead Intel was still charging the same $1,000 for their Extreme Editions, or course AMD was too at that point...

High end gaming and workstation computers? Intel i7 is the way to go?

Actually, for Workstations AMD is a very serious competitor to Intel. Intel has basically killed their dual-socket 2011 Workstation motherboards, meaning a single socket 2011 is the best you can do and 8-Core Xeons start at $1,150, and are only clocked at 2.0GHz which is really low for a SB-e. And for basically the same price you can build a 32-core dual-processor monster with AMD processors.
 
Last edited:
Joined
May 18, 2010
Messages
3,427 (0.68/day)
System Name My baby
Processor Athlon II X4 620 @ 3.5GHz, 1.45v, NB @ 2700Mhz, HT @ 2700Mhz - 24hr prime95 stable
Motherboard Asus M4A785TD-V EVO
Cooling Sonic Tower Rev 2 with 120mm Akasa attached, Akasa @ Front, Xilence Red Wing 120mm @ Rear
Memory 8 GB G.Skills 1600Mhz
Video Card(s) ATI ASUS Crossfire 5850
Storage Crucial MX100 SATA 2.5 SSD
Display(s) Lenovo ThinkVision 27" (LEN P27h-10)
Case Antec VSK 2000 Black Tower Case
Audio Device(s) Onkyo TX-SR309 Receiver, 2x Kef Cresta 1, 1x Kef Center 20c
Power Supply OCZ StealthXstream II 600w, 4x12v/18A, 80% efficiency.
Software Windows 10 Professional 64-bit
AMD is no competition to Intel. High end gaming and workstation computers? Intel i7 is the way to go? Cheap office-type computers? Intel Celeron is the way to go. HTPC? AMD APU.
Wow, one minority area where and AMD might be a better choice.
Of course, AMD could put it's crappy CPUs in those cheap $300 Best Buy laptops. But those even come with Intel CPUs now...

Intel can charge as much as people are willing to pay. Is it overpriced? Yes. But it's also worth it if you want the performance and efficiency.

What are you talking about Intel have been overcharging customers for almost 2 decades. Even when AMD had a faster CPU line up, Intel still overcharged.

Intel is a premium brand. They will overcharge regardless, it's their business model.
 
Top