Intel Core "Haswell" Quad-Core Desktop CPU Lineup Detailed

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by The Quim Reaper

Still only 4 cores for the mainstream...

Thanks AMD, thanks for being so useless as to provide Intel with absolutely no reason whatsoever to push 6 cores into the mainstream in 2013.

Thanks AMD...

And the reason mainstream needs 6 cores is ... ?

[Prima.Vera]

Still rocking on a Core 2 Quad Q9650 and no plans to upgrade...hehe.

[acerace]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

And the reason mainstream needs 6 cores is ... ?

Because he have no idea what's he is talking about.

[The Quim Reaper]

Originally Posted by Fourstaff

And the reason mainstream needs 6 cores is ... ?

5yrs ago people were asking why the need for 4 cores...

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by The Quim Reaper

5yrs ago people were asking why the need for 4 cores...

Come back in 5 years, every peasant and their cattle will have 6 cores, but for now 4 cores (with or without HT) is the king

[brandonwh64]

AMD does have 6 and 8 cores but look at the multi threaded benches compared to a 3770K with HT. As you can see it still looses to a real quad core chip with 8 threads

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/551?vs=697

So those "REAL CORES" don't do squat that HT could not do.

[Melvis]

Originally Posted by brandonwh64

AMD does have 6 and 8 cores but look at the multi threaded benches compared to a 3770K with HT. As you can see it still looses to a real quad core chip with 8 threads

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/551?vs=697

So those "REAL CORES" don't do squat that HT could not do.

But = to a 2600K? meh so what? http://www.guru3d.com/articles_pages..._review,1.html

On topic, the question realy is HOW much of an increase over the last gen? as ivy over sandy was nothing to write home about.

[Raw]

Originally Posted by james888

I was thinking about getting a 3770k when they get cheap... You can get a 2500k for $100... I don't know, haswell looks tempting.

REALLY??
Where? I WANT ONE!

Where would you buy a new 2500K for $100.00?

They sell for $220.00 today on Newegg and $210.00 on Amazon, how about >$200.00 on EBay...that's a good represetation of current pricing anywhere in the world.

[repman244]

Originally Posted by Melvis

On topic, the question realy is HOW much of an increase over the last gen? as ivy over sandy was nothing to write home about.

Ivy wasn't a new architecture.

It would be reasonable to expect ~10% increase, it could of been more since clocks stayed the same.

[TheLostSwede]

Originally Posted by Raw

REALLY??
Where? I WANT ONE!

Where would you buy a new 2500K for $100.00?

They sell for $220.00 today on Newegg and $210.00 on Amazon, how about >$200.00 on EBay...that's a good represetation of current pricing anywhere in the world.

Microcenter in the US tend to offer silly deals on CPUs, mate of mine got a 3570K for $170 there a couple of weeks back...
I guess they're still going for $170 - http://www.microcenter.com/product/3...1155_Processor
No 2500K's on their website though...

[Frick]

Now I want a 4770 and 4770's in Crossfire just for the sake of it.

Anyway, needs more cores. Not really, but it would be nice.

[3870x2]

Originally Posted by Novulux

Nah, even if AMD doesn't release any competing products soon after, Haswell will not be such an extreme increase in CPU performance that it won't have to compete with Intel's other CPUs. The fact is that Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge are fast enough for almost all purposes, and Intel would not endanger possible upgrades with exorbitant prices...hopefully.

AMD hasn't had a competing product since AMD Athlon 64, or almost a decade ago. The prices will be more slightly inflated than the last upgrade that we call the 3k series.

The good news is this is finally a viable upgrade from a 900 series i7. (for the non-enthusiast anyway)

[Dj-ElectriC]

K CPUs dont get VT, why? becuase F@#k you thats why

[Frick]

Originally Posted by 3870x2

AMD hasn't had a competing product since AMD Athlon 64, or almost a decade ago. The prices will be more slightly inflated than the last upgrade that we call the 3k series.

The good news is this is finally a viable upgrade from a 900 series i7. (for the non-enthusiast anyway)

For normal folks there haven't been a viable upgrade since the Core 2 Duos. They are still more than enough for them.

And AMD is competing alright, just not at the high end.

EDIT: I have a feeling I'm not doing the grammar well today.

[NHKS]

haswell cores have similar clocks to ivb/sandy cores(eg: 4770K, 3770K & 2700K) so whatever performance improvement we are likely to see is purely architecture/ipc enhancements, which is always a good thing... this along with full SATA III support from the platform is tempting.. a factor that can hamper the interest in this platform is another price hike over IVB - i hope the prices atleast remain similar if not lower..

still not clear why 4770K will be rated 84W while 3770K is 77W.. and i thought haswell would have iGPU named GT1/2/3 (3 being full spec) rather than HD4600... and 4600=GT3?..

those low power models are really tempting for an always-on/crunching setup!

[Octavean]

Originally Posted by Raw

REALLY??
Where? I WANT ONE!

Where would you buy a new 2500K for $100.00?

They sell for $220.00 today on Newegg and $210.00 on Amazon, how about >$200.00 on EBay...that's a good represetation of current pricing anywhere in the world.

It was a limited time offer at Microcenter:

Microcenter i5-2500k for $99.99 (today only 11/16/2012)

My concern with Intel at this point isn’t one of ridiculously high prices. Its more an issue of focus and goals. With little to no competition form AMD and ARM becoming more and more relevant every day, I suspect Intel will focus on efficiency increases more so then performance increases. The shift to mobile computing makes this even more likely IMO.

I personally want to see “significant” performance increases on desktop class processors. If I don’t see that then I’m fine with what I have until such time as said performance increases are made apparent.

[chodaboy19]

Originally Posted by Dj-ElectriC

K CPUs dont get VT, why? becuase F@#k you thats why

That is unfortunate, I was expecting VT-d and AES. Sandy bridge and Ivy Bridge both have AES at least.

[nickbaldwin86]

boring.... less than impressed

[Harry Lloyd]

Wow, what a fail. Exactly the same clocks. What is the point of these CPUs? The tick-tock is now completely pointless. Same clocks, same number of cores, and a 10% architecture performance boost? What a waste of money for whoever upgrades from Sandy or Ivy, especially considering a new mobo is needed.

Unfortunately this is AMD's fault. Intel can do whatever they want without competition.

[newtekie1]

Originally Posted by LAN_deRf_HA

Check out the 4765T. Full spec in a 35w package.

I think the 4770T is more interesting since it has a boost clock that is still respectable and still keeps it under 45w.

Originally Posted by Dj-ElectriC

K CPUs dont get VT, why? becuase F@#k you thats why

The K series have VT, they don't have VT-d which is just direct I/O. People who really want VT-d don't overclock so they have no reason to buy K series processors.

Originally Posted by chodaboy19

That is unfortunate, I was expecting VT-d and AES. Sandy bridge and Ivy Bridge both have AES at least.

The K series processors do have AES, and as I said, people that actually use VT-d don't overclock so paying extra for the K processor doesn't make sense anyway.

[Covert_Death]

Originally Posted by The Quim Reaper

Still only 4 cores for the mainstream...

Thanks AMD, thanks for being so useless as to provide Intel with absolutely no reason whatsoever to push 6 cores into the mainstream in 2013.

Thanks AMD...

yea blame AMD cause that's the fun thing to do

if your going to blame someone blame the software and game companies out there that still live in the 90's and refuse to code for 4+ Cores still... yes it's a littler harder to do but damn get with the times it's what NEEDS to be done

[btarunr]

Originally Posted by LAN_deRf_HA

That's weird. Makes it essentially a far more minor change than people were anticipating. So much for the promise of cheaper small boards.

In its own way, it's a major change. You won't find Gigabyte or ASUS vomit copious amounts of chokes/pseudo-phases around their sockets, because there are only so many phases the CPU-integrated controller logic can handle.

[lemonadesoda]

Interesting. Intel DONT WANT overclocked servers/workstations.

[Fourstaff]

Originally Posted by lemonadesoda

Interesting. Intel DONT WANT overclocked servers/workstations.

Or course not, since its going to reduce their profits.

[Covert_Death]

Originally Posted by Octavean

It was a limited time offer at Microcenter:

Microcenter i5-2500k for $99.99 (today only 11/16/2012)

My concern with Intel at this point isn’t one of ridiculously high prices. Its more an issue of focus and goals. With little to no competition form AMD and ARM becoming more and more relevant every day, I suspect Intel will focus on efficiency increases more so then performance increases. The shift to mobile computing makes this even more likely IMO.

I personally want to see “significant” performance increases on desktop class processors. If I don’t see that then I’m fine with what I have until such time as said performance increases are made apparent.

I didn't even know I had one of these stores ~30 minutes from me... i know where i'm going next week!
http://www.microcenter.com/product/3...1155_Processor