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

Intel Haswell and Broadwell Silicon Variants Detailed

Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.73/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
There are exceptions to every rule (though that wasn't a rule). I simply posted they would be 'out of their mind' to do so in an enterprise environment. You have to think of, for a large data center, how to dissipate the extra heat, pay for the power consumption, and how do you justify the performance increases versus the additional cost to support the overclocked CPU's. What if one is not really stable and bombs applications they run on? What if one in 100 are? They would mean 3 of our servers wouldn't make our uptime SLA's (smallest shop I work in now). I have worked at some fairly large places (Abbott Labs - they make Similac, Ensure, Pedialyte and Pharmaceutical drugs, as well as a 8th largest water utility in the US) so perhaps that is how my opinion is molded.
 
Last edited:

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.97/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
There are exceptions to every rule (though that wasn't a rule). I simply posted they would be 'out of their mind' to do so in an enterprise environment. You have to think of, for a large data center, how to dissipate the extra heat, pay for the power consumption, and how do you justify the performance increases versus the additional cost to support the overclocked CPU's. What if one is not really stable and bombs applications they run on? What if one in 100 are? They would mean 3 of our servers wouldn't make our uptime SLA's (smallest shop I work in now). I have worked at some fairly large places (Abbott Labs - they make Similac, Ensure, Pedialyte and Pharmaceutical drugs, as well as a 8th largest water utility in the US) so perhaps that is how my opinion is molded.

+1: As a system admin, I would never overclock our production servers at work. If a server can't handle the load I would put in a requisition order for an upgrade or a new server unless the software can be tweaked. Stability is the number one thing I keep in mind when it comes to altering server configurations.
 
Joined
Jun 27, 2011
Messages
6,666 (1.43/day)
Processor 7800x3d
Motherboard Gigabyte B650 Auros Elite AX
Cooling Custom Water
Memory GSKILL 2x16gb 6000mhz Cas 30 with custom timings
Video Card(s) MSI RX 6750 XT MECH 2X 12G OC
Storage Adata SX8200 1tb with Windows, Samsung 990 Pro 2tb with games
Display(s) HP Omen 27q QHD 165hz
Case ThermalTake P3
Power Supply SuperFlower Leadex Titanium
Software Windows 11 64 Bit
Benchmark Scores CB23: 1811 / 19424 CB24: 1136 / 7687
Not like gamers need to overclock CPU anyways.

...some do. I have a 2500k and in the two games I play most I get dramatic fps differences by how much I overclock. That is for high settings. If anything, on those two games, I am held back by my cpu. The games are natural selection 2 and planetside 2.
 
Joined
Feb 18, 2011
Messages
1,259 (0.26/day)
...some do. I have a 2500k and in the two games I play most I get dramatic fps differences by how much I overclock. That is for high settings. If anything, on those two games, I am held back by my cpu. The games are natural selection 2 and planetside 2.

Planetside 2 needs some ridiculous processing power in heavy battles. I was OC-ing a E3-1230V2 in a B75 for somebody a couple of days ago, which was basically a "cheap" i7 running at 3.8Ghz, and things still went down to 25-30 fps sometimes.
 
Joined
Aug 7, 2007
Messages
2,723 (0.45/day)
Processor i5-7600k
Motherboard ASRock Z170 Pro4
Cooling CM Hyper 212 EVO w/ AC MX-4
Memory 2x8GB DDR4 2400 Corsair LPX Vengeance 15-15-15-36
Video Card(s) MSI Twin Frozr 1070ti
Storage 240GB Corsair Force GT
Display(s) 23' Dell AW2310
Case Corsair 550D
Power Supply Seasonic SS-760XP2 Platinum
Software Windows 10 Pro 64-bit
If what that graph says is true, then I'm definitely going to get me a low-power 4770S for my HTPC I'm gonna finish up building by the summer. And if I feel like upgrading, I can always switch it out with another low-power Broadwell CPU since it's going to be on the same 1150 socket, sweet! :toast:
 
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
2,642 (0.56/day)
I have to have some help understanding here. I'm working under the assumptions that:
1) Overclocking is for enthusiasts only.
2) The mainstream wants lighter/smaller devices.
3) The mainstream doesn't care about raw performance.
4) Intel wants to make money, so they largely cater to the mainstream.


Utilizing these assumptions, Intel moving to BGA with their mainstream offerings makes sense. A person willing to spend $600 on a computer requires more flexibility (LGA) than someone looking to spend $400 (BGA). As long as Intel focuses BGA packaging on the lower end, no harm no foul.

I will raise hell if the 3570s descendants wind-up as BGA. That will get me to switch to AMD over night (performance be damned). Intel might do some stupid things, but they aren't stupid enough to kill all of the motherboard manufacturers (read: we still aren't the reason they keep LGA, there's too much money at stake for Intel to cut out the other manufacturers).


For Pete's sake, get some perspective here people. Intel is aiming itself at ARM and tablets. The traditional PC is going to take a back seat for a while. Intel already confirmed this with socket 2011. The back seat sucks, but what sucks worse is if PCs were to have the gloomy outlook of the home console. Enjoy the PC, because no other device can yet do everything that it can.
 

Frick

Fishfaced Nincompoop
Joined
Feb 27, 2006
Messages
18,914 (2.87/day)
Location
Piteå
System Name Black MC in Tokyo
Processor Ryzen 5 5600
Motherboard Asrock B450M-HDV
Cooling Be Quiet! Pure Rock 2
Memory 2 x 16GB Kingston Fury 3400mhz
Video Card(s) XFX 6950XT Speedster MERC 319
Storage Kingston A400 240GB | WD Black SN750 2TB |WD Blue 1TB x 2 | Toshiba P300 2TB | Seagate Expansion 8TB
Display(s) Samsung U32J590U 4K + BenQ GL2450HT 1080p
Case Fractal Design Define R4
Audio Device(s) Line6 UX1 + some headphones, Nektar SE61 keyboard
Power Supply Corsair RM850x v3
Mouse Logitech G602
Keyboard Cherry MX Board 1.0 TKL Brown
VR HMD Acer Mixed Reality Headset
Software Windows 10 Pro
Benchmark Scores Rimworld 4K ready!
That is crippled? Virtual technology that the vast majority of people dont use is crippling? TXT is crippling? Im a bit confused at that comment.

Of course it is.

Interesting perspective... even though one doesn't use it, one may feel bad its gone anyway? That is a mindfunk right there!

It isn't. It's cruppling. It has nothing to do with binning chips, it has nothing to do with anything besides Intel just straight up disabling those options, and that is crippling.
 
Joined
Sep 7, 2010
Messages
815 (0.16/day)
Location
Nairobi, Kenya
Processor Intel Core i7-14700K
Motherboard ASUS ROG STRIX Z790-H
Cooling DeepCool AK500 WH
Memory Crucial Pro 32GB Kit (2x16GB) DDR5-5600 (CP2K16G56C46U5)
Video Card(s) Intel ARC A770 Limited Edition
Storage PNY CS3140 2TB / Solidigm P44 Pro 2TB
Display(s) Philips 32M1N5800A
Case Lian Li O11 Air Mini (White)
Power Supply Seasonic Prime Fanless Titanium 600W
Keyboard Dell KM714 Wireless
Software Windows 11 Pro x64
When people pay more for a K but they get another feature removed due to no much reason at all, they don't feel good, even if they don't use it.

True

Of course it is.


It isn't. It's cruppling. It has nothing to do with binning chips, it has nothing to do with anything besides Intel just straight up disabling those options, and that is crippling.

That's why i ditched my 2500K for the 3770, i realized i felt bad that the feature was not in my 2500K that i dint overclock anyway, i bought it for the HD3000, and oddly it used to display HD2000

now I'm very happy with my i7-3770 with all its features at my disposal plus it has HD4000.
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.97/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
1) Overclocking is for enthusiasts only.
I know plenty of people who aren't enthusiasts who express interest in overclocking.
3) The mainstream doesn't care about raw performance.
That's crap. I've heard time and time again that the mainstream user thinks their laptop is slow after buying a 300 USD laptop. My wife doesn't do much on the computer, but there are plenty of things where an Athlon X2 or Celeron/Pentium doesn't cut it. Cheaper and fast computers will make the mainstream user happier, no doubt about it. They just don't care about it as much as we do, but they do care.
4) Intel wants to make money, so they largely cater to the mainstream.
I'm not sure which for-profit company doesn't want to make money. :wtf:
I will raise hell if the 3570s descendants wind-up as BGA.
Not me, I would consider make a very small HTPC if that was the case because it would be small and fly at the same time. If you really want LGA, then that is what you want, so you will look at their LGA lineup and I'm willing to bet that it won't be incredibly different from what is offered now. BGA might not be on your radar, but there are a lot of people and applications where BGA is a big plus.
The traditional PC is going to take a back seat for a while. Intel already confirmed this with socket 2011.
What? Last time I checked, my SB-E chip handles everything I throw at it. I don't care that I can't upgrade to IVB-E yet because I don't need to? :confused: Yeah, I would like to upgrade for the sake of upgrading but honestly, I'm perfectly content with my 3820.
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.73/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
Of course it is.



It isn't. It's cruppling. It has nothing to do with binning chips, it has nothing to do with anything besides Intel just straight up disabling those options, and that is crippling.
I don't miss anything I don't need... Pretty simple (to me). And I suppose fo rthe .1% of people that want to overclock and run VM's it would be crippling to them... to which they go to SB-E anyway for a slightly higher cost (mobo) and having bclk gearing to overclock or spend the coin on 3930k.

I know plenty of people who aren't enthusiasts who express interest in overclocking.
I think that is the cart before the horse, no? I mean someone who overclocks is an enthusiast. Someone who doesn't, is not (to me). I suppose by definition you can be an enthusiast and not overclock, but... in my feeble head, an enthusiast overclocks. Someone who doesn't care about PC's and just uses it is not an enthusiast.

EDIT: I can really see it both ways, LOL!

That's crap. I've heard time and time again that the mainstream user thinks their laptop is slow after buying a 300 USD laptop. My wife doesn't do much on the computer, but there are plenty of things where an Athlon X2 or Celeron/Pentium doesn't cut it. Cheaper and fast computers will make the mainstream user happier, no doubt about it. They just don't care about it as much as we do, but they do care.
Well, dont buy a Mustang V6 if you need the performance of a V8 GT. They(that example) purchased wrong for their needs so of course they are disappointed. You dont buy a $300 laptop and expect the world of it. Thats budget stuff.

What? Last time I checked, my SB-E chip handles everything I throw at it. I don't care that I can't upgrade to IVB-E yet because I don't need to? :confused: Yeah, I would like to upgrade for the sake of upgrading but honestly, I'm perfectly content with my 3820.
+1. Thought Im under the mindset of go big(hex) or go home(to SB/IB) in s2011, the 3820 is on par with a 2600K which can also handle anything you throw at it.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Aug 10, 2007
Messages
4,267 (0.70/day)
Location
Sanford, FL, USA
Processor Intel i5-6600
Motherboard ASRock H170M-ITX
Cooling Cooler Master Geminii S524
Memory G.Skill DDR4-2133 16GB (8GB x 2)
Video Card(s) Gigabyte R9-380X 4GB
Storage Samsung 950 EVO 250GB (mSATA)
Display(s) LG 29UM69G-B 2560x1080 IPS
Case Lian Li PC-Q25
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC892
Power Supply Seasonic SS-460FL2
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech G110
Software Windows 10 Pro
Interesting perspective... even though one doesn't use it, one may feel bad its gone anyway? That is a mindfunk right there!

I don't know if it goes that far ;)

There are some examples in life where compromises need to be made, a sports cars has fewer cup holders than a mini-van for example. However, I never had to make a compromise when choosing a Windows edition. To get domain join with Pro, I didn't have to give up any exclusive Home feature because there are none. Paid more, got more, lost nothing.

From another perspective, I rarely sell hardware. Pieces are re-purposed throughout their usable lifetime. Features unused now may became useful in the future. Now I fully comprehend that I'm in the minority here, that's why I'm not complaining. Simply stating to Intel that I will not consider the K CPUs for purchase. (a minor threat these days, I'm no longer in charge of hardware purchases at my current job)
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.73/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
You make some good points!

One could make a solid argument and say you shouldnt be buying "K" CPU's for business
in the first place. There isnt a NEED to overclock for the VAST majority of business PC users really and that is all they bring to the table are higher overclocking potential. Look like a superstar and get the systems under budget by saving $20 /CPU.

I dont know, if I dont use it, I dont miss it. Now here is the real mindfunk of it all is I occasionally will run VM's on my 3770K. I only use it to simulate my office environment for DR testing so I do not really need the benefits of VT-d when its just there to to be stood up not to crunch info.
 
Joined
Aug 10, 2007
Messages
4,267 (0.70/day)
Location
Sanford, FL, USA
Processor Intel i5-6600
Motherboard ASRock H170M-ITX
Cooling Cooler Master Geminii S524
Memory G.Skill DDR4-2133 16GB (8GB x 2)
Video Card(s) Gigabyte R9-380X 4GB
Storage Samsung 950 EVO 250GB (mSATA)
Display(s) LG 29UM69G-B 2560x1080 IPS
Case Lian Li PC-Q25
Audio Device(s) Realtek ALC892
Power Supply Seasonic SS-460FL2
Mouse Logitech G700s
Keyboard Logitech G110
Software Windows 10 Pro
True, it's mostly mental.

In reality, all the other CPUs in the Haswell family are more attractive to me, whether it's for personal or business use. I was stripped of my "overclocker" title a long time ago ;)
 

p3ngwin1

New Member
Joined
May 12, 2011
Messages
24 (0.01/day)
That is crippled? Virtual technology that the vast majority of people dont use is crippling? TXT is crippling? Im a bit confused at that comment.

I mean I can see Vt-d alienating a very VERY small amount of people (power users at home that want to overclock and run VM's more efficiently), but how many people really do that? I mean no Server Admin in their right mind will be overclocking on a small business/enterprise level, so... Im just not sure why you feel that way. :confused:

you're missing the point, that many people using VT would love to buy the best processor according to the speed and features they want, but can't because Intel only allow VT on their expensive chips.

imagine you want a $200 CPU, but you also require a certain feature that is also only available on $500+ CPU's. It's like being forced to buy a Ferrari when you only wanted a Prius.

how happy would you be to buy $300's worth of processor potential you didn't ask for just to get the feature that absolutely could be made available to lower speed processors, but Intel decides to gouge it's customers on ?

"oh you want that popular feature? yeah that's only available on my most expensive chips" - Intel
 

Aquinus

Resident Wat-man
Joined
Jan 28, 2012
Messages
13,147 (2.97/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
you're missing the point, that many people using VT would love to buy the best processor according to the speed and features they want, but can't because Intel only allow VT on their expensive chips.

imagine you want a $200 CPU, but you also require a certain feature that is also only available on $500+ CPU's. It's like being forced to buy a Ferrari when you only wanted a Prius.

how happy would you be to buy $300's worth of processor potential you didn't ask for just to get the feature that absolutely could be made available to lower speed processors, but Intel decides to gouge it's customers on ?

"oh you want that popular feature? yeah that's only available on my most expensive chips" - Intel

Wrong. Most of Intel's chips support VT. Even on an i3 or Pentium. It's VT-d that is lacking on the k-edition chips on skt1155, which is supposed to improve virtualized I/O performance. Almost all of Intel's chips support VT-x but not VT-d. (Virtualization extensions vs Virtualization with directed I/O.)

You also can get VT-d on non-k edition 1155 CPUs, which completely renders your argument invalid. The only disadvantage is that skt1155 doesn't let you overclock and have it and most of the time people won't want VT-d and be able to OC. (Even if I do.)
 
Joined
Dec 31, 2009
Messages
19,366 (3.73/day)
Benchmark Scores Faster than yours... I'd bet on it. :)
Wrong. Most of Intel's chips support VT. Even on an i3 or Pentium. It's VT-d that is lacking on the k-edition chips on skt1155, which is supposed to improve virtualized I/O performance. Almost all of Intel's chips support VT-x but not VT-d. (Virtualization extensions vs Virtualization with directed I/O.)

You also can get VT-d on non-k edition 1155 CPUs, which completely renders your argument invalid. The only disadvantage is that skt1155 doesn't let you overclock and have it and most of the time people won't want VT-d and be able to OC. (Even if I do.)
This. Spot on.

To add to that a bit, you can still overclock non K chips... just not terribly far. In a best case scenario, you can lock in the turbo multiplier for all cores and push bclk to 105ish (YMMV) on IB chips. So clearly you do not have the same headroom as with a K type chip, but you can eek out more performance in most chips that have turbo. :toast:

Speaking of no VT-d on K SKUs... check this out: http://www.reddit.com/r/IAmA/comments/15iaet/iama_cpu_architect_and_designer_at_intel_ama/c7mq2sd
 
Last edited:
Top