Intel Could Price 10-core "Broadwell-E" Core i7 Differently

[PP Mguire]

You're right, but big OEMs tend to build what people want. With so much negativity around AMD and as everybody recommends Intel, mostly due to power consumption and old low threaded, badly optimized game engines ... no wonder OEM's build intel based computers.

That's precisely why we're saying they need Zen to be good. If the enthusiasts say it's good that has a trickle effect. Big companies that buy OEM still sometimes have people that watch tech like me. If we could do a refresh of 16,000 people, plus secondary and tertiary machines with a powerful yet cheaper solution than what we have now HP will deliver. If they don't we'll go to somebody who will.

 

[Dave65]

Hey Intel, KISS MY ASS!

 

[Octavean]

Even if Zen were competitive with Intel HEDT solutions I already have a X99 solution. Keep in mind that Broadwell-E is an upgrade for LGA2011-3 platforms. Its easier for those who have already invested in the Intel platform to stick with what they have or drop in a new Broadwell-E processor upgrade. Anyone who has such a platform now probably isn't in a dire need of an upgrade since these are still very powerful systems.

Zen would have to trounce Broadwell-E and at significantly lower prices. If AMD had such a solution I don't see why they wouldn't charge similar prices for them.

 

[PP Mguire]

Broadwell-E will be like a sidegrade unless you just want more than 6 cores and don't have a 5960x. Zen is supposedly targeting Haswell performance levels which if true would be a great upgrade (and probably a good overclocking one) to any old platformers be it SB or FX. That'll be more money than the zip from all the people who switched to Intel.

Let's face it, to regular consumers the incremental CPU upgrades just aren't worth it to keep it up. I have a 6 core SB-E CPU right now and if I could get Haswell 8/10 core speed with similar platform features for cheaper I'd make the move. I'd even upgrade my server to get that. AMD needs basically all they can get, so making more competitive chips expensive would be them further shooting themselves in the foot.

On the OEM side if they can make a competitive chip in performance and power usage OEMs and companies will look at AMD again which will make the real cash. Something they obviously need.

 

[neko77025]

WTF are yall doing that needs 8 or 10 cores .... I think yall just want it to want it !

I cant find much to hurt my 4790k ... but I dont render any video or anything.

I mean I would take one if had they money for it .. but what really needs more then 4 cores right now ?

 

[Aquinus]

WTF are yall doing that needs 8 or 10 cores .... I think yall just want it to want it !

I cant find much to hurt my 4790k ... but I dont render any video or anything.

I mean I would take one if had they money for it .. but what really needs more then 4 cores right now ?

+1 to this as it's the very reason why my 3820 is still driving my machine. I could get a 3960x on the cheap nowadays but, is that really going to improve my experience? Probably not, so if 2c/4t more isn't worth 300 USD, what's the point of upgrading an entire platform to gain more than 6c/12t? Personally, I was disappointed that there wasn't a non-Xeon quad-core option for 2011-3. Not to say that that there isn't a worthy E5 v3 quad core Xeon but, at that price point, it makes no sense to not get a 6c/12t part.

Sometimes it's more about the platform and less about the cores IMHO. The 3820 was a great performing chip considering the CPU itself costed less than a 2600k when I got it. What costed more was the platform and I can't say I've been disappointed in the last 4 years. With more than enough upgrade options from the 3820, I can't say I'm even considering it right now. Very rarely I'll be encoding video to be playong on the TV or something and I'd be wishing that it was going a little faster but that's the exception, not the rule.

 

[Prima.Vera]

WTF are yall doing that needs 8 or 10 cores .... I think yall just want it to want it !

I cant find much to hurt my 4790k ... but I dont render any video or anything.

I mean I would take one if had they money for it .. but what really needs more then 4 cores right now ?

I know what you mean. I have a 3770K and NO way even considering planing to buy a new CPU/mobo right now. Video card is another story, but I will wait at least another gen....

 

[PP Mguire]

WTF are yall doing that needs 8 or 10 cores .... I think yall just want it to want it !

I cant find much to hurt my 4790k ... but I dont render any video or anything.

I mean I would take one if had they money for it .. but what really needs more then 4 cores right now ?

I do Photoshop, testing in VMs, Premier Pro, transcoding, benchmarking, gaming, streaming, and audio work. In a lot of cases I will use 100% of my CPU and could really use the speed up from 8 extra threads of a 10 core, but not be limited to the lower speeds of a Xeon that's within reason of price at that level. Honestly if I could get a 10 core SB-E or IB-E Xeon that's C0 or unlocked (to at least do 40) for 300-400 I'd be set but instead I was considering the 10 core Broadwell-E to last me another 4ish years like my current platform and still get the benefits of the newer platform like M.2 and higher capacities of DDR4.

At work I run on a workstation that has 24 threads in a dual CPU package but the 2.5GHz clockspeed holds me back in some areas which a higher clocked CPU like the Broadwell-E would overcome. Instead of paying an outrageous price of 1500 I'll just sit on fleabay and pray to the almighty maker dude that I might get lucky with a cheaper Xeon better suited to my needs to stick in my server (which already has 6 cores itself).

 

[bubbleawsome]

WTF are yall doing that needs 8 or 10 cores .... I think yall just want it to want it !

I cant find much to hurt my 4790k ... but I dont render any video or anything.

I mean I would take one if had they money for it .. but what really needs more then 4 cores right now ?

I do some rendering and there is one game I play that uses as many cores as I throw at it. I could use 10 cores easily. RAM and GPU upgrades come first though, as the CPU wouldn't be as big of an upgrade.

 

[Prima.Vera]

I do some rendering and there is one game I play that uses as many cores as I throw at it. I could use 10 cores easily. RAM and GPU upgrades come first though, as the CPU wouldn't be as big of an upgrade.

I'm curios about the game, because usually the Direct3D is the one responsible with the threading and max supported are 8 cores if I remember right....

 

[PP Mguire]

I'm curious as to what game it is too. I've never seen any game go above 75% usage on my chip by itself.

 

[Ferrum Master]

I also want to know the game...

But if I remember. Ubercrap Unity could clog up up to 16 cores... so brace yourself mates...

 

[bubbleawsome]

For those of you wondering it is BeamNG.drive.
It's a physics sandbox, and I'm pretty sure it'll use as many cores as you'll throw at it, one per car. Most anyone has on that forum (that I know of) is a 6c/12t and it uses all of that CPU.
A newer video here, though not the newest.

 

[Ubersonic]

Looks fine to me, the 8 core i7's came in at a higher price point too.

This is just the same thing Intel/AMD have always done.

 

[Frick]

Looks fine to me, the 8 core i7's came in at a higher price point too.

This is just the same thing Intel/AMD have always done.

But $500 more.

 

[medi01]

To justify the 50% price jump for 20% more cores, you either have money to burn or you're using it to make money. I suspect it will still be a lot cheaper to get this 10-core than buying a two-way platform with two 6-core processors.

Works just fine for nVidia in GPU world, last time I checked. (980 vs Titan)

 

[farlandprince]

I wish intel prices their new cpu in $200 intervals

That is :

$399 , $499, $699, $999

$1499 for 10 cores is too much .

 

[Ubersonic]

I wish intel prices their new cpu in $200 intervals

That is :

$399 , $499, $699, $999

$1499 for 10 cores is too much .

Depends how you look at it, right now Intel's entry level 10 core the Xeon E5-2650 v3 costs $1169, and people are buying them at that price (for workstation use not just server) so a faster chip for just $330 more is actually a pretty great deal for workstation use.

 

[farlandprince]

Depends how you look at it, right now Intel's entry level 10 core the Xeon E5-2650 v3 costs $1169, and people are buying them at that price (for workstation use not just server) so a faster chip for just $330 more is actually a pretty great deal for workstation use.

well the Xeons E5-2650 V3 are Dual CPU enabled , and support upto 768 GB of RAM ... While the regular "i7" CPU is single CPU only and supports 64GB of RAM . so it should be less expensive. if you check the Dual CPU Xeon prices you will see that they are Double the Price of Single CPU Xeons for the same frequency.

 

[Hood]

WTF are yall doing that needs 8 or 10 cores .... I think yall just want it to want it !

I cant find much to hurt my 4790k ... but I dont render any video or anything.

I mean I would take one if had they money for it .. but what really needs more then 4 cores right now ?

I have the same 4790K and you are absolutely right - I only want to upgrade because I want something new to play with, not because I,m pushing any limits on my present system. But I don't want a Broadwell/X99 system, so I'm waiting for Skylake-E or later, when hopefully chipset/storage improvements will be upgraded enough to make a difference.