Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [X-Bit Labs] Retail Versions of Intel Core i “Haswell” Are “Hotter and Slower” Than Expected – Report.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[X-Bit Labs] Retail Versions of Intel Core i “Haswell” Are “Hotter and Slower” Than Expected – Report. - Page 12

post #111 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stay Puft View Post

This is in no way a good chip. I'm just an above average overclocker who uses good cooling.

My fastest cinebench run with my 4.8Ghz 3770K was 9.6x. Now im over 10 at 4.6Ghz with haswell. How is this chip bad?
It's just cinebench.
Real world performance is what counts.
post #112 of 232
Synthetic benchmarks are not 100% valid since it only gives you a fraction of image involving your cpu. most benchmark tools have intels compilersand standard compiler from microsoft, there are no compilers from amd and intel dint changed the compiler that criples performance and scores of amd cpus... also tdp does not mean power consumption, i7 3770k on average consumes 140-160 watts... 8350 on average 200-220 watts. the gap is silly 40-60 watts, we are comparing quad core intel vs amds octa core.. 8 core steamroller will beat 4770k in multithreaded tasks if were at the same clock.biggrin.gif
post #113 of 232
Mobile i7 2xxx, faster than the i5 2500k according to a benchmark... Wut?

post #114 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bal3Wolf View Post

I hear you i dont see me upgrading from my 5ghz 2600k for many years

I don't think there's ever a need until you get into some really extreme GPU setups that a 6-Core Ivy X CPU can provide, frame wise.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i5-2500k @Stock MSI P67A-G45 Gigabyte GTX 980 4GB WINDFORCE 3 Gigabyte GTX 980 4GB WINDFORCE 3 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
8GB DDR3 RAM Seagate 500GB 7,500RPM Windows 64-bit EVGA SuperNova P2 850W Platinum 
Case
Carbide Series® Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel i5-2500k @Stock MSI P67A-G45 Gigabyte GTX 980 4GB WINDFORCE 3 Gigabyte GTX 980 4GB WINDFORCE 3 
RAMHard DriveOSPower
8GB DDR3 RAM Seagate 500GB 7,500RPM Windows 64-bit EVGA SuperNova P2 850W Platinum 
Case
Carbide Series® Air 540 
  hide details  
Reply
post #115 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Vanelay View Post

You can get a used 2600k for pretty cheap these days.

Haswell's are already hitting CL

" intel core i7 4770k & asus sabertooth x87 motherboard - $500, Played over 600 for them and realized I didn't need the upgrade." biggrin.gif

I'll try asking $450.00 thumbsupsmiley.png
Edited by Ovrclck - 6/9/13 at 10:55am
post #116 of 232
So much fail in these last few pages.....

First of all haswell yes is considered by some to be a fail. Why? Because most will be lucky to hit 4.6GHz while most ivys hit that to start with and go upwards of 4.8 to 5ghz. I love how the only CPU BENCHMARK hasswell owners through out is cinebench, which is one of the only benchmarks to show such a huge improvement. Lets do some comparisons with other benchmarks shall wee? The lead will be far less. Hasswell even loses to ivy clock for clock in some tests. See page one of this thread.

Secondly, because of this people are announcing AMD STEAMROLLER to topple intel? Lol hasswell was only a failure to us intel owners already on the platform, in no way is it a failure to anyone else. It will still stomp AMDs beat chip out right now. AMD has yet to match Sandys performance, yet you expect steamroller to jump 3+ generations in performance?! That is beyond laughable. I wish it where true as I'm a huge AMD fan, but lets keep things realistic in here.
Upgrayedd
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 @ 3.95GHz 1.387v Asus Prime B350 Plus  RX480 XFX RS 1350/2200 Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2933Mhz cas 14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 Windows 10 pro x64 Viotek curved FHD 144Hz EVGA 750w 80 Bronze 
  hide details  
Reply
Upgrayedd
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 @ 3.95GHz 1.387v Asus Prime B350 Plus  RX480 XFX RS 1350/2200 Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2933Mhz cas 14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 Windows 10 pro x64 Viotek curved FHD 144Hz EVGA 750w 80 Bronze 
  hide details  
Reply
post #117 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimaggio1103 View Post

So much fail in these last few pages.....

First of all haswell yes is considered by some to be a fail. Why? Because most will be lucky to hit 4.6GHz while most ivys hit that to start with and go upwards of 4.8 to 5ghz. I love how the only CPU BENCHMARK hasswell owners through out is cinebench, which is one of the only benchmarks to show such a huge improvement. Lets do some comparisons with other benchmarks shall wee? The lead will be far less. Hasswell even loses to ivy clock for clock in some tests. See page one of this thread.

It's a fail because it's Intel either completely ignoring us desktop enthusiasts (which I find hard to believe, they simply wouldn't have released desktop Haswell if they didn't make an effort) or they simply can't make it any faster. Intel's R&D budget is literally like 10 times as large as AMD's, and AMD's rate of change of performance is massive compared to Intel's.

Even the stupid FX 9000 or whatever is a 20% clock increase. Regardless of TDP, when is the last time Intel released a CPU with a 20% performance increase? Nehalem->Sandy was the last big stock clock increase, and even then D0 920s would clock into mid 4ghz range.

Not to mention that this is a tick, which is the "big architectural changes" to the chips. Usually, big changes = big performance. The tock is just a die shrink and some tiny changes. The fail comes from the fact that Broadwell is a tick, so it's another situation where we'd only see 3% to 5% (probably most of it from better working turbos). Add to that that Haswell refresh replaces Broadwell and Intel's road map got pushed back further, and we have 3 years of Haswell-like performance out of Intel unless they either abandon tick-tock or replace Haswell.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dimaggio1103 View Post

Secondly, because of this people are announcing AMD STEAMROLLER to topple intel? Lol hasswell was only a failure to us intel owners already on the platform, in no way is it a failure to anyone else. It will still stomp AMDs beat chip out right now. AMD has yet to match Sandys performance, yet you expect steamroller to jump 3+ generations in performance?! That is beyond laughable. I wish it where true as I'm a huge AMD fan, but lets keep things realistic in here.

As I said before, AMD's rate of change is significantly better than Intel's in raw performance. From the looks of it, Intel performance is basically going to be stagnant for the next 3 years, at least, provided they don't make major changes. FX 8350 can already beat 4770k in some multi-thread benchmarks, and with Haswell's horrible overclocking and all these people finding they can't even break 4.0ghz without the voltage and temp wall, a 5ghz FX 8350 can have a 25% clockspeed advantage over 4770k. And that's when 4770k is already close to FX 8350 in multi-thread.

However I think your large issue is that you assume that all that matters is gaming. If you need multi-thread FX 8350 is an amazing value, specially if you can custom compile what you need.

I was hoping for something that would really push software developers to turn around and go "wow, we have all this power, what features can we add to our software?" Instead we have "barely any increases, no reason for developers to add more features to software, time to whine the hardware has caught up"

Plus, you are right about Intel having a big lead, but it's akin to Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods basically coming in last place. If AMD is constantly in second and they fall a little further behind from first, it's expected. But if AMD is out improving itself constantly while Intel just loafs around in performance, it becomes a classic example of the tortoise and hare.
Tyrant Kuma
(13 items)
 
Starscythe
(13 items)
 
Mobility
(6 items)
 
CPUCPUCPUCPU
Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 
MotherboardGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Super Micro h8qme-2+ Sapphire 4870 Samsung DDR2 ECC 667mhz western digital caviar blue 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
FX 8350 stock cooler FX 6300 stock cooler Gentoo Linux 2x Silverstone PSU 
Case
Custom Fabbed Steel Case 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8350 gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 7970 Mushkin Enhanced Blackline 16GB 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Gentoo Linux Windows 7 x64 Yamakasi Catleap Q270 Corsair K90 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Silverstone Strider Gold Evolution 850W 80 PLUS... Antec 1200 Logitech G9x Asus Xonar D2X 
Other
XSPC RS360 Raystorm with custom radiator mounts 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
a4 5000 Radeon HD 8330 8GB G. Skill DDR3 1600 9-9-9 Gentoo Linux 
OSOther
Windows 7 Lenovo Thinkpad x140e 
  hide details  
Reply
Tyrant Kuma
(13 items)
 
Starscythe
(13 items)
 
Mobility
(6 items)
 
CPUCPUCPUCPU
Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 Opteron 8431 
MotherboardGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Super Micro h8qme-2+ Sapphire 4870 Samsung DDR2 ECC 667mhz western digital caviar blue 
CoolingCoolingOSPower
FX 8350 stock cooler FX 6300 stock cooler Gentoo Linux 2x Silverstone PSU 
Case
Custom Fabbed Steel Case 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
AMD FX 8350 gigabyte 990FXA-UD5 7970 Mushkin Enhanced Blackline 16GB 
OSOSMonitorKeyboard
Gentoo Linux Windows 7 x64 Yamakasi Catleap Q270 Corsair K90 
PowerCaseMouseAudio
Silverstone Strider Gold Evolution 850W 80 PLUS... Antec 1200 Logitech G9x Asus Xonar D2X 
Other
XSPC RS360 Raystorm with custom radiator mounts 
CPUGraphicsRAMOS
a4 5000 Radeon HD 8330 8GB G. Skill DDR3 1600 9-9-9 Gentoo Linux 
OSOther
Windows 7 Lenovo Thinkpad x140e 
  hide details  
Reply
post #118 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdlvx View Post

It's a fail because it's Intel either completely ignoring us desktop enthusiasts (which I find hard to believe, they simply wouldn't have released desktop Haswell if they didn't make an effort) or they simply can't make it any faster. Intel's R&D budget is literally like 10 times as large as AMD's, and AMD's rate of change of performance is massive compared to Intel's.

Even the stupid FX 9000 or whatever is a 20% clock increase. Regardless of TDP, when is the last time Intel released a CPU with a 20% performance increase? Nehalem->Sandy was the last big stock clock increase, and even then D0 920s would clock into mid 4ghz range.

Not to mention that this is a tick, which is the "big architectural changes" to the chips. Usually, big changes = big performance. The tock is just a die shrink and some tiny changes. The fail comes from the fact that Broadwell is a tick, so it's another situation where we'd only see 3% to 5% (probably most of it from better working turbos). Add to that that Haswell refresh replaces Broadwell and Intel's road map got pushed back further, and we have 3 years of Haswell-like performance out of Intel unless they either abandon tick-tock or replace Haswell.
As I said before, AMD's rate of change is significantly better than Intel's in raw performance. From the looks of it, Intel performance is basically going to be stagnant for the next 3 years, at least, provided they don't make major changes. FX 8350 can already beat 4770k in some multi-thread benchmarks, and with Haswell's horrible overclocking and all these people finding they can't even break 4.0ghz without the voltage and temp wall, a 5ghz FX 8350 can have a 25% clockspeed advantage over 4770k. And that's when 4770k is already close to FX 8350 in multi-thread.

However I think your large issue is that you assume that all that matters is gaming. If you need multi-thread FX 8350 is an amazing value, specially if you can custom compile what you need.

I was hoping for something that would really push software developers to turn around and go "wow, we have all this power, what features can we add to our software?" Instead we have "barely any increases, no reason for developers to add more features to software, time to whine the hardware has caught up"

Plus, you are right about Intel having a big lead, but it's akin to Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods basically coming in last place. If AMD is constantly in second and they fall a little further behind from first, it's expected. But if AMD is out improving itself constantly while Intel just loafs around in performance, it becomes a classic example of the tortoise and hare.

Tl;dr

Well if AMD is so much better in terms of growth, the how is it a lowly i5 of any of the past few generations will perform better then your 8 core?

I'm confused, you say Intel is failing the desktop enthusiast, yet AMD has nothing better to offer?..... Shall we revisit the bulldozer launch? Not only did it fail to perform better it was actually worse clock for clock then phenom. Lmao

Haswell is not worse clock for clock, so your argument is invalid. I'm amazed at the short term memory of AMD fans. I mean no disrespect, as I myself am a fan, but lets be real.
Upgrayedd
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 @ 3.95GHz 1.387v Asus Prime B350 Plus  RX480 XFX RS 1350/2200 Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2933Mhz cas 14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 Windows 10 pro x64 Viotek curved FHD 144Hz EVGA 750w 80 Bronze 
  hide details  
Reply
Upgrayedd
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 @ 3.95GHz 1.387v Asus Prime B350 Plus  RX480 XFX RS 1350/2200 Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2933Mhz cas 14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 Windows 10 pro x64 Viotek curved FHD 144Hz EVGA 750w 80 Bronze 
  hide details  
Reply
post #119 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by sdlvx View Post

It's a fail because it's Intel either completely ignoring us desktop enthusiasts (which I find hard to believe, they simply wouldn't have released desktop Haswell if they didn't make an effort) or they simply can't make it any faster. Intel's R&D budget is literally like 10 times as large as AMD's, and AMD's rate of change of performance is massive compared to Intel's.

Even the stupid FX 9000 or whatever is a 20% clock increase. Regardless of TDP, when is the last time Intel released a CPU with a 20% performance increase? Nehalem->Sandy was the last big stock clock increase, and even then D0 920s would clock into mid 4ghz range.

Not to mention that this is a tick, which is the "big architectural changes" to the chips. Usually, big changes = big performance. The tock is just a die shrink and some tiny changes. The fail comes from the fact that Broadwell is a tick, so it's another situation where we'd only see 3% to 5% (probably most of it from better working turbos). Add to that that Haswell refresh replaces Broadwell and Intel's road map got pushed back further, and we have 3 years of Haswell-like performance out of Intel unless they either abandon tick-tock or replace Haswell.
As I said before, AMD's rate of change is significantly better than Intel's in raw performance. From the looks of it, Intel performance is basically going to be stagnant for the next 3 years, at least, provided they don't make major changes. FX 8350 can already beat 4770k in some multi-thread benchmarks, and with Haswell's horrible overclocking and all these people finding they can't even break 4.0ghz without the voltage and temp wall, a 5ghz FX 8350 can have a 25% clockspeed advantage over 4770k. And that's when 4770k is already close to FX 8350 in multi-thread.

However I think your large issue is that you assume that all that matters is gaming. If you need multi-thread FX 8350 is an amazing value, specially if you can custom compile what you need.

I was hoping for something that would really push software developers to turn around and go "wow, we have all this power, what features can we add to our software?" Instead we have "barely any increases, no reason for developers to add more features to software, time to whine the hardware has caught up"

Plus, you are right about Intel having a big lead, but it's akin to Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods basically coming in last place. If AMD is constantly in second and they fall a little further behind from first, it's expected. But if AMD is out improving itself constantly while Intel just loafs around in performance, it becomes a classic example of the tortoise and hare.

Maybe you should talk to some real haswell owners for real world results. I can do 4.2Ghz on 1.15v, 4.4 Needs 1.225, 4.6Ghz needs 1.35v.

As for Vishera beating a 4770K in benchmarks. Why dont you post up some of yours? Show me how amazing vishera is compared to my 4770K lachen.gif
Core I7 5960X
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core I7 5960X ASRock X99 OC Formula MSI GTX 970 Gaming MSI GTX 970 Gaming 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
G. Skill 16GB DDR4 2600 Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD Custom 480 Water Setup Windows 10 
PowerCase
AX1500I Corsair 900D 
  hide details  
Reply
Core I7 5960X
(10 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core I7 5960X ASRock X99 OC Formula MSI GTX 970 Gaming MSI GTX 970 Gaming 
RAMHard DriveCoolingOS
G. Skill 16GB DDR4 2600 Sandisk Extreme II 240GB SSD Custom 480 Water Setup Windows 10 
PowerCase
AX1500I Corsair 900D 
  hide details  
Reply
post #120 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stay Puft View Post

Maybe you should talk to some real haswell owners for real world results. I can do 4.2Ghz on 1.15v, 4.4 Needs 1.225, 4.6Ghz needs 1.35v.

As for Vishera beating a 4770K in benchmarks. Why dont you post up some of yours? Show me how amazing vishera is compared to my 4770K lachen.gif

He can't, because we all know AMD can't currently compete. Everyone should know this already. I agree hasswell is in some ways a failure to people already on intel, but it still smashes AMD.

You should post some more CPU benchmarks though other than cinebench. So I can see exactly how haswell stacks up against ivy. Could be informative for others as well.
Upgrayedd
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 @ 3.95GHz 1.387v Asus Prime B350 Plus  RX480 XFX RS 1350/2200 Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2933Mhz cas 14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 Windows 10 pro x64 Viotek curved FHD 144Hz EVGA 750w 80 Bronze 
  hide details  
Reply
Upgrayedd
(8 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Ryzen 1700 @ 3.95GHz 1.387v Asus Prime B350 Plus  RX480 XFX RS 1350/2200 Corsair Vengeance LPX 16GB 2933Mhz cas 14 
Hard DriveOSMonitorPower
Samsung 950 Pro M.2 Windows 10 pro x64 Viotek curved FHD 144Hz EVGA 750w 80 Bronze 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Hardware News
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Hardware News › [X-Bit Labs] Retail Versions of Intel Core i “Haswell” Are “Hotter and Slower” Than Expected – Report.