Go Back   AnandTech Forums > Hardware and Technology > CPUs and Overclocking

Forums
· Hardware and Technology
· CPUs and Overclocking
· Motherboards
· Video Cards and Graphics
· Memory and Storage
· Power Supplies
· Cases & Cooling
· SFF, Notebooks, Pre-Built/Barebones PCs
· Networking
· Peripherals
· General Hardware
· Highly Technical
· Computer Help
· Home Theater PCs
· Consumer Electronics
· Digital and Video Cameras
· Mobile Devices & Gadgets
· Audio/Video & Home Theater
· Software
· Software for Windows
· All Things Apple
· *nix Software
· Operating Systems
· Programming
· PC Gaming
· Console Gaming
· Distributed Computing
· Security
· Social
· Off Topic
· Politics and News
· Discussion Club
· Love and Relationships
· The Garage
· Health and Fitness
· Home and Garden
· Merchandise and Shopping
· For Sale/Trade
· Hot Deals with Free Stuff/Contests
· Black Friday 2014
· Forum Issues
· Technical Forum Issues
· Personal Forum Issues
· Suggestion Box
· Moderator Resources
· Moderator Discussions
   

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 07-10-2012, 09:04 AM   #201
sm625
Diamond Member
 
sm625's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Posts: 4,941
Default

Well I for one am tired of my desktop pumping out heat like its a space heater. And mine is only pulling 200 watts from the wall. It is amazing how much heat you get from 200 watts! If haswell can give me the same cpu and gpu performance as my current i5-750 3.4GHz / HD5770, for only 15 watts, then I'd be happy to replace it with a tablet. I seriously doubt it is going to be able to do that. Luckily a 5770 is a bit beyond what I need, so there is a chance that whatever fits into a tablet form will still be enough.
__________________
I am looking for a cheap upgrade to my 3 year old computer.
AT forum member #1: Buy a 4790k

I am looking for a way to get 10 more fps in TF2.
AT forum member #2: Buy a 4790k
sm625 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2012, 10:59 AM   #202
hoodlum90
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 4
Default

It looks like the GT3 will be only available for Mobile CPUs. I am concerned that Intel is shifting focus to mobile and Xeon cpus while artificially limiting the capabilities of the traditional desktop cpus. We are already seeing this with overclocking and now with graphics as well

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2...rocessors.html
hoodlum90 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2012, 12:48 PM   #203
Rumpelstiltskin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tweakboy View Post
You guys are forgetting.. Haswell will have 6 core 12 threads models for desktop.

I see more then just 5 percent IPC , more like 15 to 25 percent... and throw in quad chanell 2400Mhz memory and a SSD ,, the haswell will pownz us all.
Why does everyone keep saying this? Intel's slides clearly show 2/4 cores for haswell.
Rumpelstiltskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2012, 12:56 PM   #204
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post
Why does everyone keep saying this? Intel's slides clearly show 2/4 cores for haswell.
Either they are talking about Haswell-E. Or they are just in a dream

Yes, Haswell for mobile and desktop(LGA1150) will be 2 and 4 cores.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare
Competition is good at driving the pace of innovation, but it is an inefficient mechanism (R&D expenditures summed across a given industry) for generating the innovation.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2012, 01:23 PM   #205
Sweepr
Golden Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 1,059
Default

As long as they keep improving performance end efficiency with higher IPC, clocks, and lower power comsumption each gen I dont see need to release hexa-cores for mainstream users. Higher single-thread performance translates to more performance more often than +cores in client apps.
__________________
AOpen I975X-YDG 479Pin.
Core Duo T2600@3.46Ghz.
G.Skill DDR2 800@1050/Elpida.
X1900XT.
Ocz GamerXStream 700W ATX12V.
Watercooling.
Sweepr is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2012, 02:07 PM   #206
Kristijonas
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 797
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sweepr View Post
As long as they keep improving performance end efficiency with higher IPC, clocks, and lower power comsumption each gen I dont see need to release hexa-cores for mainstream users. Higher single-thread performance translates to more performance more often than +cores in client apps.
Exactly my thoughts.
__________________
Intel Pentium G860 | Sapphire HD7790 1Gb Dual-X | MSI B75A-G41 | 2x4Gb 1333 RAM | 1 Tb 7200rpm WD Blue | Enermax Pro82+ 525w | Sound Blaster Zxr | S2340L | Edifier Studio 8
Kristijonas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-10-2012, 11:28 PM   #207
Edrick
Golden Member
 
Edrick's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Boston MA
Posts: 1,525
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post
Why does everyone keep saying this? Intel's slides clearly show 2/4 cores for haswell.
The people who say it are just talking out of their arse with no proof whatsoever. It is best to just ignore them.
__________________
Core i7 4770
Gigabyte Z87X-UD3H (F5 BIOS)
G.Skill RipjawsZ 8GB @ 2400mhz 10-12-12-31
Gigabyte GTX 660
Samsung 840 Pro 256GB
Antec Eleven Hundred
Edrick is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 04:01 AM   #208
Rumpelstiltskin
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 9
Default

Is anyone else as excited about this new architecture as I am? Even if the performance only goes up by a small amount, it will introduce and support pretty much all the standards on the road map for the foreseeable future. I can't think of a better reason to upgrade, as it will likely last you many many years before retiring.
Rumpelstiltskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 10:27 AM   #209
thm1223
Senior Member
 
thm1223's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 323
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpelstiltskin View Post
Is anyone else as excited about this new architecture as I am? Even if the performance only goes up by a small amount, it will introduce and support pretty much all the standards on the road map for the foreseeable future. I can't think of a better reason to upgrade, as it will likely last you many many years before retiring.
Pardon my ignorance, but could you explain what you mean by "it will introduce and support pretty much all the standards on the road map for the foreseeable future"?

Also, don't most processors that have come out in the last few years fall under the "it will likely last you many many years before retiring" category?
thm1223 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 11:27 AM   #210
Lonbjerg
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Denmark
Posts: 4,426
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by thm1223 View Post
Pardon my ignorance, but could you explain what you mean by "it will introduce and support pretty much all the standards on the road map for the foreseeable future"?

Also, don't most processors that have come out in the last few years fall under the "it will likely last you many many years before retiring" category?
Google AVX2...
Lonbjerg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 02:54 PM   #211
BenchPress
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 392
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lonbjerg View Post
Google AVX2...
...and HLE, RTM, BMI2, FMA3...
BenchPress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 05:02 PM   #212
Pr0d1gy
Diamond Member
 
Pr0d1gy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Where I want.
Posts: 7,776
Default

I am absolutely looking forward to Haswell. My last processor was an FX-55, so I imagine this will be like going from dial-up to broadband....lol

The best part is I plan on building a new gaming/multimedia PC with my tax returns and reports indicate that is exactly when Haswell is being released.
__________________
And there comes a time when one must take a position that is neither safe, nor politic, nor popular; but one must take it because it is RIGHT. -MLK, Jr.
http://www.heatware.com/eval.php?id=35504
Pr0d1gy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 05:15 PM   #213
Hugo Drax
Diamond Member
 
Hugo Drax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by hoodlum90 View Post
It looks like the GT3 will be only available for Mobile CPUs. I am concerned that Intel is shifting focus to mobile and Xeon cpus while artificially limiting the capabilities of the traditional desktop cpus. We are already seeing this with overclocking and now with graphics as well

http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2012/2...rocessors.html

Wow that sucks. The intel GPU works great in Linux. I have a few workstations based on the 3770K and built in GPU running 3.5 kernel.

I would love to see GT3 in the K series chip they release in 2013
Hugo Drax is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 05:24 PM   #214
Lonbjerg
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Denmark
Posts: 4,426
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hugo Drax View Post
Wow that sucks. The intel GPU works great in Linux. I have a few workstations based on the 3770K and built in GPU running 3.5 kernel.

I would love to see GT3 in the K series chip they release in 2013
I would love for them to rip the IGP far, far away from my CPU's...
Lonbjerg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 07:38 PM   #215
shadow_k
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 66
Default

Does anyone know or have any clue on improvements that 1150 mobo will have over z77?
shadow_k is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 07:51 PM   #216
Abwx
Diamond Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 4,961
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow_k View Post
Does anyone know or have any clue on improvements that 1150 mobo will have over z77?


Informations are still scarce about HW.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell...rchitecture%29
Abwx is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 08:10 PM   #217
tynopik
Platinum Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 2,539
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow_k View Post
Does anyone know or have any clue on improvements that 1150 mobo will have over z77?
Haswell support

cheaper (theoretically)

MAYBE true triple monitor support for the IGP

otherwise everything stays where it is: USB3, PCIe 3.0, SATA3, DDR3, etc

Last edited by tynopik; 07-24-2012 at 08:12 PM.
tynopik is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 09:14 PM   #218
pantsaregood
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 900
Default

Just saw on Wikipedia that Haswell is expected to have an L2 Trace Cache. If it does, what exactly does this entail?

I know NetBurst employed an L1 Trace, but I don't really know how that affected performance.
pantsaregood is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-24-2012, 09:42 PM   #219
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by shadow_k View Post
Does anyone know or have any clue on improvements that 1150 mobo will have over z77?
The 8 series chipset aint changed much (And why would it?). You basicly get more SATA6 ports and more USB3.

Else a big change is the ondie VRM. So you will notice motherboards looking quite different.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare
Competition is good at driving the pace of innovation, but it is an inefficient mechanism (R&D expenditures summed across a given industry) for generating the innovation.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 11:39 AM   #220
BenchPress
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 392
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pantsaregood View Post
Just saw on Wikipedia that Haswell is expected to have an L2 Trace Cache. If it does, what exactly does this entail?

I know NetBurst employed an L1 Trace, but I don't really know how that affected performance.
That expectation seems a bit sketchy. First of all Sandy/Ivy Bridge doesn't have a trace cache but a uop cache, and going back to a NetBurst-style trace cache for Haswell is extremely unlikely.

Even if we assume they meant an L2 uop cache, it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Uops are relatively big, and the purpose of the uop cache is to lower the branch misprediction latency and save on decoding power. Missing the L1 uop cache and having to access an L2 uop cache adds latency, so there's probably no gain there. And the L1 uop cache already has a hit rate of 80% so an L2 uop cache wouldn't significantly lower the decoder activity either. Besides, the uop cache is really more like an L0 instruction cache. So I don't see where another cache level would fit in.

The only thing I can imagine is that the L1 instruction cache would contain predecoding information. It would lower the branch misprediction latency by a bit and potentially save some power. More importantly this could also allow them to perform macro-op fusion between a mov and an arithmetic instruction. The predecoder could check for operand dependencies in a power efficient way since it wouldn't be pressed for time if it sits between the L2 and L1 cache. It also saves uop cache space since they are non-destructive already.

This would improve Haswell's scalar IPC by several percent.
BenchPress is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-25-2012, 12:55 PM   #221
Hugo Drax
Diamond Member
 
Hugo Drax's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 3,086
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenchPress View Post
That expectation seems a bit sketchy. First of all Sandy/Ivy Bridge doesn't have a trace cache but a uop cache, and going back to a NetBurst-style trace cache for Haswell is extremely unlikely.

Even if we assume they meant an L2 uop cache, it still doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Uops are relatively big, and the purpose of the uop cache is to lower the branch misprediction latency and save on decoding power. Missing the L1 uop cache and having to access an L2 uop cache adds latency, so there's probably no gain there. And the L1 uop cache already has a hit rate of 80% so an L2 uop cache wouldn't significantly lower the decoder activity either. Besides, the uop cache is really more like an L0 instruction cache. So I don't see where another cache level would fit in.

The only thing I can imagine is that the L1 instruction cache would contain predecoding information. It would lower the branch misprediction latency by a bit and potentially save some power. More importantly this could also allow them to perform macro-op fusion between a mov and an arithmetic instruction. The predecoder could check for operand dependencies in a power efficient way since it wouldn't be pressed for time if it sits between the L2 and L1 cache. It also saves uop cache space since they are non-destructive already.

This would improve Haswell's scalar IPC by several percent.
You should go and work at Intel.

assuming you don't already work there.
Hugo Drax is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 12:48 PM   #222
bronxzv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 406
Default

@BenchPress not directly related to this post but to a past discussion of ours about the MIC-AVX convergence, one more clue it's coming: http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/showpost.php?p=190704

"Reconciliation of MIC instruction sets with future AVX is a publicized goal"
bronxzv is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 06:31 AM   #223
oceanside
Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 53
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pr0d1gy View Post
I am absolutely looking forward to Haswell. My last processor was an FX-55, so I imagine this will be like going from dial-up to broadband....lol

The best part is I plan on building a new gaming/multimedia PC with my tax returns and reports indicate that is exactly when Haswell is being released.
Well, I'm sending this P4(478)Prescott out to pasture when Haswell comes out. Unless they decide to keep the paste under the IHS like Ivy. Then I may decide to vote with my dollar and support the underdog. Say what you want about Prescotts... at least they have a soldered lid. Lasted a good long time of faithful service over the years of daily use.
oceanside is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 06:34 AM   #224
ShintaiDK
Lifer
 
ShintaiDK's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Copenhagen
Posts: 11,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by oceanside View Post
Well, I'm sending this P4(478)Prescott out to pasture when Haswell comes out. Unless they decide to keep the paste under the IHS like Ivy. Then I may decide to vote with my dollar and support the underdog. Say what you want about Prescotts... at least they have a soldered lid. Lasted a good long time of faithful service over the years of daily use.
So you base your buy on whatever paste is used, seriously?
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Idontcare
Competition is good at driving the pace of innovation, but it is an inefficient mechanism (R&D expenditures summed across a given industry) for generating the innovation.
ShintaiDK is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 09:13 AM   #225
BenchPress
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Posts: 392
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by bronxzv View Post
not directly related to this post but to a past discussion of ours about the MIC-AVX convergence, one more clue it's coming: http://software.intel.com/en-us/forums/showpost.php?p=190704

"Reconciliation of MIC instruction sets with future AVX is a publicized goal"
Awesome. Thanks for the heads up.
BenchPress is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.