Cheaper Intel 6C/12T CPU coming? Core i7-3910K spotted

[SunnyD]

I've determined that a large population of forum users see the only purpose of computing technology as a tool to spit out the biggest benchmark number they can rather than apply them to commonsense real world usage scenarios.

Back to my original statement, if they price the 3910k at ~$300, there would be absolutely no reason in my mind to ever even consider building any sort of mainstream platform build short of needing a SFF (ITX) machine for some purpose.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

That's nice.

Indeed, so the chances of Intel pricing it at $300 is between not happening and never.

 

[Carfax83]

Here's an interesting analysis of porting to PS4 (from PC). PS4 (at least current devkits) have two cores reserved by the OS, leaving 6 to game developers:

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-how-the-crew-was-ported-to-playstation-4

Yep, that's exactly what I was talking about. These next gen games will scale above the triple/quad core limitation we've seen with previous games, which will mean faster performance for not only hyperthreaded quad cores, but especially for hex core processors.

Developers will find ways to tap into those extra threads believe me, as gamers will expect it. Watch Dogs and Battlefield 4 will be the first indications this year of how these new engines will approach multicore processors.

I know Watch Dogs is already showing substantial differences between the current console generation, and next gen according to articles I've read. Watch Dogs is going to be a HUGE game, so it's going to need plenty of CPU power to make Chicago come alive.

 

[Carfax83]

I've determined that a large population of forum users see the only purpose of computing technology as a tool to spit out the biggest benchmark number they can rather than apply them to commonsense real world usage scenarios.

Personally, I despise benchmarking. The only strenuous or intensive applications I run on my PC are games.

That said, I'm finding news ways to appreciate the extra power afforded by the LGA 2011 platform. For instance, just a few days ago, I had to compress a very large file with WinRAR; almost 20GB.

I didn't time it, but I was very surprised at how fast the operation was. The extra cores, combined with the over 60GB/s of bandwidth blazed a path right through it..

I may eventually use handbrake to compress a large folder of porn family videos :biggrin:

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I would fully welcome six+ thread utilization, and would purchase future CPUs accordingly. Assuming it's not like Crysis 3, where they add inefficient but threaded rope physics.

If that does happen than we'll probably see a six core mainstream chip on the next Tock, HWe is already rumored to produce an eight core variation so there would be no threat to their e platform should that occur.

I would love a six core i5 without HT Skylake for $200, who wouldn't? :awe:

That said, the future will bring what it may. I never like to purchase based on what may happen in tech (I did that with my second 7950 and for the most part have been burned so far waiting on a CF stutter fix).

The other question then becomes, with six be mandatory? Seems like a stretch, will it be the difference between 60 min or 80 min... Again I have no idea, but I'm ok where I'm sitting now as far as gaming goes. Even titles like BF3 64 player MP is no problem for my i5.

I would much rather spend money to address a need, rather than spend money on a need I myself created that may or may not come to fruition.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Software is still so far behind, that it makes very little to no sense to release mainstream 6 cores. AMDs sales of such CPUs are abysmal as well. Majority of software today is still barely 2 threaded. A few AAA titles might use 4 or even more. But thats not reason enough.

Hell, even MS cant get .Net to use more than 1 thread. So installs, patching and updates/SPs now takes 20 times longer than with binaries.

 

[crashtech]

You Debbie Downers should go away with your fact-based posts and leave us moar core ppl to our rose colored multithreaded world.

 

[Gillbot]

No it wouldn't matter, because what some people manage to get isn't what everyone can get it would only matter to you and yours.

But on that same token, you are touting a platform, overclock potential and other scenarios that not everyone can get. Apples-Oranges.

Not once did I say my system was better overall, I did agree with many others that stated 2011 was better for what we do. I need mine for the ram, and if I could get more than 8 dimm slots for a reasonable price, I'd go there in a second. The only reason I have a 3930k over a 3820 is because the superb deal I got on it. Hell, the only reason I have a 2011 system is due to the superb deal I got when I sold my 980x/P6T coupled with the superb deal I got on my 3930k/P9X79. As stated many times over, the ONLY reason I did was to go from 6 dimm to 8 dimm.

 

[Markfw]

Al I can say is that I use every core, and I can use all I can get for what I do.

I welcome this, then I can replace all my quad cores.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

But on that same token, you are touting a platform, overclock potential and other scenarios that not everyone can get. Apples-Oranges.

Huh?

Not everyone can get 1150 but can get 2011?

I never said anything about OC potential, SBe vs Haswell is similar though imo.

What other scenarios?

I'm not even sure what your issue is... My discussion has been about gaming performance and PCIe lane myths. I've already said 2011 makes sense for some people and for them it is a great choice, what more needs to be said it's the fastest platform for multithreading available that I'm aware of. Though it's not without it's downsides same as anything else in life.

 

[Carfax83]

Software is still so far behind, that it makes very little to no sense to release mainstream 6 cores. AMDs sales of such CPUs are abysmal as well. Majority of software today is still barely 2 threaded. A few AAA titles might use 4 or even more. But thats not reason enough.

I think you're being a bit disingenuous here Shintai. First off, how many consumer programs or apps require a lot of CPU power?

Very few.

That's the primary reason why the majority of contemporary software is still single threaded, or barely double threaded as you put it. They just don't require the processing power, so developers don't waste time and resources trying to parallelize them. Ironically, that's also the same reason why desktop sales are sagging and mobile sales are increasing, because the MAJORITY do not use their computers for intensive applications. Most people just use their computer for Facebook, e-mail, browsing etcetera..

So lets look at the few programs available to consumers that use a lot of CPU processing power. We have:

1) Video transcoding/encoding
2) Games
3) Photo editing/manipulation
4) Compression
5) 3D rendering

I'm sure there are others, but those are the ones off the top of my head. Now, are those programs or applications more likely to be single threaded or multithreaded?

Obviously the answer is multithreaded. Why? Because those applications by nature require a lot of CPU power. And as time has gone by and more features and complexity have been added to these programs, I think you'll find that the level of parallelization has gone UP, and not remained stagnant.

 

[SunnyD]

So lets look at the few programs available to consumers that use a lot of CPU processing power. We have:

1) Video transcoding/encoding
2) Games
3) Photo editing/manipulation
4) Compression
5) 3D rendering

FTFY. Seriously... when's the last time you saw Johnny-on-the-street doing 1, 3, 4 or 5 with any serious tool that wasn't called "Paint" or something similarly not CPU intensive?

#2 is why mainstream is still stuck at suck. The rest are all still niche categories still better served by the enthusiast/workstation platform. It just so happens that the enthusiast/workstation platform happens to do #2 just as well as the mainstream products as well.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Put it at $300 and I'd buy it in a heartbeat.

Amen! I really hope Intel is going to throw a nice bone to us enthusiasts.

Edit: Would like to do some benchmark comparisons between a Q9300 @ 3.0, a Thuban 1045T @ 3.0, and a 3910K @ 3.0.

 

[moonbogg]

I've determined that a large population of forum users see the only purpose of computing technology as a tool to spit out the biggest benchmark number they can rather than apply them to commonsense real world usage scenarios.

Back to my original statement, if they price the 3910k at ~$300, there would be absolutely no reason in my mind to ever even consider building any sort of mainstream platform build short of needing a SFF (ITX) machine for some purpose.

I have a reason to build a mainstream platform. Its faster for most of us. You have two rigs side by side playing the same game. One cost a couple hundred more than the other. The more expensive one gets 50fps while the cheaper one does 60fps. There you go!
I duno. I can't figure out why people keep pretending like sandy bridge is faster than haswell.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

#2 is why mainstream is still stuck at suck. The rest are all still niche categories still better served by the enthusiast/workstation platform. It just so happens that the enthusiast/workstation platform happens to do #2 just as well as the mainstream products as well.

Stuck at suck :awe:

If by just as well you mean costing three times as much, using more power, and slower... Then yes, "just as well".

 

[Gillbot]

Huh?

Not everyone can get 1150 but can get 2011?

I never said anything about OC potential, SBe vs Haswell is similar though imo.

What other scenarios?

I'm not even sure what your issue is... My discussion has been about gaming performance and PCIe lane myths. I've already said 2011 makes sense for some people and for them it is a great choice, what more needs to be said it's the fastest platform for multithreading available that I'm aware of. Though it's not without it's downsides same as anything else in life.

Fair enough, you win.

 

[crashtech]

Everyone shut up and buy a 4670K.

[/sarcasm]

 

[Aikouka]

FTFY. Seriously... when's the last time you saw Johnny-on-the-street doing 1, 3, 4 or 5 with any serious tool that wasn't called "Paint" or something similarly not CPU intensive?

#2 is why mainstream is still stuck at suck. The rest are all still niche categories still better served by the enthusiast/workstation platform. It just so happens that the enthusiast/workstation platform happens to do #2 just as well as the mainstream products as well.

I would probably argue that encoding has become somewhat more common with the popularization of YouTube. However, that doesn't preclude people from just uploading raw videos straight from their phone that were taken vertically regardless of how it eats away at my very soul!

The rest of those crossed-out items probably aren't that big of a deal for most people.

 

[crashtech]

I've determined that a large population of forum users see the only purpose of computing technology as a tool to spit out the biggest benchmark number they can rather than apply them to commonsense real world usage scenarios.

Lately I've been trying to figure out what is wrong with that, exactly. There are multitudes of machines and human activities whose sole purpose is to compete. Isn't that what benchmarking is, competition by another name? For some reason it is heresy to build a PC solely to compete, but a drag car? No problem, cool dude. Nobody asks how well it does on the Monday morning commute.

 

[YBS1]

I can give a very simple reason the 2011 platform made sense for me. If you were to take a well clocked 4770k and compare it to my 3930k, in applications I'd be slower, it would be by inches. In applications the 3930k is faster, it would be by miles. I also well remember the Core2 days and how many on here were hyping clockspeed over cores, a Q6600 is still a somewhat viable solution, a Core2 is not.

That being said, the viable life of a current 2011 chip is not likely much longer than a high end Haswell.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

I can give a very simple reason the 2011 platform made sense for me. If you were to take a well clocked 4770k and compare it to my 3930k, in applications I'd be slower, it would be by inches. In applications the 3930k is faster, it would be by miles. I also well remember the Core2 days and how many on here were hyping clockspeed over cores, a Q6600 is still a somewhat viable solution, a Core2 is not.

That being said, the viable life of a current 2011 chip is not likely much longer than a high end Haswell.

Your 4.9GHz i7? Isn't that only like 25% faster than a 4.5GHz i7-4770k in handbrake?

The i7-4770k is probably drawing 150w at the wall whereas you're probably closer to 500w running a custom water loop?

 

[crashtech]

Only 25% faster? ONLY?

 

[Sweepr]

It all depends on the intended use. SB-E wins in many MT applications while Haswell has an edge in CPU bound gaming and anything that doest scale well with more than 4C. I'd still get a 3GHz 6C/12T SB-E intead of a 4770K if they are similarly priced (probably wont be).

 

[Carfax83]

FTFY. Seriously... when's the last time you saw Johnny-on-the-street doing 1, 3, 4 or 5 with any serious tool that wasn't called "Paint" or something similarly not CPU intensive?

Compared to the slow majority, power users or enthusiasts are definitely a small minority. But we are still consumers.

I don't use my PC for anything even remotely professional. It's literally all a game to me. But I've done most of the things on that list at some point or another, except 3D rendering.

Perhaps listing 3D rendering was pushing things a bit, but I figured there are probably some 3D hobbyists that while they don't necessarily work as professional 3D artists or animators, fool around with entry level 3D modeling/rendering software.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Only 25% faster? ONLY?

I should say "only" because he said an inch slower, mile faster, well even with more clock speed he's about as much faster in MT as Haswell is clock for clock (not higher clocked like he is) in gaming.