Chipset features for Haswell-->Broadwell

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
C

CakeMonster

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2012
1,630
810
136
I'm trying to be somewhat economical (to the extent I can with this hobby) and now that I've decided to pick up a Haswell CPU next year with a new LGA1150 motherboard, I wonder about chipset features.

My question is, what can I expect to "lose" if I keep my motherboard going from a Haswell CPU to a Broadwell CPU? Has anything been annouced regarding the features in these chipset? I mean, in theory they don't even need to release a new chipset for the transistor shrink, but I from experience I guess they will. SB-->IB featured a new chipset that added PCIE3.0 and USB3. Can we expect something like that (or more)?

Now that features are moving onto the CPU which is turning into a SoC, could the motherboards become very cheap in this upcoming generation? Any idea when a new SATA standard will be introduced? Probably not for Haswell? Any thoughts?
 
ShintaiDK

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
146
106
You wont lose anything. PCIe 3.0 didnt have anything to do with the chipset, but the CPU. H61, H67 boards and some P67/Z68 boards supports PCIe 3.0. (It was due to some switches on the mobo for splitting the x16 into 2 x8 on P/Z series.).

And 8 series chipsets contain a full 6 SATA6 ports and 2 additional USB3. Series 8 is also made on 32nm vs 6 and 7 series 65nm. 9 series will be made on 32nm as well. And most likely just offer more USB3 ports. Maybe PCIe 3.0 for the extra lanes, but doubtful.

VRM is moving onto the CPU. This will save space and cost. And Intels current release list of 8 series boards shows they are either cheaper and/or more feature rich to compensate. The DH87FB board that I will get also shows this directly, since there is now room for 2 mSATA slots instead of 1 on the MiniITX and a price decrease over the DH77DF. But with that said, expect most mobo makers to keep prices instead of a normal price index correction.

But why upgrade Haswell to Broadwell? Unless you buy a lowend Haswell.

In this house we gonna get both Haswell and Broadwell. But thats only to finally upgrade and get rid of the i7 860 and i5 661 systems. :D
 
Last edited:
J

JAG87

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
3,921
3
76
You can expect to lose everything, because they probably won't even be compatible.

Broadwell is shaping up to be a SoC with integrated PCH that will be sold in BGA packaging attached to a motherboard. The plus side is that the whole motherboard + i7 class CPU will probably cost less than $500, which combined with a way more powerful Intel HD graphics should make for a very powerful yet economical platform.

I will not be buying Haswell. Not interested in a short lived platform, especially when Broadwell will bring so much positive change.
 
NTMBK

NTMBK

Lifer
Nov 14, 2011
10,452
5,837
136
Given that Broadwell is supposedly not being released as an LGA package, you really don't need to worry about it.
 
C

CakeMonster

Golden Member
Nov 22, 2012
1,630
810
136
Thanks for the replies. I guess there should be little to worry about regarding keeping the motherboard then (if in fact Broadwell will be released separately from it). I haven't been paying that much attention the last weeks so I missed the whole ongoing speculation about merging cpu+mobo. I'm sure that I read quite a while ago that LGA 1150 was supposed to last for a tick and a tock like previous sockets, so that's why I asked. I guess Intel is backtracking on that if the rumors are true.
 
B

Borealis7

Platinum Member
Oct 19, 2006
2,901
205
106
ShintaiDK said:
Rumours also claimed that LGA1156 and LGA1155 couldnt overclock ;)
Click to expand...
1155 can't, in a way. you have to pay Intel in order to OC. and it's not really overclocking if you can't touch the BCLK. you're not making it run "faster"...just "more times" haha.
 
podspi

podspi

Golden Member
Jan 11, 2011
1,982
102
106
Borealis7 said:
1155 can't, in a way. you have to pay Intel in order to OC. and it's not really overclocking if you can't touch the BCLK. you're not making it run "faster"...just "more times" haha.
Click to expand...

Changing the multi is overclocking, but I would say if you are paying to overclock, it isn't overclocking. Intel is just selling you a product with an unknown maximum speed.

Same reason I purchased a 1055t as well. Buy for stock performance and tweak if I can.
 
Saylick

Saylick

Diamond Member
Sep 10, 2012
4,055
9,480
136
Borealis7 said:
1155 can't, in a way. you have to pay Intel in order to OC. and it's not really overclocking if you can't touch the BCLK. you're not making it run "faster"...just "more times" haha.
Click to expand...

Edrick has a point. You can change the clock speed of non-K chips, but from what I recall, it's limited to 4 bins above the highest default Turbo Boost frequency (assuming your chip has Turbo Boost). If it doesn't have Turbo Boost, then you're stuck with BCLK OC'ing albeit you won't get ridiculous overclocks with BLCK OC'ing alone.

The only thing you're paying extra for when you buy an Intel K chip is the unlocked multiplier (perhaps cherry picking as well, but someone will have to confirm this), but even then the multiplier is limited to a maximum value of 57x.

Point is, overclocking in my mind is defined simply as running the chip faster than factory default speeds. That's all there is to it. If you can bump to to BCLK to increase the frequency above the defaults, then it's an OC. If you change the multiplier to increase the frequency above the defaults, then it's an OC. So no, Intel did not kill OC'ing with 1155 and I do not believe they will be killing OC'ing with Haswell or Broadwell.
 
GreenChile

GreenChile

Member
Sep 4, 2007
190
0
0
ShintaiDK said:
You do know thats just a direct quote of SA?
Click to expand...
Actually it's not a direct quote at all. SA did write an article about it as well but the text I quoted is no where to be found in the SA article.

I did not say it is a proven fact. I said the 'rumor' is gaining traction. It is being reported by more sources now.
 
Barfo

Barfo

Lifer
Jan 4, 2005
27,539
212
106
I've been losing sleep wondering if I'm going to lose features when I upgrade from Skylake to Skymont CPU., plz halp.
 
ShintaiDK

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
146
106
GreenChile said:
Actually it's not a direct quote at all. SA did write an article about it as well but the text I quoted is no where to be found in the SA article.

I did not say it is a proven fact. I said the 'rumor' is gaining traction. It is being reported by more sources now.
Click to expand...

The quote you made is a direct copy from SA. So yes, they copied SA who again copied Pcwatch and added something made up as they always do. In hope someone would bite and either deny or confirm.
 
GreenChile

GreenChile

Member
Sep 4, 2007
190
0
0
ShintaiDK said:
The quote you made is a direct copy from SA. So yes, they copied SA who again copied Pcwatch and added something made up as they always do. In hope someone would bite and either deny or confirm.
Click to expand...
Could you please provide evidence of this 'direct copy from SA'? It wasn't in the article I read.

Also, are you saying this rumor is without any merit because SA reported on it? It just seems you are stuck on this issue.
 
ShintaiDK

ShintaiDK

Lifer
Apr 22, 2012
20,378
146
106
GreenChile said:
Could you please provide evidence of this 'direct copy from SA'? It wasn't in the article I read.

Also, are you saying this rumor is without any merit because SA reported on it? It just seems you are stuck on this issue.
Click to expand...

http://semiaccurate.com/2012/11/26/intel-kills-off-the-desktop-pcs-go-with-it/

The orignal Pcwatch article says its a rumour. And everyone else copied that. Yet people still keep posting the same over and over again like if there was some kid of new edvidence.

Source critisism sure is low these days.
 
GreenChile

GreenChile

Member
Sep 4, 2007
190
0
0
ShintaiDK said:
http://semiaccurate.com/2012/11/26/intel-kills-off-the-desktop-pcs-go-with-it/

The orignal Pcwatch article says its a rumour. And everyone else copied that. Yet people still keep posting the same over and over again like if there was some kid of new edvidence.

Source critisism sure is low these days.
Click to expand...

Yeah that was the article I read also. Perhaps our definition of a direct quote differs. But yes, I agree the two articles are both on the same topic and it originated from the Pcwatch article. Glad we got that cleared up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom