Devil's Canyon or Haswell E for gaming?

[bubbabigsexy]

I'm wondering which chip will be better for gaming? They will both be fast, but my understanding is that gaming rigs are usually faster/better with 1150 socket motherboards which the Devil's Canyon will be built for, where the Haswell E is going to be built for 2011-13 socket motherboard.

So I was wondering what everyone's opinion on this matter is? I'm building a new rig and will buy one of these chips. Any suggestions or help would be great!

 

[R0H1T]

I'm wondering which chip will be better for gaming? They will both be fast, but my understanding is that gaming rigs are usually faster/better with 1150 socket motherboards which the Devil's Canyon will be built for, where the Haswell E is going to be built for 2011-13 socket motherboard.

So I was wondering what everyone's opinion on this matter is? I'm building a new rig and will buy one of these chips. Any suggestions or help would be great!

Moar cores = more power :thumbsup:

 

[bunnyfubbles]

I'm wondering which chip will be better for gaming? They will both be fast, but my understanding is that gaming rigs are usually faster/better with 1150 socket motherboards which the Devil's Canyon will be built for, where the Haswell E is going to be built for 2011-13 socket motherboard.

So I was wondering what everyone's opinion on this matter is? I'm building a new rig and will buy one of these chips. Any suggestions or help would be great!

They're both Haswell... I'm curious as to what gave you the idea that 1150 is faster/better given that fact.

The only advantages 1150 Haswell chips would have is fewer cores would require less heat dissipation, albeit not necessarily be easier to cool (TIM problem) and iGPU possibly being used for compute tasks (not particularly relevant to gaming, as we'll have a beefy dGPU anyway), otherwise Haswell-E has 2 to 4 more Haswell cores (4-8 more threads) to process with, as well as more than double the PCI-e 3.0 lanes (40 vs. 16), and quad channel DDR4 (vs. dual channel DDR3) to round it out

In games that use less than 4 cores, the 1150 will undoubtedly be more cost effective, in games that use more than 4 cores (or if you're looking to run more than 2 GPUs), the old s2011 platform is still the undisputed king, which will be supplanted by s2011-3

 

[NTMBK]

Unless Devil's Canyon lets it clock into the stratosphere, Haswell-E.

 

[DigDog]

q: which of these unreleased, we know nothing about, cpu is the better one?
A: wait for benchmarks

 

[blackened23]

Haswell-E for gaming? Are you kidding? Now, I certainly appreciate many core CPUs but we're still in a situation where the vast majority of games are optimized for 1-2 threads, 4 if you're lucky. The games that take advantage of anything beyond that are ridiculously few and far between.

There's also cost involved, i'm not sure if that matters to you, but if it does - A Devil's canyon will deliver 100% or more performance in most games compared to Haswell-E. In fact, DC should be faster in most games that aren't optimized for hexa core (which is 99%+ of them). A good hexa core will be 550$ for the CPU itself and 300$ for a good motherboard. A quad core mainstream part will be around 200$ for an unlocked CPU (around 4670k level) and 100-200$ for the motherboard. Heck, if you don't overclock, these motherboards are going to be closer to 100$. That was the case with the 8 series boards; they are cheap and perform very well if you don't need 9 million USB 3.0 or SATA devices. If you're a "normal" person with 1-2 drives and 3-4 USB devices, you can get a 120$ mobo and be fine on the mainstream platform, and pair it with a 4770 or 4670 type CPU.

So, do you want to pay around 900$ for a hexa/8 core CPU 4960X type platform, or would you rather pay 350$ish for the mainstream platform which performs the same in MOST GAMES? Now, obviously, budget may mean little to you. But suggesting an 8 core for gaming is outright lunacy at this point and time. The extra money you spend doesn't translate into more performance; the performance is generally identical or greater with the mainstream CPU, period.

The question is whether in the next 6 months if games take advantage of 6-8 core CPUs. I think the answer will likely be no, because the vast majority of the gaming audience is on either dual core or quad core. But you can re-evaluate that closer to launch; yet the current situation heavily favors the mainstream platform over the HEDT platform for _PC GAMING_. A lot of the answer to this question also heavily relies on what you do outside of gaming. Do you run productivity apps such as photoshop and things along those lines? Maybe the hexa/8 core makes sense. Yet for pure gaming. The answer is: get the mainstream platform. 8 core CPUs are exciting but the software and games aren't there yet to justify the cost difference. If that changes anytime soon, i'll happily re-evaluate, but that's the situation now. Period end of story.

 

[NTMBK]

Haswell-E for gaming? Are you kidding? Now, I certainly appreciate many core CPUs but we're still in a situation where the vast majority of games are optimized for 1-2 threads, 4 if you're lucky. The games that take advantage of anything beyond that are ridiculously few and far between.

There's also cost involved, i'm not sure if that matters to you, but if it does - A Devil's canyon will deliver 100% or more performance in most games compared to Haswell-E. In fact, DC should be faster in most games that aren't optimized for hexa core (which is 99%+ of them). A good hexa core will be 550$ for the CPU itself and 300$ for a good motherboard. A quad core mainstream part will be around 200$ for an unlocked CPU (around 4670k level) and 100-200$ for the motherboard.

Now, obviously, budget may mean little to you. But suggesting an 8 core for gaming is outright lunacy at this point and time. The extra money you spend doesn't translate into more performance; the performance is generally identical or greater with the mainstream CPU, period.

The question is whether in the next 6 months if games take advantage of 6-8 core CPUs. I think the answer will likely be no, because the vast majority of the gaming audience is on either dual core or quad core. But you can re-evaluate that closer to launch; yet the current situation heavily favors the mainstream platform over the HEDT platform for _PC GAMING_.

We haven't seen pricing for Haswell-E yet. The rumour is that they are moving from 4-6 cores to 6-8 cores- I personally hope that the 6-core will be priced at the same point as the current 4-core part for Ivy-E. And you can be pretty certain that Devil's Canyon will charge a premium for its overclocking uberness, too.

EDIT: As for whether games in the next 6 months take advantage- meh. If I was buying a high end CPU like that, I'd want to get at least 3 years' of solid gaming out of it, preferably longer. And we can safely say that most games within that time frame will love more cores- every single EA game, for a start, because they are all being built on Frostbite 3.

 

[blackened23]

Yeah. That aint gonna happen. Haswell-E is the HEDT platform. Haswell-E is going to be priced similarly to the current HEDT platform. That's a guarantee. Pretty sure the pricing was already leaked, but it's going to be the same: quad core locked at 300$ (HEDT), 8 core unlocked for 550-600$, or the super silly high clocked version for 1000$. If you're using scientific software or productivity software, the HEDT Platform makes complete sense and the price premium is justified. For pure PC gaming, the price premium isn't justified for someone on a budget. It's like 500$ or more over the mainstream platform, which even with a quad core i5 and mobo you can probably buy a combo for around 300$. As opposed to 800-900$ for an x99 mobo with a 5960X. Now for games that perform the same on both CPUs. 500$ more? Yeah that doesn't make sense. But it does depend on what the user does OUTSIDE of gaming.

If you need the power, go for it, but for gaming and nothing but gaming? No. Just no. Suggesting an HEDT platform for gaming, for someone on a budget (i'm not sure if this applies to the OP or not) is pretty silly since the mainstream platform will deliver 100% of that same performance for 99%+ of all games. You would literally pay 500$ more for 0% more performance in the vast majority of games.

Now, 8 core CPUs are exciting; but the software and games that take advantage of it just isn't there yet. For real work? Yeah, HEDT makes sense there. Absolutely I would get HEDT if I used it for that type of stuff - video editing, photo editing, so on and so forth. If the software/games situation ever changes, i'd love to get an 8 core CPU for such a purpose. But that change will take time, and developers are catering the majority of the audience which, (especially with mobile in consideration) are generally on dual core or quad cores at best. The steam hardware survey bears this result: VERY VERY few PC gamers are using hexa/8 core CPUs. Nearly everyone is quad/dual. The steam hardware survey is 100% inclusive of course, but i'd say most gamers use steam on a regular basis; there's simply not much incentive for devs to make use of hexa/8 core CPUs yet.

Don't get me wrong. I do hope the software situation changes. I would _love_ for more games to take advantage of more than 4 cores. But it just isn't there yet. When it does change, i'll be the first in line to get an HEDT platform.

 

[NTMBK]

Yeah. That aint gonna happen. Haswell-E is the HEDT platform. Haswell-E is going to be priced similarly to the current HEDT platform. That's a guarantee.

I'm agreeing with you. My point is that they are replacing a 4-6 core range with a 6-8 core range. I would expect them to keep the "entry to HEDT" price where it is, and hence I hope that we will get a 6-core part in the price point that the 4820k currently sits in.

If you need the power, go for it, but for gaming? No. Just no. Suggesting an HEDT platform for gaming, for someone on a budget (i'm not sure if this applies to the OP or not) is pretty silly since the mainstream platform will deliver 100% of that same performance for 99%+ of all games.

To be fair, the OP wasn't asking which was better value for money, he was asking which was faster. If he was on a budget I certainly wouldn't be recommending Haswell-E!

 

[bubbabigsexy]

And it will be primarily a gaming rig. That's kind of what I was thinking, Blackend23. The budget isn't a problem. I'll pay more for the Haswell E if it will be a much better chip for gaming than DC. I have seen most gaming rigs built with 4770k's or 3970k's all running the 1150. Haven't seen too many running Ivy/Sandy Bridge cpus. That's the main reason why I ask this question.

Not saying what other people said is wrong. But I assume most people who bought the Ivy/Sandy Bridge chips didn't do it for a "gaming first" rig. All though I do agree that common sense tells you that 8 cores is better than 4. Hmmmmm. Decisions decisions.....

 

[blackened23]

Alrighty NTMBK, you do have some good points.

Anyway, here are some more variables to consider bubba:

HEDT has more PCI-E lanes, therefore SLI/CF (especially beyond 2 way SLI/CF) would favor the HEDT platform.
HEDT has more of everything. More SATA6G, more USB 3, so on and so forth.
HEDT is better if you're using productivity software outside of games that require it
HEDT will be better suited for the plethora of PCIE SSDs that are soon to hit the market. Being that PCIE SSDs will use PCIE lanes, they will be better suited to the platform with more. Mainstream has 20, HEDT has 40 if i'm not mistaken. or 16 vs 32? Something like that.
HEDT quad cores are around 300 bucks. Motherboard costs will still be higher than mainstream, but if you're not overclocking, you should easily be able to get a 5820 level quad core HEDT for 300 bucks. (i'm assuming the HEDT quad cores will be locked, not sure). Or you could opt for the unlocked 8 core for around 550$.

Also, be sure to re-evaluate the software situation prior to your purchase. It could be the case where we get a ton of games that actually use 8 cores. I have no idea. We have games like Watch Dogs and some others coming down the pike, and if they use 8 threads, that could make an argument in favor of HEDT. BF4 uses more than 8 threads already, but the mainstream quads actually still perform incredibly well in that game. I would certainly welcome more games that use beyond 4 threads, it needs to happen. But we're just not there at this very moment; I do hope that situation changes.

Certainly HEDT has merits. And as NTMBK mentioned, you didn't mention anything about budget. If budget isn't a consideration, there are other variables that could skew things into HEDT's favor.

 

[Pheesh]

Also note that the Haswell-E will require DDR4, which will have a pretty high premium if you are an early adopter of it as it won't be in great availability....you could end up spending more on DDR4 than you do on your motherboard. Once you start to factor this in the platform cost difference is impossible to justify for a gaming rig...you'd be better off putting a fraction of that money into a better GPU and sticking with 1150 which will give you identical performance in 99% of games.

 

[blackened23]

Also note that the Haswell-E will require DDR4, which will have a pretty high premium if you are an early adopter of it as it won't be in great availability....you could end up spending more on DDR4 than you do on your motherboard. Once you start to factor this in the platform cost difference is impossible to justify for a gaming rig...you'd be better off putting a fraction of that money into a better GPU and sticking with 1150 which will give you identical performance in 99% of games.

Very true. Having been around for several DRAM releases, they are without exception overpriced when newly launched and don't really perform meaningfully better than the prior generation. I can't think of a single exception to this - every new RAM release was overpriced and under-performing at launch, and took 2 years or so to "normalize" in price and for clockspeeds to reach levels to make it a better performer than prior gen RAM types.

Case in point, clockspeeds on initial DDR4 batches will be very low and it will not perform meaningfully better than DDR3 until a few years on. Last I checked, a 16GB DDR4 kit was poised to cost in excess of 350$. They're initially aiming for servers and corporate users with DDR4, I don't know if those prices will go down prior to launch but based on past precedent - it WILL DEFINITELY be too expensive at launch. The MAIN benefit with DDR4 at this point and time is that it is extremely low power; it will be lower in power consumption compared to DDR3. This will be pretty huge for ultrabooks a year or two from now. But initial DDR4 speeds are 2133mhz, which isn't nearly close to its potential.

The wild card is, x99 supposedly supports DDR3 as well. So who knows how that works out. I'm guessing that the HEDT platform is considered "premium", so a significant portion of the X99 user base (believe it or not, a lot of corporate professionals use HEDT platforms) will not care. So i'm guessing it will require DDR4 even if X99 technically supports DDR3, and it will be expensive based on past precedent...

Don't get me wrong. DDR4 and HEDT platforms have merit. They have their niche. BUT, for a budget gamer, the mainstream platform is just better bang for the buck since an unlocked 4C/8T CPU will generally perform just as good in most games. Unless the software situation changes soon, which I really don't think it will. So I think it isn't well suited for "budget" gamers, but for gamers with no budget consideration or professionals - HEDT is a great platform.

 

[Grooveriding]

HW-E of course. All the newest cutting edge games perform better on SB-E than HW right now. That's a two generation old CPU out-performing the current latest in properly multi-threaded games likes Crysis 3 and Battlefield 4 due to additional cores.

HW-E octocore for full beast mode. :thumbsup:

 

[blackened23]

Nope

http://techreport.com/review/25293/intel-core-i7-4960x-processor-reviewed/4

http://www.techspot.com/review/708-intel-core-i7-4960X-ivy-bridge-e/page7.html

http://www.anandtech.com/show/7255/intel-core-i7-4960x-ivy-bridge-e-review/5

http://www.legitreviews.com/intel-core-i7-4960x-ivy-bridge-e-processor-review_122714/11

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-4960x-4930k-4820k_6.html#sect0

Seems to me the 4960X is either slower, 1-5 fps faster, or the same speed in every test here. You should buy HEDT based on what you do outside of gaming. If you're not a budget, then it doesn't matter obviously. But if you're on a budget, you'd have to be a wingnut to get Haswell-E over DC. Of course there are lots of wingnuts around here so I heard, , so if that applies to anyone, get HW-E. Or with no budget consideration, have fun with HW-E. Don't expect it to be meaningfully better over DC in the vast majority of games. There are a FEW games that benefit, but that benefit in those very few games isn't a large benefit. So you basically have to ask yourself if it's worth 500$ over a mainstream platform. For most people? No. For wingnuts? Yes. For no budget consideration? Yes. If you use your PC for work related tasks in addition to gaming? Yes. For everyone else? No.

BUT BLACKENED you say. NEXT GEN CONSOLE GAMES. Yeah okay whatever you say. The last major AAA release aimed at next gen consoles was XB1's Titan Fall. Good stuff there. Now I personally find Titan Fall to be an EXTREMELY fun game despite the minor shortcomings, but if you want to read up on how that game turned out as a port, have at it. There is no reason to believe that next gen consoles will do jack to help the situation. But I do hope software does take advantage of higher core counts/threads.

 

[Grooveriding]

OP just look at multiplayer BF4 benches and Crysis 3, where CPU limitations come into play. SB-E out-performs everything, but I'm not here to educate ignorance.

The enthusiast platform has always been the best platform to get. Buy into it on day 1 and it outlasts everything else with the small incremental CPU performance leaps we see. 1366 lasted well until 2011 and 2011 has out-lasted well in to the upcoming 2011-13. I ignored SB and stayed on my i7 920 until SB-E came and the same goes for the way on HW-E.

Don't listen to the noise, if you can afford it, get the new enthusiast platforms when they launch. They bring the best performance and the newest features along with providing the most longevity.

Games are going heavily multithreaded now because of the new console landscape. Things like i5s and soon 4 core processors are anemic for gaming imo.

 

[exar333]

OP just look at multiplayer BF4 benches and Crysis 3, where CPU limitations come into play. SB-E out-performs everything, but I'm not here to educate ignorance.

The enthusiast platform has always been the best platform to get. Buy into it on day 1 and it outlasts everything else with the small incremental CPU performance leaps we see. 1366 lasted well until 2011 and 2011 has out-lasted well in to the upcoming 2011-13. I ignored SB and stayed on my i7 920 until SB-E came and the same goes for the way on HW-E.

Don't listen to the noise, if you can afford it, get the new enthusiast platforms when they launch. They bring the best performance and the newest features along with providing the most longevity.

Games are going heavily multithreaded now because of the new console landscape. Things like i5s and soon 4 core processors are anemic for gaming imo.

This. I bought 1366 and 2011 day 1 and both were top-notch for years, respectively. I will be getting the HW-E on launch date as well, and looking forward to DDR4 as well.

 

[biostud]

I would like a haswell e, but i'm going to wait to see pricing.

 

[bubbabigsexy]

Well if Haswell E is only using DDR4, then I'm going with DC. DDR4 will be way over priced when it finally comes out. I was under the assumption that Haswell E would run on the new Z97 motherboards with DDR3......

 

[rtsurfer]

Well if Haswell E is only using DDR4, then I'm going with DC. DDR4 will be way over priced when it finally comes out. I was under the assumption that Haswell E wluld run on the new Z97 motherboards with DDR3......

If Haswell-e didn't come out with DDR4, then it would kill the platform for me. It is the Enthusiast platform, not the mainstream platform.

To each his own I guess.

Edit: So Groove, you getting one.?

 

[Grooveriding]

If Haswell-e didn't come out with DDR4, then it would kill the platform for me. It is the Enthusiast platform, not the mainstream platform.

To each his own I guess.

Edit: So Groove, you getting one.?

Octocore and a Rampage 5 with some DDR4 day of release. Can't wait!

 

[Ajay]

I'm wondering which chip will be better for gaming? They will both be fast, but my understanding is that gaming rigs are usually faster/better with 1150 socket motherboards which the Devil's Canyon will be built for, where the Haswell E is going to be built for 2011-13 socket motherboard.

So I was wondering what everyone's opinion on this matter is? I'm building a new rig and will buy one of these chips. Any suggestions or help would be great!

Gaming... Devil's Canyon and the HW refresh.

 

[escrow4]

OP just look at multiplayer BF4 benches and Crysis 3, where CPU limitations come into play. SB-E out-performs everything, but I'm not here to educate ignorance.

The enthusiast platform has always been the best platform to get. Buy into it on day 1 and it outlasts everything else with the small incremental CPU performance leaps we see. 1366 lasted well until 2011 and 2011 has out-lasted well in to the upcoming 2011-13. I ignored SB and stayed on my i7 920 until SB-E came and the same goes for the way on HW-E.

Don't listen to the noise, if you can afford it, get the new enthusiast platforms when they launch. They bring the best performance and the newest features along with providing the most longevity.

Games are going heavily multithreaded now because of the new console landscape. Things like i5s and soon 4 core processors are anemic for gaming imo.

And singleplayer? Crysis 3 uses a hexa core simply because its a crap port. Calculating physics on the CPU is retarded. Next gen we will see but I can't be bothered replacing a 4770 that no singleplayer game now can actually push with a hexa core that will likely give barely any improvement. Even the developer for Watch Dogs recommended a 4770 . . . .

 

[tidy]

.

 

[rtsurfer]

Octocore and a Rampage 5 with some DDR4 day of release. Can't wait!

Sweet..:thumbsup:

But I advise you wait a few months.
Both Sandy Bridge & Haswell had a bug with the motherboard when they launched. For that they had to recall the MB that were affected.

You want to wait a few days or at least a month, to know that there are no bugs this time.
Just my 2 cents.