Haswell Core Count

[MisterMac]

....since i was one of the few that was hoping the mainstream Ivy would bring forth 6 core variants - and was a tad disappointed.

What's the rumours, speculations, geusses on the Haswell mainstream core count?

The performance segment should atleast bring about some mainstream 6 core variant - could we hope for a doubling to 8 core putting intel in the driving seat for the "multithread revolution" - whenever it actually decides to happen and all that.


I personally won't upgrade to as 4 core Haswell from a 4 Core SB, unless i'm looking at 50% improvement.

6 core....tho... or 8 - well that would make the inner little upgrade boy itch!

 

[exar333]

Haswell will give you more than 50% in the GPU department, and much more than that for AVX2-enabled applications. If more cores are what you want, get SB-E/IB-E or Haswell-E when it arrives.

 

[MisterMac]

I don't know how i could put it clearer by saying mainstream segment.

Do you just skip over posts and read half?


Enlighten me how i'm not clear enough.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Haswell and Broadwell will be dual and quadcores for LGA1150. So you can already forget any hope of 6-8 cores there. Then you buy the workstation/server variants.

 

[MisterMac]

Haswell and Broadwell will be dual and quadcores for LGA1150. So you can already forget any hope of 6-8 cores there. Then you buy the workstation/server variants.

So mainstream segment is pretty much already confirmed to be the current lineup core count wise?
No SKU's will push the boundries - all 22nm space devoted to dGPU?

No new improvements on HT or similar technology up the sleeve?


Well that's a tad disappointing.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Haswell and Broadwell will be dual and quadcores for LGA1150. So you can already forget any hope of 6-8 cores there. Then you buy the workstation/server variants.

...that cost $1500-$4000+ each.

 

[ShintaiDK]

...that cost $1500-$4000+ each.

LGA2011 is workstation/server class. Hint hint...

Also people needing more than 4 cores on their desktop accounts for what? 0.01%?

 

[dma0991]

4 cores maximum for Haswell mainstream segment.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

LGA2011 is workstation/server class. Hint hint...

Also people needing more than 4 cores on their desktop accounts for what? 0.01%?

http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/team_list.php?s=

Saying a 8-core processor should be $1500 while a 4-core processor from the same architecture is $300, because the first is server-class and the second is not, is stupid. Also, does this mean Intel has a reason to completely stagnate its R&D because there's no consumer demand and enterprise has to pay the money Intel charge for their processors?

 

[Vesku]

Wouldn't hold your breath on 6 core mainstream Haswell. iGPU and related components will be taking up a lot of the chip real estate.

 

[exar333]

I don't know how i could put it clearer by saying mainstream segment.

Do you just skip over posts and read half?


Enlighten me how i'm not clear enough.

No, you just need to learn to expand your thinking a little. If Intel released a 6-core Haswell, they would probably price it the same as an 'enthusiast' 6-core. The only difference would be $50-75 in MB costs.

Look at current prices. The 3820 (s2011) is cheaper the the mainstream 3770k. The 3930k is only $150 more than the 3770k. Not a huge price difference there...the difference between 'mainstream' and 'enthusiast' is not a huge one; not everyone has to get the extreme CPU and a $500+ MB.

 

[exar333]

...that cost $1500-$4000+ each.

You can get 6-cores for $500 and 8-cores for $1000.

Check prices sometime...

 

[PowerYoga]

Why would you need more than 4 cores for home use? Servers have 8 and 16 cores for a reason, and if you need that much power then you would need to shell out the cash for it because you're really in the 0.1% of the market. Hell, most programs don't even utilize more than 1 core.

 

[pelov]

Why would you need more than 4 cores for home use? Servers have 8 and 16 cores for a reason, and if you need that much power then you would need to shell out the cash for it because you're really in the 0.1% of the market. Hell, most programs don't even utilize more than 1 core.

Well they're also dictated by perf-per-watt and the chips are also underclocked to decrease the TDP and consequent maintenance/running costs. This makes sense for server but on the desktop the decrease in clock speed isn't a good thing

If you need the added cores/threads and cache then you'd be better served by their 2011 workstation platform which is essentially a mid-way point between desktop and server (they're server chips, really). For people who use their PCs as workstations rather than gaming machines or web browsers it could potentially pay off despite the added costs (which don't seem so bad individually, but couple the more expensive motherboard with the far more expensive processor and you get a very significant price bump.

Of course, if you don't need it then you shouldn't pay for it IMO, a majority of people who buy Intel's workstation platform are those who don't use its features but rather want "the best" despite not knowing what it's the best at. They see a higher price, assume its better and splurge their cash senselessly. If you don't use your PC as a workstation then a 2600K/3770K is more than enough and an added 2-4 cores and 4-8 threads isn't necessary.

 

[MisterMac]

No, you just need to learn to expand your thinking a little. If Intel released a 6-core Haswell, they would probably price it the same as an 'enthusiast' 6-core. The only difference would be $50-75 in MB costs.

Look at current prices. The 3820 (s2011) is cheaper the the mainstream 3770k. The 3930k is only $150 more than the 3770k. Not a huge price difference there...the difference between 'mainstream' and 'enthusiast' is not a huge one; not everyone has to get the extreme CPU and a $500+ MB.

3930k is 500 USD.
+ a cheap mobo - 250/300 USD.

800 USD.

Now let's try that overseas here in EU:

3930k = 900 USD
Granted there are cheap mobo's for 350 USD in my territory, but most are 400 USD.

That equals 1250/1300 USD averagely.

That's more than 50% the cost from EU.
A cheap mobo + 3550k costs me 500-600 USD.
(Depending on mobo/features).


So no, it's not just "SIMPLE CHEAP JUST A BIT MORE" for everyone.
And this is discounting that if i live in the US - there's CRAZY deals on mobo + mainstream i5/i7 deals in most big retailers suddenly.


HENCE, EMPHASIS on MAINSTREAM.

You EXPAND your thinking to live outside your US bubble, thanks.

PowerYoga:
Your statement is ignorant and dumb.
By your logic we'd all still be single core'ing and with 1mbit internet.
Give the people power/tools and they'll use it.

I personally can't afford to mush out for a x79 (or x58 which saves me 100 usd) - just so i can have easier time on my programming/virtual machine hobby projects.

4 Cores have been standard since Nehalem - that's 4 years coming haswell. I was hoping they'd notch it up a tad.
(You bet they would, if bulldozer wasn't a dud).

 

[Edrick]

The REAL question being asked here is: "When Can I have 6 cores for the prices of 4?"

Everyone making a big deal that "mainstream" Haswell will still only have 4 cores. When 6 core CPUs have been available since Westmere. If you want 6 cores, you have to pay for 6 cores. If you dont want to spend the money, dont come here and moan about it.

Lets do some math (based on Newegg):

3770K = $349, which is $87 per core.
3930K = $599, which is $100 per core. But for the little extra cost, you are getting more PCI-e lanes, double RAM bandwidth and more L3$ per core.

Sorry, but there is nothing wrong with that pricing if you ask me.

Haswell will follow the SB/IB models. 99% of computer users are mainstream and do not need more than a 3770K.

 

[pauldun170]

Any mainstream apps or upcoming mainstream apps used by mainstream users use more than 8 logical cores effectively?

If you need to feed more than 8 logical cores, you are out of mainstream territory as far as Intel is concerned.

AMD has the low to mid range, throw more cores at the problem "mainstream" segment covered. Intel doesn't feel the need to compete on AMD's terms.

 

[MisterMac]

The REAL question being asked here is: "When Can I have 6 cores for the prices of 4?"

Everyone making a big deal that "mainstream" Haswell will still only have 4 cores. When 6 core CPUs have been available since Westmere. If you want 6 cores, you have to pay for 6 cores. If you dont want to spend the money, dont come here and moan about it.

Lets do some math (based on Newegg):

3770K = $349, which is $87 per core.
3930K = $599, which is $100 per core. But for the little extra cost, you are getting more PCI-e lanes, double RAM bandwidth and more L3$ per core.

Sorry, but there is nothing wrong with that pricing if you ask me.

Haswell will follow the SB/IB models. 99% of computer users are mainstream and do not need more than a 3770K.

So if i do the same with GPU's and "FPS per Dollar" - as long as it's linear it's absolutely fine ?

Think many would disagree with you.
The value of haswell to SB owners for Intel's own sake has to be more than 20% IPC.

Else why buy the new products?
(along with the new sockets and chipsets).

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

You can get 6-cores for $500 and 8-cores for $1000.

Check prices sometime...

I don't live in the States, I'm not really that into actual market prices. I'm going off what Intel says the processors should be sold at. It doesn't make any difference to my actual point though.

Why would you need more than 4 cores for home use? Servers have 8 and 16 cores for a reason, and if you need that much power then you would need to shell out the cash for it because you're really in the 0.1% of the market. Hell, most programs don't even utilize more than 1 core.

A lot of professionals working with graphics or design would very much like more cores at an affordable price. I would very much like more cores at an affordable price. Saying there's no need for it therefore Intel shouldn't try to provide it, is not very forward thinking.

 

[Edrick]

So if i do the same with GPU's and "FPS per Dollar" - as long as it's linear it's absolutely fine ?

If you exclude the top end parts (GTX680), and only deal with the pruducts below it, then I see no issue with it. Every company sells their top of the line for a premium (3960X comes to mind). At that point it is not worth it to most people.

Think many would disagree with you. The value of haswell to SB owners for Intel's own sake has to be more than 20% IPC. Else why buy the new products?

[

Clearly you are just omitting the entire AVX2 instruction set, which will increase performance up to 100% is a lot of FP type code. To developers like myself, this is what really matters most. And to Gamers, this will be huge within a few years (Nvidia and AMD have been using some AVX2 instructions for years as their GPUs support it).

If you read my post in the other Haswell thread, I explain that IPC on legacy code will end eventually. New instructions and new multi-threading designs are where we are going in the future.

 

[Don Karnage]

Haswell should ofer 10-15% better IPC then IB so thats more then enough for mainstream. If you want 6 cores the only option is LGA 2011 or Amd

 

[Edrick]

A lot of professionals working with graphics or design would very much like more cores at an affordable price. I would very much like more cores at an affordable price. Saying there's no need for it therefore Intel shouldn't try to provide it, is not very forward thinking.

Again, people want 6-8 cores without paying for 6-8 cores. I would like a Rolex for $100, but you dont see me moaning about it on the Rolex forums.

 

[Mr. Pedantic]

Again, people want 6-8 cores without paying for 6-8 cores. I would like a Rolex for $100, but you dont see me moaning about it on the Rolex forums.

Is it so horrible to want to pay less? I don't need a Rolex, therefore I don't pay the premium they demand. If my job depended on having fast render times, I would need fast processors.

 

[Edrick]

Is it so horrible to want to pay less? I don't need a Rolex, therefore I don't pay the premium they demand. If my job depended on having fast render times, I would need fast processors.

No, its not horrible to want to pay less. I would also be happy if Intel was only charging $299 for the 3960X CPU. And in a few years, Intel will have 6 core CPUs in that price range. The only problem is by then, 8 and 10 core CPUs will be available in the higher end market. Hell, remember when the first quads came out? ($999 if I recall correctly). Now you can get one for $149.

But Intel has clearly defined the "mainstream" and "workstation/enthusiast" market lines. They feel that 4 core for mainstream is good enough since 2009 and will remain there until at least 2014. Nothing we can do about it other than accept it.

And honestly, IF your job required you to have 6 cores, do you really think you would balk at spending the extra $300 for a tool your job depends on? I don't think you would.

 

[hyrule4927]

A more specialized product will cost more. Intel is a business, they aren't going to give you handouts. How would a hex core for the price of a quad make any sense? It's 50% more performance in fully threaded apps.

Are we going to have to discuss why quads cost more than dual cores next?