• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Haswell Refresh Tempuratures

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Communism said:
Gimme a few days, gotta crawl through the last thousand or so threads in my history.

EDIT: Most of this thread.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2323720

Most of this thread.

http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2326941
Click to expand...
There's not a single publicly-outed Intel engineer in either of those threads. Stop trolling and spreading false information.

Homeles, you really need to try to stop while you're ahead. You know our policies on thread crapping; trying to tell another member what to do isn't going to fly here.
-ViRGE
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So we shaved a couple more watts off with DC.

How much more are we seeing with Broadwell? Anyone got any ideas/completely unfounded guesses they'd like to throw out?
 
Intel does these refreshes for their Motherboard and OEM system partners as well as themselves, so they can sell new product between ticks/tocks.

This is not the first time a multiplier bump has EOL'd a previous SKU, and won't be the last. I don't see any issue with it, and a TIM swap or stepping change is just a bonus.
 
ShintaiDK said:
From the same website where a 3770 performs like a 4790 in tests?

Lets try another review site before making any judgments.
Click to expand...

Great point. Or we could wait for official reviews - gasp D:

We really are getting so desperate for news the past couple of years that any little snippet of information must be dissected and debated Ad Nauseam (myself included at times).
 
I like how everyone comes out of the woodwork when I'm disallowed from pursuing the line of argument.

Cowards.

Look at the timestamp of the Mod edit.

Trolling is not allowed, and this also is a general insult.
Markfw900
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Communism said:
I like how everyone comes out of the woodwork when I'm disallowed from pursuing the line of argument.

Cowards.

Look at the timestamp of the Mod edit.
Click to expand...

EarthRotate.gif


1200px-Biological_clock_human.svg.png
 
witeken said:
Broadwell-Y consumes 1.4x or 30% less power.
Click to expand...

That's Broadwell-Y though (not your fault obviously intel tells us what they tell us. Becoming more interested in power consumption/heat as I leave my PC on all the time and the room slowly heats up. The slower/less heat there is to dissipate the better.

I'm excited for Broadwell on mobile (Wish it had been out this year in time for Fall), but really interested to see how intel will continue to lower power consumption, and what they'll do once they hit that "wall". When you've hit a performance wall and a power efficiency wall, where do you go next?
 
BTRY B 529th FA BN said:
They should of put better TIM on the K chips. That would mean Intel is listening to it's people who buy their products.. how literally ignorant
Click to expand...

Maybe you haven't heard, the refresh of the unlocked k-series is called "Devil's Canyon" and is rumored to be released on June 2. It will be interesting to see if that chip just matches the temperature improvement we see in this review, or if they went even further with enhancing the unlocked chips. The new CEO of Intel said that enthusiasts are a growth market that they are focused on, which is a huge plus.
 
Wall Street said:
http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/6...h-cpu-and-z97-performance-preview/index5.html

It looks like Haswell Refresh uses 15 watts less power and is 10 degrees C cooler than original Haswell. Let's see if Devil's Canyon is similar or if it is even better. This looks like the new TIM is paying off, let's hope all of the chips run this cool instead of the lottery effect.
Click to expand...

Could be solely from improved thermal conductivity (be it improved TIM or be it from better control over the gap height distribution and mean) or it could really be from something as common as redoing a few masks as we saw occur with the 65nm Q6600 B3 stepping versus G0 stepping which yielded vastly improved thermals and power consumption.

Given that Haswell Refresh is guaranteed to have a reworked mask set, I'm betting we are going to see a power consumption reduction (which begets a temperature reduction provided the thermal conductivity remains unchanged at the worst) simply due to the layout engineers having had another year to optimize the routings and xtor blocks over that which the original Haswell layout team was given.
 
Idontcare said:
Could be solely from improved thermal conductivity (be it improved TIM or be it from better control over the gap height distribution and mean) or it could really be from something as common as redoing a few masks as we saw occur with the 65nm Q6600 B3 stepping versus G0 stepping which yielded vastly improved thermals and power consumption.

Given that Haswell Refresh is guaranteed to have a reworked mask set, I'm betting we are going to see a power consumption reduction (which begets a temperature reduction provided the thermal conductivity remains unchanged at the worst) simply due to the layout engineers having had another year to optimize the routings and xtor blocks over that which the original Haswell layout team was given.
Click to expand...

Yea I don't see Intel bothering to replace the TIM on non-K parts. They already run well within spec and can't be pushed.
 
tential said:
That's Broadwell-Y though (not your fault obviously intel tells us what they tell us. Becoming more interested in power consumption/heat as I leave my PC on all the time and the room slowly heats up. The slower/less heat there is to dissipate the better.

I'm excited for Broadwell on mobile (Wish it had been out this year in time for Fall), but really interested to see how intel will continue to lower power consumption, and what they'll do once they hit that "wall". When you've hit a performance wall and a power efficiency wall, where do you go next?
Click to expand...

There are 2 options:

1. Make better transistors or other similar innovations.
2. Stop innovating like HDD companies have done; those would only shoot themselves in the foot if they make a 1PB HDD for 100 bucks.
 
stuff_me_good said:
Is the lower power consumption only due to lower temps, or actually some improvements on the core itself? :hmm:
Click to expand...
I think it's the other way around, lower power to keep temps under control due to higher power densities with die shrinks. Otherwise why not have a higher TDP and clocks that go with it while giving the customer the option to limit TDP if they want to conserve power.
 
Dufus said:
I think it's the other way around, lower power to keep temps under control due to higher power densities with die shrinks. Otherwise why not have a higher TDP and clocks that go with it while giving the customer the option to limit TDP if they want to conserve power.
Click to expand...

It sort of goes both ways. If you take a chip and compare water cooling vs air cooling, you'll find that, excluding the extra power for the water pump, the lower temperature on the CPU will result in lower power consumption. This is because leakage is affected by temperature. That's why if you look at the top 500 GREEN super computers, which measures performance per watt, besides seeing efficient chips and generally smaller server sizes, you're also starting to see exotic cooling solutions to help reduce power consumption (#1 uses oil immersion cooling)

And then yeah, faster clocks and all the usual stuff can increase temperature.
 
As a 4570S/4770K owner. The figures are wrong, there is just no way 4790 consumes ~6w less at idle (that is only achievable with a different PSU/MB). Don't even wanna comment on the rest of the article. A joke. Need a more credible/professional source.
 
Last edited:
ShintaiDK said:
Thats a DDR3 limitation rather than CPU. You need server memory to get higher densities or DDR4 for standard desktop.
Click to expand...
Nope. 16GB unbuffered DIMMs are possible, the first ones are just appearing now. Intel processors older than the Avoton Atoms have some limitation (bug?) that keeps maximum DIMM size at 8GB.
 
ericloewe said:
Nope. 16GB unbuffered DIMMs are possible, the first ones are just appearing now. Intel processors older than the Avoton Atoms have some limitation (bug?) that keeps maximum DIMM size at 8GB.
Click to expand...
There are even some AM3+ boards with 64GB memory support, but no modules to max them out. Crucial still doesn't list non-ecc 16GB memory sticks on their web site.

And with DDR4 due out later this year.... :hmm:
 
I feel like I'm asking an idiotic question (presumably because I have missed a piece of information), but what unit of measurement are the temperatures in? I'm wondering what parallel universe I've just entered where an FX-8150 has the lowest temps.

I'm also having some trouble swallowing the power consumption readings. It suggests to me that an FX-8150 consumes a similar amount of power (load or idle) to an Intel i7-3770K. Whereas this page suggests that the FX-8150 consumes double the 3770K on load and about 20W more when idle:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6396/the-vishera-review-amd-fx8350-fx8320-fx6300-and-fx4300-tested/6
 
ericloewe said:
Nope. 16GB unbuffered DIMMs are possible, the first ones are just appearing now. Intel processors older than the Avoton Atoms have some limitation (bug?) that keeps maximum DIMM size at 8GB.
Click to expand...

And who makes these modules? Its the same on Core series for that matter, 8GB per DIMM max for desktop.

And with DDR4 so close, a 16GB DIMM DDR3 product is just not gonna sell.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top