What people do with Desktop PCs to really need faster than SATA-6 performance today ???
There is nothing wrong with that connector. It's certainly a lot better than PATA + MOLEX. PCIe SSDs aren't really an option for those of us off in ITX land.
What don't they do?What people do with Desktop PCs to really need faster than SATA-6 performance today ???
Boot? Open applications? Cache recently visited websites? Load assets in video games?
Most of those are HDD performance(latency, seek etc) oriented than SATA bandwidth limited. The only bandwidth limited scenario i can see is transferring large data files from one SSD to another. But how many times do you do that with your desktop PC ??
"HDD performance"? Of course we're talking about SSDs here, not HDDs!
PCI-E should be lower latency. There's a real lack of information out there, though.Most of those are HDD performance(latency, seek etc) oriented than SATA bandwidth limited. The only bandwidth limited scenario i can see is transferring large data files from one SSD to another. But how many times do you do that with your desktop PC ??
What people do with Desktop PCs to really need faster than SATA-6 performance today ???
What people do with Desktop PCs to really need faster than SATA-6 performance today ???
So has it been confirmed that current Haswell Z87 boards will or will not support Broadwell on the desktop? Was planning on building a Z87 mATX setup that I'd like to be able to pop a Broadwell into in a few years when Broadwell's are cheap. If I have to wait for new Haswell Refresh boards that will support Broadwell that's fine, I can wait.
All I want is a high-end 14nm CPU at that point.
Why do you want 14 nm for Desktop? What improvements do you expect it to bring compared to Haswell? The lower TDP does not matter much for desktop.
The cheaper, smaller transistors more than offset the increased wafer cost.
PCI-E should be lower latency. There's a real lack of information out there, though.
At the same TDP, Broadwell should have a clock speed bump. Intel may choose instead to lower the TDP, but if they don't, 200-300 more MHz isn't unlikely. It should also overclock higher than Haswell. I'm not expecting it to be the next Penryn or anything, but it should be better than Ivy Bridge. Enthusiasts won't have to deal with the regression from solder and planar FEts to paste and FinFETs, so the clock scaling won't be held back. I'm keeping my hopes pretty conservative, though. What I'd like to see and what I expect to see is a return to that magical 5GHz mark that Sandy hit with a good chip, barring unforeseen issues.Why do you want 14 nm for Desktop? What improvements do you expect it to bring compared to Haswell? The lower TDP does not matter much for desktop.
Why do you want 14 nm for Desktop? What improvements do you expect it to bring compared to Haswell? The lower TDP does not matter much for desktop.
~20% improved performance, +/- 5%. See my post above.Has-what? How about SB or even Nehalem? What practical gain can desktop Broadwell bring for 99% of people with SB?
I'm not so concerned. Heat density was never cited as an issue until 22nm, where it was erroneously cited as the problem behind Ivy Bridge's overclocking troubles. IVB didn't clock as high as SNB primarily due to two issues: TIM instead of solder, and regressed performance at the voltage levels used in overclocking on air and so on. The latter isn't well known, and Intel certainly wasn't going to advertise it. The vast majority of tech journalists and enthusiasts aren't aware of that regression.I still expect Broadwell-K's CPU to overclock worse than Haswell due to the heat density and low clocks optimization, but we will have to wait and see on that one. iGPU should overclock very nicely though, kind of interested to see how high people can get it.
~20% improved performance, +/- 5%. See my post above.
The problem with Intel is that +20% in reality is useless for 99.9% of people. This forum sometimes forget people don't buy CPUs to run Superpi all day long.
and regressed performance at the voltage levels used in overclocking on air and so on. The latter isn't well known, and Intel certainly wasn't going to advertise it. The vast majority of tech journalists and enthusiasts aren't aware of that regression.
Why do you want 14 nm for Desktop? What improvements do you expect it to bring compared to Haswell? The lower TDP does not matter much for desktop.
It seems like the heat density doesn't really become an issue until you hit a certain level. I'm thinking about that slide that Intel had about the Pentium 4 hitting 'Rocket Nozzle' levels, which may have prevented them from hitting the clock speeds they had hoped with it. The finfets look like they increased the density while increasing the heat rather significantly which is just accelerating the issue.