• 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.

Intel Broadwell Thread

Page 111 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
StrangerGuy said:
I very suspicious of stellar OCing results even if it was real because who knows what kind of cherrypicking was done behind the scenes to get those clocks.
Click to expand...

Is nothing sacred? This is Fugger man! Read the thread, it's not like he's hyping the chip . . . the results under phase were frankly awful. Not like it was his fault. Cold just didn't help. Not one tiddly bit. For the XS faithful that's probably disappointing, but for those of us who will never touch anything better than an AiO or a dual-tower HSF, it's certainly not bad news.

Even if you are suspicious of the results, read the detail he goes into on RAM speeds, power domains, etc. It's educational for anyone that's interested in Broadwell.

ehume said:
Overclocking will never be dead.
Click to expand...

Damn right.
 
frozentundra123456 said:
Thanks for the link, but that is just like a desktop. The iris pro is wasted. The point was a cheaper one using the iris pro for light gaming.
Click to expand...

Your looking for an Intel Core M laptop and those have been out since late last year. They mostly have Intel HD 5300 Graphics without the CrystalWell eDRAM cache so they don't make the greatest gaming machines but that is why they have a TDP down to like 4W I believe.
 
DrMrLordX said:
Is nothing sacred? This is Fugger man! Read the thread, it's not like he's hyping the chip . . . the results under phase were frankly awful. Not like it was his fault. Cold just didn't help. Not one tiddly bit. For the XS faithful that's probably disappointing, but for those of us who will never touch anything better than an AiO or a dual-tower HSF, it's certainly not bad news.

Even if you are suspicious of the results, read the detail he goes into on RAM speeds, power domains, etc. It's educational for anyone that's interested in Broadwell.



Damn right.
Click to expand...

Not that special of a 4C/8T chip when to reach validation only 2C/2T made the cut:
4wgfse.png


Not sure, but that 0.312V number seems a wee bit low. Maybe those other 2 cores are the power eaters. ;-)

But, on a brighter note, we're doomed!

Have to change the name of this forum to CPUs and Mild Overclocking.
 
There is still no review of an retail cpu.

I got the impression that intel got one cpu from one reviewer to another with identical results.

Broadwell´s iGPU is impressive, but a lot of games show some glitches. People say "you can play with Iris Pro games", but its most likely no replacement for discrete graphics. AMD got the better support (catalyst). Forgett broadwell for gaming purpose. And minesweeper will run on every iGPU.

Broadwell runs 4 Ghz at 1.2v Vcore. Haswell runs 4,5 Ghz at 1,2v Vcore. In non-broadwell-supported-games like cryengine-games the haswell performs about 12,5% faster. In broadwell-supported-games like total war you get about 15+% more performance. At that speed and games neither broadwell nor haswell gets the upper hand. The biggest difference you will see is the power consumtion: broadwell takes less power. But on the other side broadwell gets hot.

My final thoughts:

Broadwell performs at the moment "okay", but there could be some suprice. The bios of every mainboard seems to have headroom for some improvements. Perhaps in near future someone will explain the big performance gains in several games.
At the moment i am considering broadwell as low power cpu for my gaming rig. A lot of newer games doesnt requiere more than 2 ghz haswell quadcore power and they will run very fast on an underclocked broadwell at passive cooling.
 
DrMrLordX said:
Also, for those of you who thought the HKEPC OC was fake . . . do you also think Fugger is a fake?
Click to expand...
Are you asking if 4.8Ghz@1.55V is more plausible than 4.8Ghz@1.42V? Suddenly Broadwell jumped from less voltage than Haswell @ 4.7Ghz+ to needing significantly more voltage, yet you still believe the original report was 100% genuine?
 
coercitiv said:
Are you asking if 4.8Ghz@1.55V is more plausible than 4.8Ghz@1.42V? Suddenly Broadwell jumped from less voltage than Haswell @ 4.7Ghz+ to needing significantly more voltage, yet you still believe the original report was 100% genuine?
Click to expand...

There is no comparison with Haswell. 1.6v @ -60C for 4.8Ghz is just terrible.
 
coercitiv said:
Are you asking if 4.8Ghz@1.55V is more plausible than 4.8Ghz@1.42V? Suddenly Broadwell jumped from less voltage than Haswell @ 4.7Ghz+ to needing significantly more voltage, yet you still believe the original report was 100% genuine?
Click to expand...

I think the HKEPC overclock was a cherry-picked chip. Fugger is giving us more detail, and is showing us what we should more-realistically expect from retail parts. I'll see if I can get him to post some power draw numbers on the chip (4.8 GHz @ 1.55v) to see how it stacks up vs. Haswell.

Regardless, the idea that there's an insurmountable clockspeed wall @ 4.2-4.4 GHz is not true. It takes sick voltage to get up there, but you can get there.

And yeah, the cold results were pretty bad. Sub-zero temps just aren't helping here.
 
Fjodor2001 said:
Intel 5675C: $276
AMD 7870K: $137
Click to expand...

Sorry, I almost forgot this is not 2011-2014 anymore when we were told Intel would never catch up on the graphics department. Now that Intel dominates CPU+iGPU performance the goalpost moved to price and AMD is familiar to the word cheap.
 
Hardware.fr Core i5 5675C Review

Some very interesting results here.
They tested Broadwell-K against Haswell at the same clockspeed (4GHz) under some MT applications and very CPU intensive games and the results are surprising:

Broadwell-K was 17,6% faster (overall) than Haswell @ games and 5,6% faster (overall) @ applications.
The IPC improvement but mostly the eDRAM is doing wonders for games.

>30% faster @ Total War Rome II and >22% @ Arma III.

Their efficiency test also puts Broadwell-K largely ahead of any previous chip.

www.hardware.fr/focus/112/core-i5-5675c-broadwell-cote-cpu-test.html
 
Last edited:
From the Hardware.fr Core i5 5675C review I mentioned above:

Probably one of the best IPC comparisons we'll have:
broadwevshaswelll_zpsgivmzl46.jpg


Overall gaming performance:
moyennejeuxx_zpsri5s52kr.jpg


Core i5 5675C is the chip to beat when it comes to CPU intensive games. It largely dominated all games they tested (except Crysis 3), even Devil's Canyon was beaten (despite the clock difference, 4-threads @ 3.1-3.6GHz vs 8-threads @ 4.0-4.4GHz).
We need eDRAM cache in 'E' series enthusiast chips (LGA2011) now Intel. 😛
 
Last edited:
IMG0047735.jpg

(The above image is from the French review cited. Could not drag it up from Intel) Notice that the CPU square IHS goes over these, which themselves are two IHS's. Boy, the heat must struggle to get out. What do they use for TIM, I wonder?

Did anyone catch if they used an ES or a retail Broadwell?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top