• 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 142 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
A no-brainer vs a USD 999 (60 USD more expensive from google searching) 10 core chip that could possibly overclock and sustain a 4.4-4.5 ghz speed?
 
LTC8K6 said:
If the E5-2640 v4 90W Xeon will work in the boards, and sustain it's 3.4ghz turbo speed, and it's cheaper, it would seem to be a no-brainer over the 6950X for enthusiasts.
Click to expand...

The 2640 v4 is a 2.4Ghz base clock chip with a 3.4Ghz max single core turbo.
 
ShintaiDK said:
The 2640 v4 is a 2.4Ghz base clock chip with a 3.4Ghz max single core turbo.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know.

The claim was about sustaining turbo speeds.

If the xeon can be run at or near it's turbo speed, it will be quite close in performance.

I wouldn't expect high clock speeds out of either chip.

I think with overclocking, they'd end up near each other.

Maybe not.
 
Hmmm...I guess I am thinking of my Haswell Xeon which happily runs all of it's cores at it's turbo speed on my Z97 board.

10 cores at 3.4ghz wouldn't be bad, I guess.
 
LTC8K6 said:
Broadwell Xeons, too.
Click to expand...
They say Broadwell-EP XEON so it seems X99 can run E5-2640v4 🙂

LTC8K6 said:
Hmmm...I guess I am thinking of my Haswell Xeon which happily runs all of it's cores at it's turbo speed on my Z97 board.

10 cores at 3.4ghz wouldn't be bad, I guess.
Click to expand...
If we are to believe this the E5-2640v4 can run its 10 cores at 2.8 GHz.

@Shintai: as others guessed, I quoted $1500 based on rumors reported in this thread. If these are wrong, and 6950X is $1000, then the latter is the better choice without a doubt.
 
Nothingness said:
They say Broadwell-EP XEON so it seems X99 can run E5-2640v4 🙂


If we are to believe this the E5-2640v4 can run its 10 cores at 2.8 GHz.

@Shintai: as others guessed, I quoted $1500 based on rumors reported in this thread. If these are wrong, and 6950X is $1000, then the latter is the better choice without a doubt.
Click to expand...

Well, Intel says the 1231 V3 can run it's 4 cores at 3.6ghz turbo, but if I set the multi to the max of 38, they all happily run at 38. 🙂
 
Nothingness said:
They say Broadwell-EP XEON so it seems X99 can run E5-2640v4 🙂


If we are to believe this the E5-2640v4 can run its 10 cores at 2.8 GHz.

@Shintai: as others guessed, I quoted $1500 based on rumors reported in this thread. If these are wrong, and 6950X is $1000, then the latter is the better choice without a doubt.
Click to expand...

And if the Xeon can run its 10 cores at 2.8 GHz, but the 6950X can (overclocked) run its 10 cores at around 4.5 GHz, is it still a no-brainer to spend $999 on the former?
 
Aristotelian said:
And if the Xeon can run its 10 cores at 2.8 GHz, but the 6950X can (overclocked) run its 10 cores at around 4.5 GHz, is it still a no-brainer to spend $999 on the former?
Click to expand...
I don't care about overclocking, so it'd depend on non-OC speed of 6950X. That's personal preference and the need to have a reliable machine.
 
BTW the few Broadwell Celeron/Pentium notebooks available are selling well if we look at Amazon's listings. Some people clearly value the extra ST performance these chips provide compared to Braswell.
 
DrMrLordX said:
No surprises there. I'm sure the Braswell products are cheaper but . . . false economy and all that.
Click to expand...

I think I know that now... starting to actually notice the difference between my Bay Trail (and my one Cherry Trail) laptops, and my other machines. The Atom actually is a tad slow.

Enjoying my self-refurbished 1007U Win7 64-bit laptop. Even without NoScript, it seems a bit more snappy than my Atom laptops (even though they have NoScript).
 
Broadwell-EP thin PCB (like skylake)
0xeXADk.jpg
 
I've modified the Z10PA-D8 BIOS 3003 with CPU microcode extracted from Z10PE-D8 WS BIOS 3204, and successfully booted with E5-2687W v4 🙂
Z10PA-D8_E5-2687Wv4_x2_160407_boot.png

Z10PA-D8_E5-2687Wv4_x2_160407.png

Z10PA-D8_E5-2687Wv4_x2_CB_KS.png
 
ShintaiDK said:
You could do that on older setups too. Its not like its a new thing that suddenly came along.
Click to expand...
Agreed. But only Thermalright heatsink mounts had a public problem with this, and they changed the mounts because of that. But since then, Intel has thinned out the supporting PCB. Probably if an OEM followed Intel specs there was no issue in the past, and there will be no issue in the future. But for those who do not follow specs, they will be more likely to damage their cpu's.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top