• 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 "Devils Canyon" Launch - Reviews, OC Info, Availability

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I'm definitely getting the i5 4690k if it can overclock to the same speeds as the i7 4790k. I need the fastest single-threaded performance I can get.
 
ZGR said:
I'm definitely getting the i5 4690k if it can overclock to the same speeds as the i7 4790k. I need the fastest single-threaded performance I can get.
Click to expand...

There really seems to be no interest in that chip here or online yet. I'd like to see what it does to since that chip is $90 cheaper at micro center and i'd rather dump the $90 I save towards a faster video card
 
Bman123 said:
There really seems to be no interest in that chip here or online yet. I'd like to see what it does to since that chip is $90 cheaper at micro center and i'd rather dump the $90 I save towards a faster video card
Click to expand...
Interest in the 4690K will increase rapidly once it's released. I think the speculative focus is usually on the flagship part, pre-release.
 
Man, I would have thought at least one review site would have done some overclocking reviews of the 4790K by now.
 
StinkyPinky said:
Man, I would have thought at least one review site would have done some overclocking reviews of the 4790K by now.
Click to expand...

Anand's preview made it sound like they were being sent over soon after he wrote the piece. Any decent review and write-up will take at least a day I would imagine...
 
If the 4690k can overclock to at least 4.7hz on air, then I'll be upgrading my 3570k. I been getting sick of tired of having to replace my TIM every 2 months. Even with the IC Diamond 7 paste, temperature doesn't look that great after 1 month, keep climbing up slowly. Additionally, the ICH seems to be only able to run 1600mhz memory, and anything above = crash. My old 2500k can run at 2133mhz without any problems and I been using the same 30nm samsung DDR3 memory.
 
OCGuy said:
Anand's preview made it sound like they were being sent over soon after he wrote the piece. Any decent review and write-up will take at least a day I would imagine...
Click to expand...

Ian Cutress said:
Review samples for sites like ours should be arriving sometime this week when we can test and dissect the new parts, with a full retailer release later in the month. At present the date is still uncertain: we were hoping to get samples before Computex in order to present results today, but delays have pushed testing and release later down the line. This is in part due to the restricted timescale for these new processors, whereby VP Lisa Graff in a recent press call stated that the Intel engineers had fewer than six months from idea-to-launch.
Click to expand...

..
 
^ Also when scouring the internet to try to score an early chip, I saw multiple US and international vendors with the part listed @ 4.1 base clock. I think the final spec may have been a game-time decision since the older ES screenie was 4.0. It may be why review samples lagged behind the launch.
 
OCGuy said:
^ Also when scouring the internet to try to score an early chip, I saw multiple US and international vendors with the part listed @ 4.1 base clock. I think the final spec may have been a game-time decision since the older ES screenie was 4.0. It may be why review samples lagged behind the launch.
Click to expand...

Nah, the 4/4.4 specs were locked in long ago. But different vendors were told different numbers so Intel could see who was leaking what, and how.
 
Will be interesting to see if the 4790K will hold it's value vs a 5930K rig. I think the hexacore will dominate new games
 
Idontcare said:
Nah, the 4/4.4 specs were locked in long ago. But different vendors were told different numbers so Intel could see who was leaking what, and how.
Click to expand...

I was thinking how interesting it would be if you had something that when you downloaded confidential documents off a sharepoint, it would install a unique key by scrambling some non-essential words. Then when it was leaked, you can tell which document version it was as well as who's leaking them. 😛
 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFGfHgLavJY

4.8GHz and 1.37V with water cooling, and nearly 80W higher power consumption than a 4770K at 4.4GHz 1.25V. 79C under load. It's better than the original Haswell release, but it's not even close to Sandy Bridge unless they got a truly abysmal chip. In the comments of the stock vid, they said that they believe that the 5.5GHz at the competition was on a single core. Based on these results, I can see why. Realistic chips will likely only hit 4.3-4.5GHz on air. Wait for Haswell-E/Broadwell/Skylake.
 
Techhog said:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uFGfHgLavJY

4.8GHz and 1.37V with water cooling, and nearly 80W higher power consumption than a 4770K at 4.4GHz 1.25V. 79C under load. It's better than the original Haswell release, but it's not even close to Sandy Bridge unless they got a truly abysmal chip. In the comments of the stock vid, they said that they believe that the 5.5GHz at the competition was on a single core. Based on these results, I can see why. Realistic chips will likely only hit 4.3-4.5GHz on air. Wait for Haswell-E/Broadwell/Skylake.
Click to expand...

One data point is not enough to form an opinion about clock speed and voltage. There are so many variables that go in to what Vcore you need to get a stable clock, that you have to look over several different thorough reviews in order to gain a consensus. That is the only way to minimize the effect of the array of variables, such as mobo, RAM, user error, etc.

The reach the same conclusion as most people are predicting, which is that those with a 4770k should hold off, particularly if they can hit 4.4 on air already.

But 4.4 on air is no guarantee for the original Haswell chips, so 4.8ghz would be an achievement by Intel.

On a side note, for the vast majority of people, AVX stress testers are for stability, not a real-world idea of temperature expectations. Even so, 4.8 @ 79C on an unrealistic burn test isn't bad. But why would you switch out the cooler between stock and OC? Far too much variance, I believe.
 
Last edited:
Techhog said:
In the comments of the stock vid, they said that they believe that the 5.5GHz at the competition was on a single core.
Click to expand...

I am really curious to know just who Intel thinks was going to care what kind of suicide run clockspeeds they could generate with a crippled core-count DC CPU?

Does the fanfare actually impact revenue one iota? I doubt anyone is impressed with having their expectations set to "ZOMG!!! You can haz 5.5GHzzzzzzz*" only to turn around and see those expectations stomped with the reality of having maybe 4.7GHz 24/7 stable on air across all cores.

Somebody needs to clue in to the fact that hype in marketing can only result in added revenue if the rubber actually meets the road.

* on one core, with a cherry-picked CPU straight from the warehouse of already cherry-picked CPUs
 
OCGuy said:
One data point is not enough to form an opinion about clock speed and voltage. There are so many variables that go in to what Vcore you need to get a stable clock, that you have to look over several different thorough reviews in order to gain a consensus. That is the only way to minimize the effect of the array of variables, such as mobo, RAM, user error, etc.

The reach the same conclusion as most people are predicting, which is that those with a 4770k should hold off, particularly if they can hit 4.4 on air already.

But 4.4 on air is no guarantee for the original Haswell chips, so 4.8ghz would be an achievement by Intel.

On a side note, for the vast majority of people, AVX stress testers are for stability, not a real-world idea of temperature expectations. Even so, 4.8 @ 79C on an unrealistic burn test isn't bad. But why would you switch out the cooler between stock and OC? Far too much variance, I believe.
Click to expand...

That's 4.8GHz under water. Unless this is an exceptionally bad chip, this isn't a notable improvement.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top