Is Desktop Haswell a dud? How many are not "upgrading"?

[Edrick]

Failwell is the new faildozer...

Enjoy your AMD and I will enjoy my Haswell. Feel free to compare benchmarks with me anytime.

 

[itsmydamnation]

Give it time, they will come.:sneaky:

no they wont and that's the point. transaction memory has it's largest potential benefit for large NUMA system where threads across "nodes" will be accessing the same large data set.

read from here on:

http://www.realworldtech.com/forum/?threadid=134060&curpostid=134096


TSX is just yet another increment in the tool bag. its not some magical ferry dust, just like AVX/AVX2 and all the other tools that have been added to the bag over time.

im surprised that i haven't heard people on this forum proclaiming Haswels gather instruction as the second coming of Jesus yet.

 

[bleucharm28]

Yup! no to Haswell... I might look for new board, need something savvy for next two years.

 

[podspi]

TSX is just yet another increment in the tool bag. its not some magical ferry dust, just like AVX/AVX2 and all the other tools that have been added to the bag over time.

im surprised that i haven't heard people on this forum proclaiming Haswels gather instruction as the second coming of Jesus yet.

Actually, people were before its release. Now I've heard people complaining that it is actually quite slow (!). I am sure it will improve over time, but generally none of these instructions actually increase overall performance anywhere near their theoretical peak.

 

[Lepton87]

And that's the issue. People wanted performance akin to Sandy over Lynnfield, which after OC's were factored in, were on the order of perhaps 25% because Sandy ran cooler and had more OC headroom on top of the base 10% faster clock for clock. This generation brings somewhat under 10%, but also does not OC as well as Ivy or Sandy on average.

From Nehalem to Sandy IPC increased by about ~18% not 10%, but SB was only such a huge improvement over previous quads because they were never shrinked, clearly gulftown overclocked way better than 45nm bloomfield/Lynnfield, but SB overclocked better still. The upper bound was 4.2GHz for Nehalem, 4.7 for Westmere and 5GHz for SB.

im surprised that i haven't heard people on this forum proclaiming Haswels gather instruction as the second coming of Jesus yet.

What? Some users had an erection just writing about it. See some old posts of Benchpress or Edrick. Vectorising all scalar instructions, 8X improvement in performance, etc. was repeated like a mantra.

 

[HisDivineOrder]

The only reason I can see to upgrade to Haswell from SB or IVB is if you need the improvements that the Z87 chipset bring.

It's a shame that after looking at the tradeoffs, a lot of us would be happier if they'd give us a Z87 for IVB. I'd love the extra native SATA3 6gb ports and wouldn't mind the improved UEFI bioses.

However, if you're pre-SB, I can see an argument for Haswell. Especially on the back of rumors that this is it--Haswell, no to Broadwell next year for LGA--for two years.

 

[cmdrdredd]

keeping my system until skylake. Maybe wont eve upgrade deending on how it changes with SATAe. I mostly game on this but if Skylake offers acceptable performance improvements and SATAe is a must have for SSD performance I may upgrade then.

 

[ehume]

Personally, I feel you're making a mistake by opting for the 3770k. The 3770k gets very hot as well while overclocking, let's not kid ourselves - you can easily get 90C temperatures at 4.6ghz. It may be very slightly lower than haswell but make no mistake - there is a definite thermal limit with IVB as well.

IMO, I think the IPC increase with haswell will offset any potentially lower overclock - I went from a 2600k to a 3770k and the 3770k scores better in all synthetics despite having a 300mhz lower overclock. I expect the same of Haswell. Aside from this, Z87 is just a much better platform than Z77 is - having only 2 native intel SATA 6G ports is just completely frustrating and WILL limit you in terms of RAID setups and SSD caching. Z87 is just better all around, and like I mentioned earlier the Haswell should be the same or better in performance even IF you get unlucky with your overclock. Again - overclocking with IVB isn't all roses compared to Haswell. It is a lot of the same thing, it DOES get hot as well; I can attest to this with my own 3770k.

I'm necro'ing this because I took blackened23's advice and went with an i7 4770k.

So far, I've installed Win7-64. Haven't OC'd it yet. I ran Windows Experience Index on it last night. The computation and memory operations were 7.8. Now, I know this is not a good benchmark, but it was the only software I had. The comparable WEI on my i7 860 OC'd to 4GHz was a 7.7 for both items.

So, even at stock it's a better chip. Thank you, blackened23.

 

[sxr7171]

I just wish they used better TIM with Haswell, and do something about that 'gap' which keeps the temps high. Then it would have been an easy choice to upgrade. I do not think desktop Haswell is a complete failure, Intel is merely holding back its punches as usual. Profit margin > performance.

Haswell still makes eminent sense for those using pre-Sandy Bridge CPUs. Those guys will see an easy 'real world' 20-30% boost in most scenarios.

For SB and IVB users an upgrade to Haswell only makes sense if you are a software developer who needs to compile with AVX2.



They have not even launched IVB-E, as yet. No way large socket Haswell is being released in 2014.

Check the TIM thread. Even delidded it runs slower than IB.

 

[AkumaX]

should i post this here? oh well...

@ 4.0GHz - "hot" is an understatement...

with a hyper 212+ EVO and 2 x cougar 120mm fans in push/pull

 

[cmdrdredd]

should i post this here? oh well...

@ 4.0GHz - "hot" is an understatement...

with a hyper 212+ EVO and 2 x cougar 120mm fans in push/pull

Need better cooling? A hyper 212+ isn't exactly top tier performance but I see what you mean...4ghz should not be 100c

 

[AkumaX]

Need better cooling? A hyper 212+ isn't exactly top tier performance but I see what you mean...4ghz should not be 100c

ya its not, but considering i only went from 3.8ghz to 4.0ghz, its not a huge step up either.

and now, i can't even image if i kept it @ stock, but used the stock cooler....

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Can you use 1.64.3 so we can see your actual voltage?

Even so, you should probably consider a vice and hammer if you want more at this point.

 

[Smartazz]

I'm not getting it, but I think it's an awesome chip. There are still games like Civilization which need extreme single threaded speed.

 

[Wuzup101]

I probably won't be upgrading as I don't really see the point. Even my 2500k still is plenty fast for my needs. That being said, I may be upgrading to a note notebook this year (my current notebook also is running a sandy chip)... fortunately battery life isn't a consideration for my desktop!

 

[zephyrprime]

ya its not, but considering i only went from 3.8ghz to 4.0ghz, its not a huge step up either.

and now, i can't even image if i kept it @ stock, but used the stock cooler....

Those temps are too high. Even the stock cooler should be cooler than that let alone a 212 evo.

 

[Vdubchaos]

I'm pretty sure any new CPU will be a dud unless Software companies play tricks....like they have been.

CPU end of the road was reached not too long ago.

 

[bradly1101]

Yeah intel sure doesnt want us to change boards.. :\

They also want to sell the other Intel chips that are on the boards.

 

[CHADBOGA]

Enjoy your AMD and I will enjoy my Haswell. Feel free to compare benchmarks with me anytime.

I doubt his Duron would fare too well in such a comparison.

 

[oceanside]

I think this release made the decision for my upgrade path easy. The desktop version of Haswell has been somewhat disappointing with it's poor thermals, diminishing OC headroom and missing extensions.

Haswell-E or bust.

 

[szvwxcszxc]

I'm more concerned in the loss of value of my 3770K, than the 10% performance gain of the 4770K.

 

[szvwxcszxc]

Yeah intel sure doesnt want us to change boards.. :\

NEWS REPORT:
"In a secret meeting behind closed doors, Intel Executives struck a deal with motherboard manufacturers, giving the motherboard manufacturers a kickback to change the chipset on the new overhyped processor, in effort to help stimulate the over-lined pockets of corporate giants and drive unnecessary PC upgrades... One executive was quoted as saying '...yeah, we need to take advantage of all those greedy taxpaying citizens! And who cares about the starving people in Africa! I want a new Lamborghini; my 2013 Aventador is getting old!...'"

 

[Sheep221]

not upgrading nothing new to get

 

[PrincessFrosty]

All I can say is that for an overclocker simply looking for the best performance at a reasonable price, there is STILL no reason to leave Sandybridge.

My 2600k @ 4.9Ghz on air is doing just fine.

Having said that I don't know what I'd do with more power, the few things I do which require a crap load of calculations (hash cracking, video processing, gaming) they're all done far quicker on GPUs anyway. Day to day use doesn't come close to stressing my CPU and I do all sorts of stuff.

 

[blackened23]

I had a 2600k previously that clocked at 5ghz with a ton of voltage, and I "upgraded" to a 3770k (yes, it really wasn't an upgrade) yet at a 4.6ghz overclock, the 3770k does beat the 5ghz 2600k in all synthetics by a pretty sizable margin. A 4.3GHz 4770k still beats a 4.6ghz 3770k in all synthetics as well.

Even if you get incredibly unlucky with a 4770k overclock, it is by far the best chip to buy for a new system. As far as upgrading from SB/IB, it's probably not worth it unless you want new platform features - But it is still faster due to IPC increases, even if your overclock is several 100mhz worse.