[PCPro] Haswell vs. Haswell ES Overclocking

[guskline]

I never trust overclocking results from average Joes on internet forums. Especially from Overclock.net and HardOCP. Their results are generally only stable enough for them to boot Windows and run a few benchmarks. It would never pass the kind of stability tests I put processors through.

Thank you AdamK47! I'm hardly an expert on overclocking but have done my share through the years. Posters who "claim" high overclocks because they can boot into windows, yet scream bloody murder when their cpu "acts weird amuse me.

I run my 3770k at 4.4Ghz and am sure it will survive stability tests. Is there a bit more in the overclocking tank? Perhaps but I'm almost 1Ghz over stock. This "outpouring" of angst about Haswell is crazy. If I was building a new rig today it would be a 4770k and new mb UNLESS I had specific needs and the cash to go socket 2011.

 

[frozentundra123456]

is it true that Haswell doesn't have Turbo OC in non-K chips anymore? (raising the turbo by 4 bins)

I still don't have a definitive word on this, but microcenter specifically stated in their ad that the 4570 can over clock from 3.2 to 3.6 ghz, which I pass assume is the turbo overclocking.

 

[rge2]

Rough estimates!

Haswell at 4.5 equals...

Ivy at 4.8 equals...

Sandy at 5...

yep, that is the average I get.

haswell, looking at many benchmarks mostly varies between 5 and 10% improvement over ivy, and averaging ~ 7.5% faster, which is about 300mhz or 4.5 haswell ~ 4.8 ivy.

or you can cherry pick a single benchmark and get smaller difference or higher difference.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

Decent percentages to use :

HW = 108% Ivy = 112% SB = 123% Nehalem

 

[tential]

I will say this, users at OCN are reporting cinebench 11.5 scores higher than 10 for 4770k @ 4.4ghz, which is higher than my 3770k gets at 4.7ghz. Going from SB to a 3770k myself, the 3770k outscored the SB in all synthetic benches despite having a lower overclock by several hundred mhz - the takeaway point is that the Haswell does not need to be overclocked AS high, even if you are incredibly unlucky with OC'ing it. Oh yeah, just for comparison basis, the 2600k gets around a 6.8 in cinebench 11.5 at stock.

It doesn't matter if the overall OC is 200-300mhz lower due to the IPC increase. It's also completely laughable that the 3770k is now being spoken of as if it's the best overclocker in the world now - it isn't different than the Haswell. It also gets completely hot when over-volted and is temperature limited, people are just wearing rose tinted glasses now.

The impression I'm getting from most people after asking around is quite simple. They want higher clockspeeds. They don't care about the application it's used for, or whether it will benefit their applications or not. They just want to hit a higher clockspeed.

Getting a lower clockspeed in Haswell than IVYBridge, even if the performance is HIGHER in Haswell at the lower clockspeed, means less to them.

 

[blackened23]

Yeah, very true, I can agree with that. I mean - I guess can kinda understand it, since doing that kind of thing is a hobby and is considered fun for quite a few people. Myself personally, I look for more in terms of functionality when I overclock - I want photoshop to be more responsive. I want excel to do my work more quickly. I want my games to get higher framerates. I want better boot times. Etc. If I can't get another 100mhz it isn't the end of the world, you know, who cares - especially when Haswell's IPC increase over SB/IVB more than makes up for any potentially lower OC. That's just me, though.

And the other argument is, those with SB and IB already aren't seeing a reason to upgrade. I can symphathize with that, being completely honest there isn't a very compelling reason to do yearly upgrade iterations -- I don't think anyone on this forum suggested otherwise. If you have a monster overclock on a 2600k, you can feel confident in sticking with that system. In any case, the situation with Haswell is not unexpected, intel focused on efficiency and delivered mobile ULV chips that do just that in spades. With that in mind, I think the Haswell is a great chip - and is a great indicator of things to come with Broadwell. It also is by far the best chip one can purchase for a *new* desktop system - I just can't understand some of the inflammatory arguments i've seen about the 4770k lately.

 

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

With my current system I used 8 to 12 hours of LinX AVX - 11 threads 28GB memory. Then 8 to 12 hours of Prime95 AVX with 12 threads and 10GB memory. Then around 8 hours of 3DMark11 demo loops using the extreme preset. Afterwards I use a combination of Prime95 or LinX with 10 threads and loop Unigine demos for several hours. While doing the LinX and Prime95 tests I'm also using the system for browsing the web and doing other stuff.

Ah, gotcha. Didn't mean to come off as adversarial - it's true that a lot of folks just boot up, run SuperPi, and claim "Hey ma! I achi3v3d t3h 6GHz on 0.8V!"
That said, I absolutely love IBT. Where Prime95 with AVX would only error out after 1/2 - 1 hour, IBT will fail within 10-25 passes - one heck of a timesaver while you're still in the inital stages of tweaking an OC.

 

[frozentundra123456]

Yeah, very true, I can agree with that. I mean - I guess can kinda understand it, since doing that kind of thing is a hobby and is considered fun for quite a few people. Myself personally, I look for more in terms of functionality when I overclock - I want photoshop to be more responsive. I want excel to do my work more quickly. I want my games to get higher framerates. I want better boot times. Etc. If I can't get another 100mhz it isn't the end of the world, you know, who cares - especially when Haswell's IPC increase over SB/IVB more than makes up for any potentially lower OC. That's just me, though.

And the other argument is, those with SB and IB already aren't seeing a reason to upgrade. I can symphathize with that, being completely honest there isn't a very compelling reason to do yearly upgrade iterations -- I don't think anyone on this forum suggested otherwise. If you have a monster overclock on a 2600k, you can feel confident in sticking with that system. In any case, the situation with Haswell is not unexpected, intel focused on efficiency and delivered mobile ULV chips that do just that in spades. With that in mind, I think the Haswell is a great chip - and is a great indicator of things to come with Broadwell. It also is by far the best chip one can purchase for a *new* desktop system - I just can't understand some of the inflammatory arguments i've seen about the 4770k lately.

I agree that there is a lot of hyperbole in the bashing of Haswell. Seems like a lot of people on the forums these days take any powerpoint AMD slide and run with it, while looking for any excuse to bash intel. That said, I see haswell as a decent progression if you dont overclock, but disappointing for overclockers in that basically overclocked it is still very close to SB, where we are used to seeing progress in every generation.

I am also disappointed in the pricing, in that the Microcenter near me had a very good 3570k cpu/mb bundle, but seems to be phasing that out, while the haswell bundles are 25 to 30 dollars more expensive. And motherboard prices alone are even worse, with the cheapest 1150 board being 115.00, while there are several 1155 boards in the 60 to 80 dollar range.

The higher prices dont really bother me for something new, but I hope the availability of IvB chips and mobos doesnt dry up so they can milk you for haswell products.

 

[Gillbot]

I agree with this, but the problem in this case is that stock temperatures are also affected, to the tune of 15C. That's alarming as review samples @ stock already had high temperatures.

If it works properly @ stock clocks and under appropriate cooling, I fail to see the problem. They don't have to guarantee anything other than it works @ it's advertized speeds.

 

[tential]

Yeah, very true, I can agree with that. I mean - I guess can kinda understand it, since doing that kind of thing is a hobby and is considered fun for quite a few people. Myself personally, I look for more in terms of functionality when I overclock - I want photoshop to be more responsive. I want excel to do my work more quickly. I want my games to get higher framerates. I want better boot times. Etc. If I can't get another 100mhz it isn't the end of the world, you know, who cares - especially when Haswell's IPC increase over SB/IVB more than makes up for any potentially lower OC. That's just me, though.

And the other argument is, those with SB and IB already aren't seeing a reason to upgrade. I can symphathize with that, being completely honest there isn't a very compelling reason to do yearly upgrade iterations -- I don't think anyone on this forum suggested otherwise. If you have a monster overclock on a 2600k, you can feel confident in sticking with that system. In any case, the situation with Haswell is not unexpected, intel focused on efficiency and delivered mobile ULV chips that do just that in spades. With that in mind, I think the Haswell is a great chip - and is a great indicator of things to come with Broadwell. It also is by far the best chip one can purchase for a *new* desktop system - I just can't understand some of the inflammatory arguments i've seen about the 4770k lately.

I don't see things really changing until software that is used widespread requires more processor speed. I can't think of many things that will do that but we'll see I guess.

However, I don't see at the moment why people would even be upset. So Haswell doesn't warrant an upgrade. Great. There were so few applications that more processor power would benefit you anyway so who cares. Spend that money on other parts of the PC.

 

[loccothan]

He He -> Please, We all know where Intel goes ($$$) and nothin' more for the users. I'm suggesting move ON to the Big AMD and Start _thinking about The Next-Gen and what Chips They Have = AMD is The Future and HUMA will crush intel's Money chip$

 

[rge2]

All depends on how you view your hardware.

Many overclockers/benchers (ie the less than 1%), like myself, buy hardware ~ yearly as a new toy to bench, no different than buying a new video game. But buying/benching new hardware is only fun if at least ~10% ipc improvement + same or better OCing, plus side benefit of knowing you gained 10% or more in new purchase, even though unlikely to notice a single 10% upgrade.

My Ivy benches 5 to 5.1 all day with ease, and 4.7 and 4.8 prime 12hrs stable, though use 4.7 for lower vcore. Many, including myself, were hoping for a new toy with 10% ipc improvement plus good chance at oc stable in 4.7+ range, benching in 5 range.

Haswell, like windows 8, is intel and MS realizing the future growth is in mobile, and haswell with increased power efficiency is a step in that direction.

Is Haswell a bad cpu, no... will likely get one in new mobile.

Is Haswell going to get a warm reception from desktop enthusiast benchers in a thread in overclocking section... I am going with no on that one as well.

 

[ShintaiDK]

. And motherboard prices alone are even worse, with the cheapest 1150 board being 115.00, while there are several 1155 boards in the 60 to 80 dollar range.

You can get B85 boards from 65$ and up.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813130703
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...E&Pagesize=100

 

[Meghan54]

He He -> Please, We all know where Intel goes ($$$) and nothin' more for the users. I'm suggesting move ON to the Big AMD and Start _thinking about The Next-Gen and what Chips They Have = AMD is The Future and HUMA will crush intel's Money chip$

Ahh, another wet dream straight from AMDZone.

 

[Meghan54]

You can get B85 boards from 65$ and up.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...82E16813130703
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...E&Pagesize=100

Sheesh....you really know how to rain on someone's parade, don't you? You think bringing in facts in any way counteracts the hyperbole, angst, and misguidedness being shown in this thread?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

My i5-2500k @ 5,278MHz with 8-10-9 timings on 2200MHz ram scored 8.4

 

[bononos]

I agree that there is a lot of hyperbole in the bashing of Haswell. Seems like a lot of people on the forums these days take any powerpoint AMD slide and run with it, while looking for any excuse to bash intel. That said, I see haswell as a decent progression if you dont overclock, but disappointing for overclockers in that basically overclocked it is still very close to SB, where we are used to seeing progress in every generation.
.......

What sort of improvement did SB have over Nehalem and Nehalem over Core?
I think Haswell is more mediocre for a new architecture than its predecessors.

 

[Haserath]

I don't get why Intel hasn't touched their L1/2 cache sizes since Nehalem. Doubling their size would seem like it would help.

Core 2 had a decent boost from 4MB to 6MB per 2 cores.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I don't get why Intel hasn't touched their L1/2 cache sizes since Nehalem. Doubling their size would seem like it would help.

Core 2 had a decent boost from 4MB to 6MB per 2 cores.

WUT?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/picture/?src=/images/cpu/core-i7-4770k/18.png

 

[Haserath]

WUT?
http://www.xbitlabs.com/picture/?src=/images/cpu/core-i7-4770k/18.png

Size, not bandwidth.