• 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.

Should I move back the "mainstream" Intel platform?

Arachnotronic

Arachnotronic

Lifer
So, I've got this beautiful, wonderful 980X. My first EE CPU, and it's just wonderful. However, looking to the future (2013ish), I'll probably want to upgrade my CPU/mobo as a graduation gift or something.

I have no particular need for the 980X, but I do want to have the best. However, I'm torn between the "best" based on two different metrics. The mainstream Intel platforms have the "best" CPU cores for a while, but fewer of them, as well as a less sophisticated uncore. The higher end Intel platforms have...more CPU cores, bigger cache, more PCI-E lanes but...less modern cores. The latest Intel roadmap indicates that when HSW arrives, SNB-E will still be the best thing on LGA 2011...but I bet by them it'll have 8 cores.

I guess I'm just annoyed that there is no clear "best" anymore...do I take more cores but with less features/worse process tech/etc., or do I take the shiny new cores but only take 4 of them with a gross IGP taking up a lot of the die?
 
You want best, but you don't need it. You have best, but you don't use it? It's a psychological thing. I suggest, looking elsewhere and, maybe, expand your bag of hobbies 🙂
 
Last edited:
Intel17 said:
So, I've got this beautiful, wonderful 980X. My first EE CPU, and it's just wonderful. However, looking to the future (2013ish), I'll probably want to upgrade my CPU/mobo as a graduation gift or something.

I have no particular need for the 980X, but I do want to have the best. However, I'm torn between the "best" based on two different metrics. The mainstream Intel platforms have the "best" CPU cores for a while, but fewer of them, as well as a less sophisticated uncore. The higher end Intel platforms have...more CPU cores, bigger cache, more PCI-E lanes but...less modern cores. The latest Intel roadmap indicates that when HSW arrives, SNB-E will still be the best thing on LGA 2011...but I bet by them it'll have 8 cores.

I guess I'm just annoyed that there is no clear "best" anymore...do I take more cores but with less features/worse process tech/etc., or do I take the shiny new cores but only take 4 of them with a gross IGP taking up a lot of the die?
Click to expand...
There probably isn't any answer right now and things will become clearer in approx 12 months, so sit tight.
 
Unless I'm mistaken, IB-E should be out before Haswell launches. Should come with some power savings versus SB-E and the MOAR CORES you seem to relish.

That said, I'm a little puzzled myself by Intel's launch sequence. Why the heck would they put out their mainstream chips first, then follow with the high performance version of the same parts just before launching the next generation of mainstream, that often rivals/beats the extreme parts?
 
Denithor said:
Unless I'm mistaken, IB-E should be out before Haswell launches. Should come with some power savings versus SB-E and the MOAR CORES you seem to relish.

That said, I'm a little puzzled myself by Intel's launch sequence. Why the heck would they put out their mainstream chips first, then follow with the high performance version of the same parts just before launching the next generation of mainstream, that often rivals/beats the extreme parts?
Click to expand...

Looking at their market share at the moment they can't be doing that much wrong.
 
Mainstream is what matters to Intel, 1366/2011 are server sockets they toss out to the desktop end for a very small portion of their sales - not unimportant to say the least... Just that Mainstream moves the most product, and low end mainstream is what most people buy because they aren't us.
 
Hang in there, 980X chips are still good. Once Haswell comes out, you should see a 40%~ improvement in performance over your current chip. That justifies it.
 
Magic Carpet said:
You want best, but you don't need it. You have best, but you don't use it? It's a psychological thing. I suggest, looking elsewhere and, maybe, expand your bag of hobbies 🙂
Click to expand...

I dont see that a really a bad thing. If you want the best of the best, that is a lot cheaper to do with a computer than some other things, eg cars.
 
then wait... 1.5 years is a long time in technology... your 980x isn't outdated yet (unless you want low power / higher singlethread performance right now)
 
Why make a thread if you are not going to upgrade for almost another year?are you really wasting time thinking about this now?

You need to find a new hobby lol

Nothing that we tell you today matters anyways,for all we know by then amd might have an option for you but im sure you are biased towards intel with your setup abd screen name.

If you are that bored buy the dual socket 2011 setup and run a single quaf and then wait for the ivy xeon chips to upgrade too.that is the only real upgrade that would give you raw performance that would justify an new setup over your ee.

That is if money is no option

Just imagine having 20 cores and 40 threads with 64 pci e 3.0 lanes

That setup would last at least 10 years before you woulf bottle neck it.
 
Last edited:
grkM3 said:
Why make a thread if you are not going to upgrade for almost another year?are you really wasting time thinking about this now?

You need to find a new hobby lol

Nothing that we tell you today matters anyways,for all we know by then amd might have an option for you but im sure you are biased towards intel with your setup abd screen name.

If you are that bored buy the dual socket 2011 setup and run a single quaf and then wait for the ivy xeon chips to upgrade too.that is the only real upgrade that would give you raw performance that would justify an new setup over your ee.

That is if money is no option
Click to expand...

If AMD's "Vishera" is the best thing out at the time, I will be getting it...I'm just assuming AMD has dropped out of the uber high end desktop race, though.
 
Whatever you do, I would do it sooner rather than later, while your 980X can still fetch a decent price. (If you plan to sell it)

Personally I waited with my 1366 setup for 2011 because I wanted the platform. I knew going into it for gaming and mainstream tasks my chip would perform the same as a regular SB at the same clocks. I do encode a lot of videos so that is 50% faster on my rig than it is on a 2600K.

If you like owning a 980X, you'll like owning a SB-E platform as well, especially if your plan is a 3960X. That is what matters if you can afford it, if it will bring you satisfaction and enjoyment with your purchase. I knew if I bought an 1155/2600K I would wish I had gotten a 2011/3930K, so I got that instead. 😎
 
Grooveriding said:
Whatever you do, I would do it sooner rather than later, while your 980X can still fetch a decent price. (If you plan to sell it)

Personally I waited with my 1366 setup for 2011 because I wanted the platform. I knew going into it for gaming and mainstream tasks my chip would perform the same as a regular SB at the same clocks. I do encode a lot of videos so that is 50% faster on my rig than it is on a 2600K.

If you like owning a 980X, you'll like owning a SB-E platform as well, especially if your plan is a 3960X. That is what matters if you can afford it, if it will bring you satisfaction and enjoyment with your purchase. I knew if I bought an 1155/2600K I would wish I had gotten a 2011/3930K, so I got that instead. 😎
Click to expand...

i7 980x to 3930K would make more sense since he would probably break even. However, I wouldn't bother upgrading to SB-E, especially since it would be a complete platform change.
 
This thread has me wondering what I am going to in 2015. I need to work on my upgrade plans for then!
 
Just decide what you NEED and then what you want and if the cost is worth it.

My desktop machine is more than I need, still today (Q9450). My upgrade plan is simple: run it till it dies. The earliest I'll willingly replace it is Haswell. Was never too hyped up about SB, IB ect.
Curious to see if mainstream Haswell will have the APU power to play League of Legends and Left 4 Dead 2. If so, I might stop buying video cards.

edit- I don't want to leave out AMD. If they can get their APU power up, even at a CPU performance detriment to Intel.. I might go there. Whoever can serve my light-gaming needs with an APU first, wins in my book. That said, I lean Intel so I'm hoping Haswell can do that job.
 
Last edited:
Intel17 said:
I guess I'm just annoyed that there is no clear "best" anymore...do I take more cores but with less features/worse process tech/etc., or do I take the shiny new cores but only take 4 of them...
Click to expand...
Just look at the GFLOPS for an indication of performance:

i7-980X: 6 cores x 2 units x 4 element x 3.33 GHz = 160 GFLOPS
Haswell: 4 cores x 2 units (FMA) x 8 elements x 3.9 GHz = 500 GFLOPS
 
Intel17 said:
So, I've got this beautiful, wonderful 980X. My first EE CPU, and it's just wonderful. However, looking to the future (2013ish), I'll probably want to upgrade my CPU/mobo as a graduation gift or something.

I have no particular need for the 980X, but I do want to have the best. However, I'm torn between the "best" based on two different metrics. The mainstream Intel platforms have the "best" CPU cores for a while, but fewer of them, as well as a less sophisticated uncore. The higher end Intel platforms have...more CPU cores, bigger cache, more PCI-E lanes but...less modern cores. The latest Intel roadmap indicates that when HSW arrives, SNB-E will still be the best thing on LGA 2011...but I bet by them it'll have 8 cores.

I guess I'm just annoyed that there is no clear "best" anymore...do I take more cores but with less features/worse process tech/etc., or do I take the shiny new cores but only take 4 of them with a gross IGP taking up a lot of the die?
Click to expand...

I would go to mainstream, it would bother me if i paid a lot for my chip and it was a gen behind the mainstream stuff, i.e. like ivy bridge E will be when haswell comes along.

If there are 6 core mainstream haswells i would jump on those. Wishful thinking but theyve got to push forward with more cores at some point 🙂
 
Maximilian said:
I would go to mainstream, it would bother me if i paid a lot for my chip and it was a gen behind the mainstream stuff, i.e. like ivy bridge E will be when haswell comes along.

If there are 6 core mainstream haswells i would jump on those. Wishful thinking but theyve got to push forward with more cores at some point 🙂
Click to expand...

The Ivy Bridge die size is pretty small, so hopefully Intel increases the die size a lot with Haswell.
 
BenchPress said:
Just look at the GFLOPS for an indication of performance:

i7-980X: 6 cores x 2 units x 4 element x 3.33 GHz = 160 GFLOPS
Haswell: 4 cores x 2 units (FMA) x 8 elements x 3.9 GHz = 500 GFLOPS
Click to expand...

That is only valid mathematics for code which has been optimised for AVX/HNI, though...
 
You could probably get a good deal on a SB-E CPU when IB-E CPUs are released. You might even be able to sell the 980X at the same price or even more than what you paid for it at that time.
 
AdamK47 said:
You could probably get a good deal on a SB-E CPU when IB-E CPUs are released. You might even be able to sell the 980X at the same price or even more than what you paid for it at that time.
Click to expand...

Definitely. I think when/if I sell this 980X, I will give somebody a good deal on it like I was able to get...I still can't get over how awesome it was to be able to afford this chip.

I mean, don't get me wrong...I LOVE the Extreme platform, but I just wish Intel would put the good cores on it sooner rather than later. However, I suppose an 8C/16T SNB-EP would rip a 4C/8T HSW to shreds, even if HSW has all of its new uArch features.

However, I assume it takes a lot more time to validate a server/WS grade CPU with all of its more sophisticated features versus a client CPU with 4 cores, no QPI, small cache, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top