TSX borked in Haswell and Broadwell

[Fjodor2001]

It is though - DDR4 is expensive... but something has to be the guinea pig. OEMs will sell both 4+2 Haswell Refresh and 4+2 Skylake in an attempt to get volume going for DDR4. It's not a high volume product but needed to get DDR4 out there.

But that would make it even more strange, because Broadwell-K which is likely more "enthusiast oriented" will not have DDR4, but Skylake-S will.

I think it would have made more sense to skip Broadwell-K completely, and just have a Skylake-K model instead. That is if desktop Broadwell and Skylake actually will be released at the same time.

Also remember the markets don't overlap.

Hmmm... yes I know, but could you please clarify what point you are trying to make with that?

 

[*NixUser]

TSX disaster may be only the beginning of an ugly trend for Intel.

Release it now.. fix it later.. get the money.

This unacceptable and short-sighted mentality looks exactly like what Intel's CEO is planning for the company going forward. Half-assed, buggy products out of the door as fast as possible, quality and reliability a mere afterthought. See:

Intel Corp. (INTC), the world’s largest chipmaker, is being pushed by Chief Executive Officer Brian Krzanich to bring new products to market more quickly and then update to refine them.

“He wants to see Intel move faster. That’s very clear,” Justin Rattner, the company’s chief technology officer, said today. “We’ve been legitimately accused of trying to get everything perfect before it comes to market.”

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-...chief-says-ceo-wants-new-products-faster.html

LOL. It was bad enough I had to wait until C2 mobos were available, delaying my purchase for months (and for a lot of others too). You can clearly see a trend of diminishing quality from their products. From chipsets to processors, all the way to SSD's with nand flash coming from unproven sources in their latest series.

You can go to the Q2 earnings call transcript and CTRL + F SkyLake (or is it SkyLink?) and you'll see Brian Krzanich make 2 unambiguous statements about Skylake being released in 2015.

Well let's see:

Hans Mosesmann - Raymond James: Okay. And just a follow-up, does that delay SkyLake by six months?

Brian M. Krzanich - CEO: We’re still looking at the actual launch date. We’ve set it in 2015 so it’s a pretty broad window there. We’re trying to pin down and I think we go through the second half of this year, we’ll pin down exactly when SkyLake will come to market. Again it’s going to be – as we launch these other Broadwell products (indiscernible) consumers, everybody, when are they ready for SkyLink. That will drive it as much as anything on the process readiness and the product readiness.

I have not seen ANY concrete guarantees. I do not want to bash Intel too hard on this one, since they are at the forefront of manufacturing technology and that comes with unexpected developments by nature. But if you take into account the CEO vision "get the product out the door no matter what" then it may really get shipped at some point in 2015.

Intel QA has done a terrible lately with P67 SATA degradation, Haswell chipset USB3 bug, and this on the very CPU itself. Compared to the virtually perfect track record for at least a decade before 2011.

I would be careful to blame the engineers at first. They are constrained by decisions coming from the top. And you can see what the #1 rule the CEO lives by: "Do the absolute minimum. Get this shit out the door in whatever state it is in two weeks".

[...]Broadwell and Skylake roadmaps have changed back and forth quite a bit over the past year. So I don't take anything for granted and things may very well change going forward. There could be a Skylake-S delay for example. It's happened to Intel CPU releases before you know.

Regardless, I think Intel should explain their intentions with the Broadwell and Skylake-S desktop release plan. Because I don't think it's totally obvious why they would release the tick (Broadwell) and tock (Skylake) on desktop at the same time. They've never done that before.

I would like answers to this situation too.

 

[NTMBK]

Well, I'm just glad that this news broke before the Xeons started shipping. (Proper Xeons, not the overclock laptop APU Xeon E3s.) At least now the customers know what they are buying and can decide accordingly. Shame though, it was looking forward to getting my hands on it Here's hoping it's fixed for Broadwell EP!

 

[Fjodor2001]

Intel: We have two products A and B. B has the additional feature X, so we charge a bit more for it.

Customer: Ok, I'll buy product B since feature X will be useful for me.

[Time passes]

Intel: Sorry Customer, it turned out feature X does not work on product B. But thanks anyway for paying us the extra money for it. Now please buy our new product C which will be coming shortly, if you actually want feature X.

 

[witeken]

I though products with TSX were actually cheaper.

 

[Fjodor2001]

I though products with TSX were actually cheaper.

Nope, they are more expensive (when comparing models where all else is equal). Why would a product with an additional feature be less expensive?

 

[witeken]

IIRC K processors don't have TSX, but they're more expensive.

 

[Stoneburner]

time_to_file_a_class_action_suit01!

 

[Fjodor2001]

IIRC K processors don't have TSX, but they're more expensive.

Depends on where you order from. As an example, 4670 is often more expensive than 4670K.

But anyway, the K models do not fulfill the criteria "when comparing models where all else is equal". K models are unlocked, remember?

 

[Magic Carpet]

Depends on where you order from. As an example, 4670 is often more expensive than 4670K.

Where do you order then?

e.g. on Newegg 4670K carries a ~$15 premium over the regular 4670. The former being on sale. The "K" models have always been more expensive in my shopping experience.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Depends on where you order from. As an example, 4670 is often more expensive than 4670K.

Utter rubbish.
http://geizhals.at/eu/intel-core-i5-4670k-bx80646i54670k-a930960.html
http://geizhals.at/eu/intel-core-i5-4670-bx80646i54670-a930993.html

 

[Fjodor2001]

Where do you order then?

e.g. on Newegg 4670K carries a ~$15 premium over the regular 4670. The former being on sale. The "K" models have always been more expensive in my shopping experience.

Newegg is not the only shop you know. But they are not comparable anyway, because 4670K model is unlocked, so it has additional features over the 4670. Compare any model where the only difference is that one of them has TSX, then the TSX model will be more expensive.

Ask youself: What would the logic be of selling a CPU with more features at a lower price than a similar one where the only difference is that it has less features?

 

[TerryMathews]

I though products with TSX were actually cheaper.

No, TSX is an upmarket feature.

IIRC K processors don't have TSX, but they're more expensive.

Replying to this, but directed at all. Don't get hung up on the Ks, they are theri own beast. Look at the non-OC Intel processors. With a few exceptions spread throughout, the line of delineation is the i5-4440s per Intel.

 

[Fjodor2001]

Utter rubbish.
http://geizhals.at/eu/intel-core-i5-4670k-bx80646i54670k-a930960.html
http://geizhals.at/eu/intel-core-i5-4670-bx80646i54670-a930993.html

Since you're from Denmark, how about this at Proshop.DK:

http://www.proshop.se/Processor/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-Haswell-Box-2404672.html

http://www.proshop.dk/CPU/Intel-Core-i5-4670-Haswell-Box-2404673.html

4670K: 1499 DKK
4670: 1521 DKK

 

[ShintaiDK]

Since you're from Denmark, how about this at Proshop.DK:

http://www.proshop.se/Processor/Intel-Core-i5-4670K-Haswell-Box-2404672.html

http://www.proshop.dk/CPU/Intel-Core-i5-4670-Haswell-Box-2404673.html

4670K: 1499 DKK
4670: 1521 DKK

One link is swedish, the other danish.

But nothing prevents you from finding a good deal on a product. Its just not often.

https://www.komplett.dk/search?q=4670

4670=1439DKK
4670K=1499DKK

4670 wins again.

 

[Fjodor2001]

One link is swedish, the other danish.

But nothing prevents you from finding a good deal on a product. Its just not often.

https://www.komplett.dk/search?q=4670

4670=1439DKK
4670K=1499DKK

4670 wins again.

So the conclusion is that sometimes 4670K is more expensive, sometime 4670. But the comparison is pointless anyway, since 4670K is unlocked and hence has additional an feature over the 4670. I.e. it's not just presence of the TSX feature that differs.

Compare products where the only difference is that one of them has TSX, and you'll find that the one with TSX is more expensive.

I'm surprised that we're even having this argument. What do you honestly think the logic would be to price a product with an additional feature lower? It would be as insane as pricing the 4770K lower than the 4670K because the 4770K has HT and higher frequency.

 

[jones377]

So the conclusion is that sometimes 4670K is more expensive, sometime 4670. But the comparison is pointless anyway, since 4670K is unlocked and hence has additional an feature over the 4670. I.e. it's not just presence of the TSX feature that differs.

Compare products where the only difference is that one of them has TSX, and you'll find that the one with TSX is more expensive.

I'm surprised that we're even having this argument. What do you honestly think the logic would be to price a product with an additional feature lower? It would be as insane as pricing the 4770K lower than the 4670K because the 4770K has HT and higher frequency.

http://ark.intel.com/compare/75048,75047

 

[ShintaiDK]

So the conclusion is that sometimes 4670K is more expensive, sometime 4670. But the comparison is pointless anyway, since 4670K is unlocked and hence has additional an feature over the 4670.

Compare products where the only difference is that one of them has TSX, and you'll find that the one with TSX is more expensive.

Honestly, I'm surprised that we're even having this argument. What do you honestly think the logic would be to price a product with an additional lower?

So lets see. Sometimes the 4670 is cheaper, but often the 4670K is cheaper. Really?

Lets take Newegg as well:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-898-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-899-_-Product

4670 = 220$
4670K = 235$ with a 15$ discount down from 250$.

No, the conclusion is that its an exception to see the 4670K cheaper than the 4670. Hence the "TSX value" is pretty low to non existant.

 

[TerryMathews]

So lets see. Sometimes the 4670 is cheaper, but often the 4670K is cheaper. Really?

Lets take Newegg as well:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-898-_-Product
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...-899-_-Product

4670 = 220$
4670K = 235$ with a 15$ discount down from 250$.

No, the conclusion is that its an exception to see the 4670K cheaper than the 4670. Hence the "TSX value" is pretty low to non existant.

No, it means that being unlocked is worth significantly more than TSX.

If TSX were so cheap, why isn't in the i3, Pentium, or Celeron lines hmmm?

 

[TerryMathews]

I'm surprised that we're even having this argument. What do you honestly think the logic would be to price a product with an additional feature lower? It would be as insane as pricing the 4770K lower than the 4670K because the 4770K has HT and higher frequency.

Really? You can't figure out why after Intel got some egg on their face that certain posters are arguing that the defective feature was worthless anyway?

 

[ShintaiDK]

No, it means that being unlocked is worth significantly more than TSX.

If TSX were so cheap, why isn't in the i3, Pentium, or Celeron lines hmmm?

http://ark.intel.com/compare/80815,80817

There is a 10-15$ difference between 4460 and 4590. The difference includes faster GPU, higher clocks, TXT, TSX, SIPP and vPro. All in favour of the 4590.

Intel sure dont put much value in TSX if so.

 

[TerryMathews]

http://ark.intel.com/compare/80815,80817

There is a 10-15$ difference between 4460 and 4590. The difference includes faster GPU, higher clocks, TXT, TSX, SIPP and vPro. All in favour of the 4590.

Intel sure dont put much value in TSX if so.

And yet they must assign some value to it or they would have populated the whole line with it a la AVX2.

 

[Magic Carpet]

Newegg is not the only shop you know. But they are not comparable anyway, because 4670K model is unlocked, so it has additional features over the 4670. Compare any model where the only difference is that one of them has TSX, then the TSX model will be more expensive.

Ask youself: What would the logic be of selling a CPU with more features at a lower price than a similar one where the only difference is that it has less features?

http://ark.intel.com/compare/75047,75048

Unlocked processors with less features (aside from extra speed in the form of unlocked multiplier) are more expensive right from the start. That's how it is :whiste:

Of course, there are other models but I was countering this:

Depends on where you order from. As an example, 4670 is often more expensive than 4670K.

Which is not true. Often it is the other way around and the recommended price is part of it.

And now after the recent events, 4670K is going to gain more value as being a non-defective part, funny, isn't it? in the used market, at least.

 

[Fjodor2001]

http://ark.intel.com/compare/75048,75047

Check the comparison table in what you linked to. The difference is not only TSX vs no TSX. You're comparing apples and oranges. The most important difference being that the 4670K is unlocked.

Did you not read my previous post? I'll repeat parts of it for you (and ShintaiDK):

"Compare products where the only difference is that one of them has TSX, and you'll find that the one with TSX is more expensive."

"What do you honestly think the logic would be to price a product with an additional feature lower?"

Care to to answer that question?

 

[Magic Carpet]

"Compare products where the only difference is that one of them has TSX, and you'll find that the one with TSX is more expensive."

None such products exist, so you can't work out how badly TSX affects the price tag. ShintaiDK made a good example. But it's now getting silly to argue more.