Will Intel release 125MHz and 167Mhz strap overclocking for non-K Haswell refresh?

[cbn]

Maybe this is a little early to ask the question, but how many people think Intel will finally release 125Mhz and 167Mhz strap overclocking on the non-K Haswell Refresh desktop CPUs due out in 2014 (eg, Celeron, Pentium, Core i3, non-K Core i5 and non-K i7)

One theory I have is that Intel already has released a good amount of enthusiast level cpus in the form of Core i5-2500K/2550K, Core i7-2600K/2700K, Core i5-3570K, Core i7-3770K, Core i5-4670K and Core i7-4770K etc. This may have saturated a good part of the enthusiast desktoip market to the point where current enthusiast folks may consider the next upgrade Haswell-E (also due out around the same time in 2014) or nothing at all.

If Intel's desire is to increase adoption of Haswell-E then I don't think allowing overclocking on the mainstream SKUs will affect their enthusiast sales much. The upgrade path for current enthusiast owners on LGA 1155/LGA1150 would primarily be Haswell-E. Older Intel enthusiast owners (LGA 775, LGA 1156) could upgrade to either LGA 1155/LGA 1150 K chips (not so likely if they haven't done so already) or the new overclocking Haswell Refresh budget chips (more likely).

Secondly, there is Kaveri to consider. It is rumored to have a much better IPC and this could provide another reason for Intel to allow overclocking on its cheaper cpus.

 

[PPB]

Only if they feel some kind of pressure from AMD.


So, nope, sadly. At least not in the inmediate future.

 

[jpiniero]

If anything, I wonder if Intel would end overclockable processors entirely in the mainstream line, and make that an Extreme-line exclusive feature.

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Unlikely imo, i5k and i7k have to represent a huge bulk of their gaming segment, but perhaps they aren't aware of just how much cash that is driving in or don't care?

 

[Idontcare]

Considering the chipset segmentation along with iGPU segmentation and CPU segmentation...I very much doubt Intel would do anything to disrupt or blur the brand value or ROI that comes from those efforts.

Intel has come to be a little more like polished royalty (monarchy) in that the marketing guys look at this stuff and quip "tut tut, my good man, that is just not done among high society".

It is pretty clear they've lost the connection with the laymen and budget enthusiast, they have dined on caviar and champagne long enough now that they have lost the ability to remove their ties and unbutton their collars while getting down with the blue collar consumer who still enjoys drinking beer that is on tap with the keg sitting in a trash can full of ice and drinking out of plastic red cups.

That crowd just ain't sexy enough to be worth the effort of offering OC'ing options via boot-strap multipliers. Peeps need to know their place, the upper-decks are reserved for the affluent.

 

[jpiniero]

Unlikely imo, i5k and i7k have to represent a huge bulk of their gaming segment, but perhaps they aren't aware of just how much cash that is driving in or don't care?

Well, Intel already sells an Extreme Quad in the same price range as the i7. Maybe by pushing the Extreme line more there would be an greater opportunity to upsell to a 6 or 8 core?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

Intel doesn't sell an extreme quad.

 

[jpiniero]

intel doesn't sell an extreme quad.

4820k?

 

[SPBHM]

Intel should at least sell a cheaper unlocked CPU

$1xx i3 K (remember the old Pentium E6500K? something like that)
$2xx i5 K
$3xx i7 K

but I know it wont happen, just like the straps for locked CPUs on 1150,
why would they give this benefit for lower priced products at the risk of only helping them to compete with their higher priced options?

maybe if Kaveri is really great they can do... something.

 

[cbn]

Only if they feel some kind of pressure from AMD.


So, nope, sadly. At least not in the inmediate future.

I've read Kaveri is supposed to have a 15% to 25% boost in IPC over Piledriver based Trinity/Richland. (One site said 30% IPC increase)

Assuming a 20% increase in IPC @ 4Ghz clockspeed we are looking at performance in the neighborhood of Core i5-3330. That is pretty darn good.

Then there is the overclocking of Kaveri to consider. If Kaveri could push 5 Ghz like the GF 32nm Piledriver, then AMD potentially could be in a good position among enthusiasts if the price is right (I'd be looking for the cheaper Athlon II x4 version of Kaveri myself) . With that said, does anyone know if GF's 28nm process predictably will scale to 5Ghz?

 

[BallaTheFeared]

4820k?

4820k isn't an Extreme branded cpu.

 

[Idontcare]

With that said, does anyone know if GF's 28nm process predictably will scale to 5Ghz?

There is no reason it wouldn't, given 32nm can hit 5GHz.

SOI impacts the power-consumption, doesn't really factor into clockspeeds. (drive current factors in there)

Now then, if the lack of SOI results in a power-consumption limited or thermally limited clockspeed situation then it may turn out that 5GHz is out of reach. We have to wait to see how bad the leakage is for 28nm w/o SOI.

 

[JohnDC]

I just started looking around at new PC parts after being out of the loop for several years.Sad to see Intel has killed off the budget overclocking scene and AMD is not quite up to speed on performance compared to intel.Gone are the days of sub 100 dollar overclocking CPU's that performed close to expensive CPU's.

Here is hoping AMD makes some good performing chips in the future or motherboard makers find a way to let us overclock intel chips again.I don't think intel will willingly make cheap overclockable chips when they can charge extra now and everyone is buying.

 

[Smoblikat]

4820k?

This might sound like splitting hairs, but that processor is technically not an "extreme edition", its just unlocked.

 

[jpiniero]

This might sound like splitting hairs, but that processor is technically not an "extreme edition", its just unlocked.

By Extreme, I mean the family (Ivy Bridge-E, Haswell-E, etc..).

 

[VirtualLarry]

By Extreme, I mean the family (Ivy Bridge-E, Haswell-E, etc..).

The E in those stands for Enthusiast, not Extreme. Extreme-branded CPUs are almost always $999 or more.

 

[aigomorla]

By Extreme, I mean the family (Ivy Bridge-E, Haswell-E, etc..).

no extreme means it carries a BLACK LABEL...
Its the flagship processor of its generation.

see how in cpu-z the label is black... and not blue.

vs a standard Blue..

Another example... Extreme

non extreme

 

[Borealis7]

those are crap OCs, aigo

anyway, it doesnt work on current Haswell CPUs/MoBos, and considerring the blazing amount of heat these CPUs exert while OCed, i'd be surprised to see a stable 167MHz bus system any time soon.

 

[Kenmitch]

those are crap OCs, aigo

anyway, it doesnt work on current Haswell CPUs/MoBos, and considerring the blazing amount of heat these CPUs exert while OCed, i'd be surprised to see a stable 167MHz bus system any time soon.

Surprised?

My straps are functional with rig in sig

Didnt find any performance gain using them. Temps and vcore required didn't look to change too much if at all.

 

[cytg111]

when the K part oc's to 4.2 4.3? Hell no.. that would defy every sense of good reason. Given another stepping and improved OC'ability to the 4.5->5.0 for the K parts .. then maybe there would be a fit. Maybe.

 

[ElFenix]

It is pretty clear they've lost the connection with the laymen and budget enthusiast, they have dined on caviar and champagne long enough now that they have lost the ability to remove their ties and unbutton their collars while getting down with the blue collar consumer who still enjoys drinking beer that is on tap with the keg sitting in a trash can full of ice and drinking out of plastic red cups.

That crowd just ain't sexy enough to be worth the effort of offering OC'ing options via boot-strap multipliers. Peeps need to know their place, the upper-decks are reserved for the affluent.

i don't know how you can say this with a straight face. intel will sell you an unlocked quad with 95% of the performance of their top of the line part for just a bit over $200. even the lower level locked quads have great performance relative to the top end parts. this isn't like the days where a top end processor had a huge performance lead and cost $600+, leaving budget users out in the cold unless they overclocked.

 

[Idontcare]

i don't know how you can say this with a straight face. intel will sell you an unlocked quad with 95% of the performance of their top of the line part for just a bit over $200. even the lower level locked quads have great performance relative to the top end parts. this isn't like the days where a top end processor had a huge performance lead and cost $600+, leaving budget users out in the cold unless they overclocked.

I'm guessing you read my post and took a wildly unexpected interpretation of it.

In the meantime, the fact that 100% of the poll votes have been a resounding "no...", there is a possibility that my post (as written and interpreted by the larger audience) does in fact ring a tad true when interpreted within the context of the thread's topic. (which has nothing to do with $200 unlocked quads or the relative performance of locked quads versus the even more expensive enthusiast/extreme lineup)

So, unless what you really meant to post in this thread was something more akin to "c'mon, how can 36 out of 36 of you voters really think (with a straight face) that Intel won't make available such an easy means of OC'ing non-K haswell refresh processors!?", I am going to suggest you reconsider the topic, the poll, and why so many of your fellow forum members feel the way they do (and then, perhaps, my own post will make more sense within the larger context of the ongoing discussion).

 

[ElFenix]

I'm guessing you read my post and took a wildly unexpected interpretation of it.

i don't know how else someone is supposed to take what you wrote.

In the meantime, the fact that 100% of the poll votes have been a resounding "no...",

...

So, unless what you really meant to post in this thread was something more akin to "c'mon, how can 36 out of 36 of you voters really think (with a straight face) that Intel won't make available such an easy means of OC'ing non-K haswell refresh processors!?", I am going to suggest you reconsider the topic, the poll, and why so many of your fellow forum members feel the way they do (and then, perhaps, my own post will make more sense within the larger context of the ongoing discussion).

no, i completely agree with the results of the poll. i don't think intel will allow strap overclocking to 125 and 167 on a future non-k haswell refresh. why would i?

there is a possibility that my post (as written and interpreted by the larger audience) does in fact ring a tad true when interpreted within the context of the thread's topic.

i think you're misinterpreting the results with regards to your post about intel losing the connection with laypeople (as if they're overclocking anyway; what percentage of computer users do you think overclock? i'd be shocked if it's over 5%.) and budget enthusiasts. how many people even read your post before voting in the poll?

(which has nothing to do with $200 unlocked quads or the relative performance of locked quads versus the even more expensive enthusiast/extreme lineup)

i don't know how it can't. you brought up budget enthusiast. not me. not the OP.


or maybe i'm just dining on caviar for thinking a ~$200 unlocked quad that can hang with intel's best for typical "enthusiast" workloads is a good value.

 

[Lepton87]

or maybe i'm just dining on caviar for thinking a ~$200 unlocked quad that can hang with intel's best for typical "enthusiast" workloads is a good value.

What? Last time I checked 4770K costs about 350$ in retail.

http://ark.intel.com/products/75123/

Then again I don't think it can hang with Intel's best unless you limit the number of threads to 4, in such a scenario it's going to be the fastest CPU out there even.

 

[cbn]

or maybe i'm just dining on caviar for thinking a ~$200 unlocked quad that can hang with intel's best for typical "enthusiast" workloads is a good value.

It is not a bad price, but I think Intel could do better by opening the enthusiast level to the lower chips as well.

These days I think it is fair to say many people consider full power desktops (even if they are only dual core) a luxury item. My guess is that the average person will probably spend money on a smartphone and some kind of dual core laptop. After these dollars are spent it is probably a toss up between a Tablet and a Desktop...if they even buy anything additional at all.

While an overclocked 4+ Ghz dual core (Celeron, Pentium or Core i3, etc) on a H81 would not be as fast as a $200 quad core with Z87 mobo, it is probably a good jump up from the Laptop they already own.

So they way I see things allowing overclocking on the non-K SKUs is not so much about competing against $200 processors and $140 Z87 motherboards. It is more about giving us additional reasons to buy that budget enthusiast desktop over what other non desktop computing option is also being considered.

I guess another way Intel could go about this (without allowing overclocking) would be to bump stock clocks on the Celeron, Pentium and Core i3 desktop cpus. Sometimes I really think these chips could use a big speed bump compared to what some of the Intel laptops are already receiving.