Haswell Debuts: Intel Core i7-4770K Review

Must say I'm slightly relieved that the performance difference between the 3770k and the 4770k is almost none. Was worried that my 3770k would be obsolete a few months after I bought it lol.
 
Unfortunately man. AMD is now rumored to be releasing a 5GHz CPU. They have to focus on architecture, not clock speeds. That is their issue. They need to snatch more Intel guys. That wont be hard with the money they just got from Xbox and Sony console deals.
I heard about that, I want to see it compared to this chip and see a new gen comparison when they come out. I like the idea of power saving honestly, but I was hoping for more of the under load variant, not idle. I leave my machine off when I'm not gaming, and when I am gaming it's ring pushed, that's where I think the focus should lie. But yea, on the mobile platform, I have a feeling this will shine there.
 
A couple of points:
1. AMD is always rumoured to releasing something.
2. A 5GHz Piledriver based chip made in limited quantities for the LN2 crowd wouldn't impact the market at all. AMD already has 8+ GHz chips in the record books, and it hasn't exactly improved AMD's outlook.
3. The mythological FX-9000 (there's a hint in that name) is supposedly a 220 Watt part. Just for the sake of putting the oddball rumour to rest, there are plenty on analysis on the net to why this isn't feasible on the 32nm process using in-place hardware.

Well, that seems at odds with launching 5GHz / 220W monster golden sample doesn't it ?

Hahahahahahahahahaha.................................sorry.
Intel will spend over sixty percent more on R&D in this quarter than AMD's total financial cap is valued at
($4.7 billion in R&D versus AMD's market cap of $2.86 billion)

Well, no they aren't, and no it isn't.
Intel clarified that HEDT remains a socketed solution for the foreseeable future - hardly surprising since the CPUs share commonality with workstation and server chipsets. As for mainstream, Skylake (2015-16) is still LGA (Flip Chip-Land Grid Array) which means a socketed CPU
Intel-Broadwell-Will-Be-Followed-by-Skylake-in-2015-2.jpg

You're probably thinking of the hoo-hah regarding Intel's supposed shift to embedded (BGA) processors. Intel pretty much cleared up the issue saying that certain SKU's would be embedded only. A prime example would be the 4570R and 4670R because of the embedded DRAM on package.
FWIW, you'll find that there is a distinct lack of socketed processors made that feature eDRAM- mostly because the complexity of pin-outs and criticality of contact required between pins and mainboard.

Lol that R&D fact is pretty hilarious. Intel may be released socketed chips for another few years, but that doesnt mean that performance will be increased dramatically. I was just saying that they are not increasing performance to the point in which they used to.

Steve Can you guys test the performance of 1600MHz RAM on Haswell vs IB. Intel said they "redesigned" the 1600MHz memory controller.
 
Steve Can you guys test the performance of 1600MHz RAM on Haswell vs IB. Intel said they "redesigned" the 1600MHz memory controller.

All configurations were tested with the memory clocked at 1866MHz if they supported it which Ivy Bridge and Haswell did.
 
But they redesigned the 1600MHz controller, not the 1866MHz ;) lol.
trollface_small_bigger.png
There is a 1600MHz memory controller? That's news to me, can you link me to this info.

Note - that's only under peak load. On average it is way better than Ivy Bridge ;)

Do you have any proof of that claim because from everything I have seen that is a load of rubbish.
 
Since I upgraded to Core i7 3770s last year along with Asus's very nice P8Z77-V Premium motherboards for my boxes I'll be skipping Haswell. It looks like a good upgrade for anyone on a Core 2 Duo or Core 2 Quad system (or similar AMD hardware) though.
 


Okay its not a 1600MHz memory controller, its just a memory controller that supports DDR3-1600 memory officially. That doesn't mean 1600MHz memory is faster than 1866MHz memory and it doesn't mean it cannot use 1866MHz memory.

It certainly doesn't mean you need to set both platforms at 1600MHz to look for a difference.

The whole point as I understood it was the main advantage to the new memory controller is that it could be overclocked to operate at high frequencies such as DDR3-2400. There are no performance advantages at 1600MHz and evidently at 1866MHz either.
 
Okay its not a 1600MHz memory controller, its just a memory controller that supports DDR3-1600 memory officially. That doesn't mean 1600MHz memory is faster than 1866MHz memory and it doesn't mean it cannot use 1866MHz memory.

It certainly doesn't mean you need to set both platforms at 1600MHz to look for a difference.

The whole point as I understood it was the main advantage to the new memory controller is that it could be overclocked to operate at high frequencies such as DDR3-2400. There are no performance advantages at 1600MHz and evidently at 1866MHz either.


(y)
 
Interesting, so they say that it supports even higher frequencies on ram, nice.

I'm with you Steve, from what I've seen, the chip uses more power under load, but it's idle is nice. Though to me, it sounds similar to that zero core technology on AMD video cards (which I'm not find of as well except in laptops).
 
And Intel needed to increase performance *why*? That is the real issue - Intel's only competition is itself (specifically, the LGA2100 and LGA1155 parts). And it depends on the game (as it always has) - some games are plain and simply optimized for discrete graphics.
 
This is what happens when there is no competition. When a company holds a monopoly on an industry. They are not motivated to improve their products much because there is nothing that comes close to beat their technology. This is how technology can be held back for years. This is also why oil is still popular. Renewable fuels such as biodiesel, bioethanol/butanol are not being utilized nor being developed because the monopoly in charge wants to stick with fossil fuels and refuses to develop the infrastructure needed for widespread change. IN other words, gas will keep getting more and more expensive when we could be using renewable fuel right now at half the cost.
 
Ugh, I find myself missing the days when CPU arcitechtures would launch at a frequency double that frequency over the course of the next 12-18 months, then a new aritechture could come out and do it again... It used to be that there would be no way in hell a chip "3 generations" back could ever hope to come close to whatever was current. It seems that sadly the days of leap frogging hardware are over... :/
 
Haswell confirmed as a big letdown.

Guess I'm going to have to look forward to the ever delayed Ivy Bridge-E.

Come on AMD, step up. Intel needs to stop getting away with this ****.
 
Let me fix that for you. I know you are not looking down at Intel, as long as they are at the top.
AMD confirmed as a big letdown.
Come on AMD, step up. Intel needs to stop getting away with this ****.
Personally speaking we don't have the right to look down at anyone with capabilities we ourselves don't understand.
 
Ugh, I find myself missing the days when CPU arcitechtures would launch at a frequency double that frequency over the course of the next 12-18 months, then a new aritechture could come out and do it again... It used to be that there would be no way in hell a chip "3 generations" back could ever hope to come close to whatever was current. It seems that sadly the days of leap frogging hardware are over... :/
Well, technically the architecture of both AMD and Intel have been on 2+ year cycles for a while. AMD's arch introduction is on a four year timetable of late ( K7 in 1999, K8 in 2003, K10 in 2007, Bulldozer in 2011), and Intel's if anything have been accelerating of late (Netburst in 2000, Core in 2006, Nehalem in 2008, Sandy Bridge in January 2011). Of course, CPUs like any technology become a case of diminishing returns- more so if you count process shrinks as architectures in their own right. Back in the early days of CPU evolution-as with any tech- the initial gains are impressive. Using the tried and true automobile analogy, cars were capable of 200+ mph in the mid-late 1980's. What has the next 25 years added in terms of absolute speed for production cars?
Of course, absolute speed isn't the only measure of advancement. For the CPU you'd need to consider power consumption, work throughput, and of course IGP increases. The latter being non-existent three generations ago.

A look at Passmark's CPU benchmark tells a tale of incremental advancement as a general rule. The number of truly revolutionary architectures with quantum leaps in performance are fairly small.
Personally speaking we don't have the right to look down at anyone with capabilities we ourselves don't understand.
Hasn't stopped a large percentage of forum posters is the past.
 
Intel are cleary humoring the enthusiast market with Haswell. With it's nigh on farcical high power consumption, mediocre OCing and half assed IPC improvement, it's almost completely redundant and just a blatant cash grab from Intel it seems. Think I'd rather invest my money in a custom loop for my 3770k and wait for Skylake and DDR4.
 
OMG, Anyone with the last two i7 generations should just chill. You guys still have nice machines. Is everyone making so much money, they wish to simply throw it away for the hell of it?

I have a 2600K and will likely be happy for another 2 or 3 generations. Complaining about a single generation progress when you have a comparable machine to my own is nothing more than a search for bragging rights.
 
From a benchmarking point of view, Asus aren't the best indicators of a representative performance since their UEFI implements an "all core turbo" by default. The Intel specification is to enable max turbo on one core, and drop one multiplier for every successive core coming into turbo state. This is the primary reason that Asus motherboards generally top the performance charts (stock clocks) against their competitors - SATA third party controllers excepted.

Interesting, is Asus the only company that has those capability's? I see why they weren't relevant though, I just like Asus Motherboards xD
 
So this over my 2600k Sandy wouldn't be worth it either, maybe see a 20% boost in certain tasks. Little if any boost in gaming maybe 1 or 2 frames better. Good review thanks. Not sure its worth $500 for this and a board for me over my 2600k overclocked @ 4.5 though. Will focus on a GTX 780 for my next upgrade and wait to see what next year brings to the table. I would like to see a 40-50% boost over my current CPU for it to be worth it. Also where are the native 6 -8 core Haswell cpus?
 
The opportunity has always been there. But the ability... That's another story.

I think they need to restructure. Their driver team for graphics is a mess, along with their hardware team. They have to fix their act. They may have struck a deal with MS and Sony now, but in a few years, Sony and MS may hover toward offerings from other companies if they are disappointed with AMD.
 
Back