Haswell Debuts: Intel Core i7-4770K Review

Why use GPU-dependent games for a CPU benchmark?

Test Starcraft or something. Show the real difference in CPU performance.
 
I agree, but I think the point of the tests were to show for much improvement with each card it did in games and to see if there's bottle necking. Which it did not show it bottlenecked any games and gpus with the current tests.
 
As usual, the game benchmarks are backwards. Most gamers will first set a goal range for playable frame rates for a given game and then adjust graphics quality up to the maximum possible for that fps goal. A person who is playing a game with the hardware they have will adjust quality down to keep the game playable. So, a better comparison would be what graphics settings are possible for a given goal.

Of course fps is a convenient number to compare but it is meaningless for very low or very high fps since the user will adjust quality in the real world to bring fps within a useful range. The type of game will make a difference as to what fps is playable but most consider between 30 and 60 fps to be good for games with fast paced action.

So, if integrated graphics are able to get 30 fps at even low quality and resolution settings this is impressive and may be good enough for some casual gamers. Of course if they get hooked on games they are likely to upgrade to discrete graphics in order to increase quality.

When a review claims a game to be unplayable with integrated graphics some readers may assume this to be the case regardless of settings. However, with the current generation of mid range integrated intel graphics it is clear that it is at least capable of running most if not all current popular games at minimum or better quality and resolution which is a large improvement from the past. In the much older GMA series for example many games were simply unplayable regardless of settings. The fact that modern games can actually be played at reasonable fps by sacrificing quality with integrated graphics means that most new computers will be capable of playing games with limitations even before adding a discrete graphics card. Being able to play a game at minimum or low graphics is vastly superior to not being able to play the game at all.

This is a major accomplishment by both intel and AMD. Modern integrated graphics should get respect for accomplishing the role of capable baseline graphics for any use, including games.
 
So comon with the 2011, 4960 x allready been floging my QX9770 long enough , im ready to upgrade and another Extreme Edition is the way to go..
 
Boilerhog146 I believe your referring to Ivy Bridge-E, Yeah im anxious as well to see that processors performance, my friend is waiting for those to get a dual socket board with 2 of those inside.
 
Ya I "ve been an extreme edition user since the PentiumD 840 EE,then the C2D x6800 'then QX6850 ,last was The QX 9770,in 07 I think, been a while just got 16 gig Domintor GT working in the 790I Ultra last year ,skipped all of the i7"s ,untill now, ,Got an ASUS Rampage 4 Extreme ,almost bought the 3970 x untill the sudden release of Haswell.. so I'll do another shutdown or 2 give Intel a chance to get it out .and maybe a pair of TiTans, :p picking up my second 16 gig of 2133 Dominator GT on Tuesday and a Corsair Obsidian case,on a clearance sale. should be good for another 5 or 6 years happy Camping..lol
 
GhostRyder, they would have to be server chips to get 2 working or has intel decided to allow the desktop variants to interconnect. that would be cool ,but I would be utterly surprise if they did that. I remember SR2 needed to be server chips.. to run a pair together..
 
GhostRyder, they would have to be server chips to get 2 working or has intel decided to allow the desktop variants to interconnect. that would be cool ,but I would be utterly surprise if they did that. I remember SR2 needed to be server chips.. to run a pair together..
Aye, HEDT chips (Core i7) have the 2 (or 3) QPI's fused off. Xeon processors are required for 2P and 4P deployment.
 
Ya I "ve been an extreme edition user since the PentiumD 840 EE,then the C2D x6800 'then QX6850 ,last was The QX 9770,in 07 I think, been a while just got 16 gig Domintor GT working in the 790I Ultra last year ,skipped all of the i7"s ,untill now, ,Got an ASUS Rampage 4 Extreme ,almost bought the 3970 x untill the sudden release of Haswell.. so I'll do another shutdown or 2 give Intel a chance to get it out .and maybe a pair of TiTans, :p picking up my second 16 gig of 2133 Dominator GT on Tuesday and a Corsair Obsidian case,on a clearance sale. should be good for another 5 or 6 years happy Camping..lol

I have forgotten, how was the Pentium Extreme Edition 840 different from the Pentium D 840 again? I have honestly forgotten, other than being twice the price was the EE any different?

I do remember the Core 2 Extreme X6800 because I had one and it was a shocking buy. It was the exact same processor as the Core 2 Duo E6700, only difference was the multiplier which was x11 opposed to x10. Probably not worth paying three times the price. The Core 2 Duo E6850 which was released the year after was a much better processor than the X6800.

So you are running the Core 2 Extreme QX9770 now? At least that processor was slightly different to the standard models but because of that you had to pay 4x the price. By today’s standards the QX9770 is a real slug. Just my 2c worth but maybe rather than robbing yourself blind you should just upgrade once a year. In most benchmarks the age old Core i7-920 will lay waste to the QX9770 so imagine what the Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge and Haswell chips do.
 
Pentium D 840 EE had Hyper threading enabled and unlocked multyplyer.the only pentiumD to do so . 4 threads. running.and yes it was a slug ,QX6850EE, like x6800EE had unlocked multiplyer, even my QX 9770 is showing its age .but the platform still allows some decent gaming ,Hawken brings it to its knees.but I played crysis ,at ultra settings .low aa and no af .but ,yes it can play crysis,BF3 at ultra.,water cooled and overclocked .was a powerhouse in its day,pricey at 1600.00 canadian at NCIX,Unreal tournament 3 bundled,WOW! right? thats why I flogged it for so long ,wanted my moneys worth,but I guess that will never happen.must be the EPEEN .factoring in .LMAO.it will make a decent home server ,running under clocked in retirement,as my other backups have done..
 
Decent review on the haswell BTW,Given the time restraints,my friend finally upgraded his q9300 on the evga nforce 750i sli, to a 4670K on an ASUS Sabertooth Z87,With a GTX780, in the last few days.he's stunned..awesome performance in comparison..
 
As usual, the game benchmarks are backwards. Most gamers will first set a goal range for playable frame rates for a given game and then adjust graphics quality up to the maximum possible for that fps goal. A person who is playing a game with the hardware they have will adjust quality down to keep the game playable. So, a better comparison would be what graphics settings are possible for a given goal.

Of course fps is a convenient number to compare but it is meaningless for very low or very high fps since the user will adjust quality in the real world to bring fps within a useful range. The type of game will make a difference as to what fps is playable but most consider between 30 and 60 fps to be good for games with fast paced action.

So, if integrated graphics are able to get 30 fps at even low quality and resolution settings this is impressive and may be good enough for some casual gamers. Of course if they get hooked on games they are likely to upgrade to discrete graphics in order to increase quality.

When a review claims a game to be unplayable with integrated graphics some readers may assume this to be the case regardless of settings. However, with the current generation of mid range integrated intel graphics it is clear that it is at least capable of running most if not all current popular games at minimum or better quality and resolution which is a large improvement from the past. In the much older GMA series for example many games were simply unplayable regardless of settings. The fact that modern games can actually be played at reasonable fps by sacrificing quality with integrated graphics means that most new computers will be capable of playing games with limitations even before adding a discrete graphics card. Being able to play a game at minimum or low graphics is vastly superior to not being able to play the game at all.

This is a major accomplishment by both intel and AMD. Modern integrated graphics should get respect for accomplishing the role of capable baseline graphics for any use, including games.

Of course we play with the resources we have as best as possible; is just for reference purposes so you can have an idea. For example, when you play a lot a demading game from certain point and you know how it behaves through different PC configurations through the years, you know what other games can be playable on a PC that can handle that game as reference.
 
AYE! I personally would like to see an integrated gpu from intel or amd playing hawken, very demanding game. I"m using Sli'd gtx 480 with a 280 doing physx,with my qx9770, if either integrated gpu can keep up, is time to upgrade for sure,:eek:
 
Back