1. TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users. Ask a question and give support. Join the community here.
    TechSpot is dedicated to computer enthusiasts and power users.
    Ask a question and give support.
    Join the community here, it only takes a minute.
    Dismiss Notice

Intel details new enthusiast CPUs, including Broadwell, Haswell-E, Devil's Canyon

By Scorpus · 28 replies
Mar 19, 2014
Post New Reply
  1. At GDC 2014, Intel has unleashed a flurry of news relating to a range of their upcoming desktop-class CPUs, from Broadwell to high-performance Haswell-E and even new Pentium processors.

    Read more
    misor likes this.
  2. misor

    misor TS Evangelist Posts: 1,397   +303

    Wow at intel: the unlocked Pentium anniversary edition is enticing.
  3. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Evangelist Posts: 611   +94

    Great.. now TIM has become another feature for them to charge you more. it used to be that you buy a CPU, it's a no brainer to get a properly soldered die. now you have to pay extra for an upgraded TIM, not even soldered.

    try buying a car with only rims but no tires. this is what happens when there's lack of competition in the CPU market.
    Jad Chaar and p3ngwin like this.
  4. DKRON

    DKRON TS Guru Posts: 569   +26

    I was generally happy when they said "coming out mid next year" because I had more time to get the money together for the next build and suddenly its this year....great lol now to find 6K in the next few months
    petcamel likes this.
  5. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,840   +1,268

    Really? And when were the prices announced?
    FWIW, I think you'll find that Intel's prices have been pretty static over the past few generations. Since the Core I "K" nomenclature debuted
    Well, get used to it. Since AMD are also now using TIM, it seems to be that solder is passing out of fashion. Look on the bright side, at least de-lidding is easier
    Odd analogy. A car without tyres doesn't run (at least well). A TIM'med CPU runs fine- just not a cool as it could with a soldered IHS...bit then I don't know what heat transference characteristics this new TIM has. Maybe you could share.

    FWIW, I wouldn't be at all surprised if the new TIM was in fact a PCMA ( phase change metal alloy), since it is getting good results with existing Intel CPUs.
    Last edited: Mar 19, 2014
  6. GhostRyder

    GhostRyder TS Evangelist Posts: 2,151   +588

    I've been waiting for more news on the haswell-e series and I can safely say I know what I'm purchasing.

    I hope msi will do another one of those msi Big Bang edition motherboards with the X99 chipset.

    I'm curious about this pentium anniversary edition. Sounds kinda cool actually especially depending on how well it clocks.

    On the matter of the devils canyon chips...why are the unlocked chips not like that to begin with... Should just come like this instead of releasing 2 different versions, that's what made the 2600k such an awesome chip.
  7. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,840   +1,268

    Budget orientated (bargain basement pricing) of salvage parts. Intel putting the screws to AMD's A4/A6 Kaveri line up by the looks of it.
    What do you mean? Why are they moving to an improved TIM? ('cause the one they were using was garbage, and I'm guessing PCMA is now doable on the assembly line), Why did they move from solder to TIM ( cost reduction), or why do they have locked and unlocked CPUs? ( silicon variance won't allow all chips to OC safely within stock Vcore specification - Intel allow a warranty claim (singular per sale) for chip failure from overclocking. Chips locked down past turbo are favoured by OEMs)
  8. GhostRyder

    GhostRyder TS Evangelist Posts: 2,151   +588

    More of why are they not using the solder or improved TIM to begin with. I know improvements down the line always happen as tech gets better of course but my wonder is why re-release a better overclocking version of the same chip instead of just make the K unlocked series as it is the top clockers like they used to (Of course they might give those chips a better base and turbo but I guess we will have to wait and see). I know the purpose was cost reduction but the point is they have made the Ivy-Bridge and Haswell series of chips very poor overclockers only in terms of the heat (Still chips can be golden or bad but you get what I Mean).

    This is why I loved the E series so much because they stuck with the solder on those chips which gave them better temperature control and overclocking range from the people ive seen clocking these chips.
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  9. TomSEA

    TomSEA TechSpot Chancellor Posts: 3,129   +1,635

    Been waiting for this to do my next "from scratch" upgrade. Now I want to see the same from the GPU side - whatever the next family of nVidia will be.
  10. GhostRyder

    GhostRyder TS Evangelist Posts: 2,151   +588

    8XX series with GM 'Maxwell' is what that seems to be since they already released the 8XXm series.
    TomSEA likes this.
  11. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Evangelist Posts: 611   +94

    really...? ... you're taking my statement WAYY to literal dude. call it get less for the same, or pay the same for less whatever you want. truth is, they're giving you less than what they used to while the price of processor is only going higher. you're comparing prices of CPU in the past 4 years, while I am talking in terms of general history of CPU in the past 10~15 or more years. you used to be able to get a high end cpu for way less than you pay these days, now you're even getting one without properly soldered die.

    I will not get use to it. this is what happens when there's less competition in the ring. they start cutting down on the material, and use lesser material while steadily charge you more.
  12. Crap. I was going out today to build a i7 4770k (hopefully at 5ghz) to replace my i7 2600. Now I'm not sure if I should just wait?? :(

    -Jamie M.
  13. GhostRyder

    GhostRyder TS Evangelist Posts: 2,151   +588

    If you want to hit 5ghz threshold, I would wait because unless you hit the one magical chip out of 100k (Rough guess not factual) chips that can overclock to that threshold. Mostly heat limitations are what hold these back as it is so if your trying to get beyond 4.5+ Spectrum your going to have to wait.
  14. Lionvibez

    Lionvibez TS Evangelist Posts: 1,477   +644

    umm why do you need to spend 6k on a new build? Seems abit excessive no?
  15. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 11,513   +5,077

    4k for labor (aka: R&D).
  16. Railman

    Railman TS Booster Posts: 708   +101

    If you take inflation into account the price of CPUs has actually dropped in price in real terms. When I was going though some old documents I found out that I spent over £1,000 for a Pentium 75 system. With inflation that could be around £3,000 in todays value.
    cliffordcooley and dividebyzero like this.
  17. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Evangelist Posts: 611   +94

    inflation is part of the equation, however, not the sole determining factor.

    inflation rate from 2001 to 2014 is 32% according to USInflation Rate calculation. speaking from experience, you could purchase an upper mid range chip back then for $150 give or take, factoring in inflation, that's $198, a far cry from the typical $330 you would pay today for a ball park upper mid range chip.

    the reason your statement holds value is because PC sales and cost of PC in general has been steadily on a decline. but CPU itself has been on a steady rise. ever since post A64 era, there really isn't anyone giving intel anything sweat for their money. naturally if you're the only biggest game in town, you have the leverage on pricing. just because it's the way it is, it doesn't mean consumers have to like it. which is why I am hoping more competition can spur up in this industry to drive the price back down.

    EDIT: just for kicks.. I went back into my newegg purchase history back all the way to 2003, since that's the oldest newegg has record of. back then I purchased an Athlon XP 2100+ thouroughalbred for $106, the equivalent Pentium 4 2.1ghz was slightly higher at $120. factoring in inflation, consumers should be paying $136~$150 for the same ball park. that gives you some perspective, how much cash Intel is raking in lately. :)
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  18. Jad Chaar

    Jad Chaar Elite Techno Geek Posts: 6,482   +978

    Haswell-E looks enticing. As for the updated Haswell, curious how much more performance they can squeeze out with the updated thermal interface.
  19. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,840   +1,268

    Nah. You're looking at the past through rose tinted glasses.
    Just comparing the upper mainstream segment (before Intel bifurcated the product line between two sockets) from ten years ago you'd be looking at a Prescott 4E 3.4 at $417 (the P4 Extreme Edition ran $999)....and fifteen years ago Intel debuted the Katmai Pentium III - the cheapest of which was $496.
    A 2.1GHz Pentium 4 ? Unlikely....very very unlikely.
    In any case, a low spec ~2GHz P4 in 2003 ( a 2.0A Northwood 130nm) is pretty far down the model hierarchy, and to find an analogue within the Sandy/Ivy/Haswell SKU lineup you'd need to look at the lower tier i3 family.
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  20. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Evangelist Posts: 611   +94

    not accurate, Prescott E extreme edition was an special limited edition. it was consider top of the line. if you're comparing upper mid range to upper mid range, it would be P4 3ghz vs AMD's Athlon 64 3000+, which was about $150 for the 3000+ and $180 for the P4 3ghz. factoring in infaltion that's $198 in today's term. top of the line extreme edition will always be prices way beyond most doesn't matter how you slice it and what year you compare it. but in terms of what most people would purchase in the mid to upper mid range, it's a clear picture.
  21. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Evangelist Posts: 611   +94

    not at all, back then Intel's release was not by generation, but relied solely on clock speed. so 2.1ghz was released one year, 6 months later 2.2 was released, and 2.3 so on and so forth. so back when 2.1 was widely available with 2.3 and 2.4 on the horizon, 2.1 was considered the affordable upper mid range choice. I know this because I remember debating about CPU choice with my fellow co-working while shopping for either a Athlon XP 2100+ or an equivalent Intel P4 2.1.

    in today's term, i3 would be considered what the top speed Celeron was back in the 2000 era.

    not to mention back in the days, you could wait until prices bottom out to snatch up a great deal. now a days Intel would phase out a processor before they would ever consider lowering the price.
    Last edited: Mar 20, 2014
  22. DKRON

    DKRON TS Guru Posts: 569   +26

    Nah just chuck in a couple GTX780's and a few 1TB Evo's and a $1000 cpu (est, hoping the hexi-core cpu's will be cheaper due to the octo-core ones being the most powerfull now ) will add up to well near 6K without breaking a sweat
  23. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,840   +1,268

    And what you're forgetting about is that AMD and Intel were locked in core frequency race, so instead of generational changes, you were looking at model additions on a monthly (sometimes weekly) scale with the new additions cratering prices of the previous "new" models. In effect, you could buy a six month old CPU for the price of a modern arch 2-3 generation old processor, but strictly speaking, making a new-for-new product comparison you weren't appreciably better off then than you are now, it's just that now, Intel controls its retail pricing more strictly. You want a good deal on a previous gen product then you have to dive into a less regulated market (eBay, asia/pacific wholesale/etail)
    That's not how it works. Celeron is typified by reduced cache and slower interconnect frequency - then as now.
    And that is the only difference between then and now. Obsolescence due to accelerated product (SKU) cycles is the only thing that differentiates now from the previous decade...but I was actually making a comparison between product at introduction.

    So where's this P4 2.1 (the link also serves to illustrate the product line up changes/introduction) ?
  24. howzz1854

    howzz1854 TS Evangelist Posts: 611   +94

    you're talking in terms of face value, while I am talking about real market price when those CPUs were widely available. Intel were notorious known for playing the face value game for release and rapidly drop the price as life cycle goes. now a days, you're just paying a plain high price that's locked in by intel even when the chip is near phasing out. doesn't change the fact that then I could purchase an equivalent chip for less than I do today. I lived in that time and purchased a lot of CPUs in my life time, and can honestly say in comparison to today's CPU, consumers are paying a lot more than what they used to. now go ahead and dig up more links, you seem to have A LOT of free time to respond to each and everyone's post one by one and micro analyzing it to the grain . seeing that I merely referred to intel's release based on clock speed from recollection. I was off on the exact number, but doesn't change the fact that intel's release were based on 100~200mhz step increase rather than today's generation release. Celeron has always been watered down version of what's available at the time. to compare P4 2ghz to a i3 in today's term is a bit of far fetch consider P4 2ghz was considered mid to upper mid when AXP 2100 and 2400 were equally good value but out performs. and they were no sloucher. not far off from the top of line performer at the time.

    go ahead, have the last word, you seem to have a lot of time and nothing else to do than analyzing every word and digging for arguments. frankly I got another meeting to attend. good day.
  25. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,840   +1,268

    Well that depends on geographic distribution areas and catchment- as I noted in my previous post. Intel doesn't lower prices often- or very far on midrange (and lower) parts, and if you're shopping at large (r)etail outlets in the U.S. and Europe then they are tied to Intel's whims. Doesn't mean that deals weren't/aren't available elsewhere.
    Since I live in a geographically disadvantaged area ( 15% sales tax, last stop before Antarctica), I generally intensively trawl internationally for hardware. It doesn't take much to find a reasonable deal if you take the blinkers off. Also allows me to pass on some savings to friends and family that also won't look too far afield when buying electronics.
    Congratulations on being special. You are the first person I've ever heard of that has purchased a lot of computer hardware over the years.
    No, but if I'm investing time posting I like to take the time to verify the facts beforehand - call it a quirk...such as
    I think you'll find that the Extreme Editions were Gallatin Pentium's not Prescott, and the 3.4GHz CPU (the $417 one) I mentioned was a Prescott 4E model which isn't an Extreme Ed. CPU. I only referenced the EE's $999 price as an indicator that the Prescott's weren't the top of the line. But it's only facts, right?
    OK. Advice taken. Enjoy your meeting, I hear those 12 steppers are a great way to meet new friends.;)
    Last edited: Mar 21, 2014

Add your comment to this article

You need to be a member to leave a comment. Join thousands of tech enthusiasts and participate.
TechSpot Account You may also...