Intel Haswell CPU lineup leaked online, led by flagship Core i7-4770K

By Shawn Knight ยท 42 replies
Dec 12, 2012
Post New Reply
  1. It has come to our attention that Intel will be releasing 14 different Haswell desktop processors spanning the Core i5 and Core i7 brands next year. The next generation chips will use a new socket so if you are looking...

    Read more
  2. slh28

    slh28 TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,706   +172

    Same clock speed as the 3770K, same cores/threads, higher TDP, wow that really is disappointing. I don't know the exact percentage but very, very few people will care about the improved IGP on this chip.
  3. Per Hansson

    Per Hansson TS Server Guru Posts: 1,957   +214

    slh28, well keep in mind that IPC improvements between generations can be large, just because the new CPU has higher TDP but the same number of cores and threads does not mean it will not be significantly faster.
    And also the number of end-users that actually use the GPU are probably in a large majority towards those that don't, sure those numbers are reversed for enthusiasts but atleast I am glad Intel finally are pushing for good integrated graphics!
    I'll probably wait for the successor for LGA 2011 (If there is one in the not too distant future?)
    gamoniac likes this.
  4. Blue Falcon

    Blue Falcon TS Addict Posts: 161   +51


    I am not sure what you were expecting? With little competition from AMD, Intel will maximize their yields to reduce costs/improve profitability. Not ramping up clocks will help to achieve this goal. This is why it's so important that we have a competitive AMD. Otherwise we end up with a slowed pace of progress in the CPU space, as we have been seeing since Core i7 920 days frankly. There will still be an IPC increase of about 10%. Were you expecting a processor 20-30% faster than IVB 3770k? There also shouldn't be a material decrease in power consumption since Haswell uses a more complex GPU and is still manufactured on the same 22nm node as IVB is.

    Speaking of the original 1st generation Core i7, if someone plays games with a single flagship GPU, if a gamer overclocks them to 3.75ghz+, they are still not a bottleneck in modern games:,7.html

    That means for anyone with a Core i7 920 @ 3.8-4.0ghz, there is little reason to upgrade outside of motherboard features and reduction of power consumption in overclocked states. That's not necessarily a bad thing as CPUs today last longer than ever. That $ can be spent on a larger/faster SSD or a GPU upgrade.

    For anyone rocking i5-2500k/2600k/3570k/3770k @ 4.5ghz+, Haswell will obviously be a waste of $ performance wise. Of course if one resells his/her parts and minimizes the upgrade costs, it's still fun to play with new hardware :)
    SantistaUSA and H3llion like this.
  5. H3llion

    H3llion TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,376   +286

    Will AMD ever recover? Id like to see them push their CPUs more then they are doing now, they are really slacking and Intel will be/are already taking advantage of this ... I want more CPU breakthroughs not these "little" improvements each year.

    I wonder in 10-15 years when other forms of computing arrive (Optical / Quantum) if there will be much competition or Intel still being the "top dog"...
  6. captainawesome

    captainawesome TS Guru Posts: 428   +44

    I hope Haswell is terrible. But that's mainly because I just bought a 3570-k :D
    Oh and AMD needs a break from this onslaught from Intel.
  7. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 9,715   +3,696

    Yep, I'm happy with my 2600K but that does not mean I am not enthusiastic about building a new machine. :) Even if Microsoft has slowed down because of AMD's lack in performance, that doesn't irritate me in the least. And since everyone has praised AMD for their IGP performance, I can only imagine that Intel is taking this opportunity to close the gap between them and AMD.
  8. slh28

    slh28 TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,706   +172

    Yup, totally agree with everything you said, it's just disappointing that Intel are holding back due to the lack of competition. I'm pretty sure this could have been a 6 core/12 thread 4Ghz chip overclockable to 5Ghz (with the IHS issue sorted).

    I've held off for the last 2 generations, still looking for a decent reason to upgrade :( Was expecting a bit more from Haswell being a "tock" and all.
  9. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 2,040   +678

    Blue Falcon said:

    I am not sure what you were expecting? With little competition from AMD, Intel will maximize their yields to reduce costs/improve profitability. Not ramping up clocks will help to achieve this goal.

    LMAO. You actually think anything has changed at Intel with a chip that has been in development for the past 2 or so years, because AMD said they were bowing out less than 6 months ago? Oh god....
  10. hahahanoobs

    hahahanoobs TS Evangelist Posts: 2,040   +678

    Slh28 said:

    I'm pretty sure this could have been a 6 core/12 thread 4Ghz chip overclockable to 5Ghz (with the IHS issue sorted).

  11. Darth Shiv

    Darth Shiv TS Evangelist Posts: 1,811   +472

    Do you think Intel has thought AMD has been a threat for the last 3+ years? Oh god...
  12. amstech

    amstech IT Overlord Posts: 1,936   +1,101

    Has Intel been milking it the last 3 generations of was Bloomfield just that good?
  13. EEatGDL

    EEatGDL TS Evangelist Posts: 568   +241

    Slh28 said:

    "I'm pretty sure this could have been a 6 core/12 thread 4Ghz chip overclockable to 5Ghz (with the IHS issue sorted)."

    Again with the GHz myth? Dude, I thought we'd passed that stage; there are other parts of the microprocessor architecture that can be improved to gain performance than just adding more pipeline stages, higher clock speed or more cores.

    *Pentium's philosophy of higher and higher clock -> FAIL, power wall
    *Intel's super-deep pipeline -> FAIL, non-linear program execution -lots of jumps- loosing in performance
    *Putting more cores without other intercommunication improvements -> FAIL, potential bottleneck if not handled well

    In most reviews here we've seen that overclocking in games will barely get you 1-3 FPS in average; and in just computing, DRAM and SSD are still too slow for the processor to get a better performance by just improving the same processor. Big cache helps, but with a big word size it will be full pretty quickly and seem smaller to the processor once the processor needs a new instruction or data that's not in the cache. So they have to hit other areas without wildly just adding and making faster.
  14. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,264

    3770K TDP is 95 watts, so a 11 watt (or 11.5%) reduction in TDP while adding a sizeable bump in IGP performance. Whether people care about IGP is really neither here nor there in this context, and if integrated graphics is something "very few people will care about" , then someone should tell AMD they're heading down a cul-de-sac. There are plenty of examples of OEM prebuilts that ship with IGP as either default or sole graphics option...not everyone will need to play games at HD/HD+ resolutions with 8xMSAA enabled....assuming they game at all, and as such, I'd note the Core i5 4570T (see the link in the above article) which manages to pack a 2.9G base clock with 3.6G turbo into a 35 watt TDP. I'd call that reasonably impressive all things considered.
    Yes and no. The lack of substantial increases seen in some games...not all I might add
    [​IMG] generally down to poor/unoptimized coding- generally CPU <---> RAM and/or CPU<--->GPU and /or GPU <--> VRAM subsystems. Core frequency generally scales better with code optimized for a particular setup. Remove graphics from the equation, and optimize for bandwidth, and you'll see why Power7 is already at 4+GHz (up to 5.2GHz for the z196) with an eye on 5.5GHz for the zNext variety.
  15. St1ckM4n

    St1ckM4n TS Evangelist Posts: 2,922   +630

    Well, this is definitely disappointing as there is no real 'tock'. My memory is bad, but wasn't this supposed to be a die shrink..?

    It's to be expected, though. No pressure, and no requirement for better CPU's. I believe when the next-gen consoles ship, we will see a better increase.
  16. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 9,715   +3,696

    No the die shrink was Ivy from Sandy. It's now time for the architectural change on the same die.
    St1ckM4n likes this.
  17. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,264

    Nope. The next die shrink is Broadwell (14nm). 22nm was introduced with Ivy Bridge. Even Intel aren't rich enough to justify a single CPU series per process node.
    EDIT: cliffordcooley the ninja !
    Pretty much. The percentage of software the fully utilizes four threads on the currently available architectures isn't exactly staggering, and we're not quite overrun with programs that take advantage of the instruction sets introduced in the last couple of years (AVX, FMA3, XOP etc.) least gaming is looking forward with the predominance of D3D 11....umm
  18. Adhmuz

    Adhmuz TechSpot Paladin Posts: 1,828   +633

    This is where I get to laugh hysterically, I've been rocking a 920 @ 4.2 GHz since the year it came out, I guess 2009? And have yet to need to change anything, even my two 5870's are holding steady. I use to think of upgrading with every new generation of CPU, but this seems pointless now. Almost as if the industry is at a point where the technology at hand isn't being fully utilized so why make anything significantly faster. Of course with respect to scientific research which always needs more processing power and servers. The end user however, unless your a super enthusiast, won't even see the difference. Also worth bringing up, wasn't ddr4 suppose to be brought to the table with Haswell? Until that I still see no reason to upgrade, I think I said the same thing last year when the last "New" I Series came out.
  19. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,264

    Haswell-E/-EN/-EP - the HEDT/Server parts. DDR4 for mainstream desktop isn't scheduled until Broadwell (Haswell's successor). DDR4 isn't that big a deal in any case when you have DDR3-2800/-3000 kits now available.
  20. cliffordcooley

    cliffordcooley TS Guardian Fighter Posts: 9,715   +3,696

    Sorry about that DBZ!!
    Lets just say I was supporting your comment before it was made. :D
    dividebyzero likes this.
  21. Darth Shiv

    Darth Shiv TS Evangelist Posts: 1,811   +472

    Would be nice if they made the stock mem speeds a bit higher then! 1600MHz is a bit dated.... run 1333 mem at 1333 if put in etc like they do for slower modules at the moment anyway.
  22. St1ckM4n

    St1ckM4n TS Evangelist Posts: 2,922   +630

    Thanks for the info guys. 14nm Boradwell with DDR4 is probably where I'll be upgrading, then. I'm still on i7 920 too, and it's a beast. :)
  23. Per Hansson

    Per Hansson TS Server Guru Posts: 1,957   +214

    Is there any info available yet for a timeframe when the enthusiast parts in this range will be released? (Successor to LGA 2011)
  24. dividebyzero

    dividebyzero trainee n00b Posts: 4,891   +1,264

    Per Hansson likes this.
  25. Archean

    Archean TechSpot Paladin Posts: 5,690   +96

    +1 to Per's comments on better IGP.

    I think DBZ has already 'taken care' of misunderstandings regarding the new architecture, just to add to that, I believe Haswell is targeted more towards improving parallelism, hence the TSX implementation / improvements in Speculative multithreading (SpMT uses multiple cores to accelerate a single thread by speculatively splitting it into multiple threads that can be executed in parallel) etc. Also add improvements to BP into equation, which probably also means it will handle misses a lot faster. So to sum it up, for someone with an IVB/SB system, Haswell may be not bring huge performance boost, but it will be a reasonable one.

    I think the addition of MOVBE (for storage and networking applications) to Haswell is interesting, probably meaning Intel is seriously aiming for mobile sector with Haswell <=10W SoCs (e.g. in tablets). So with overall improvements in core architecture + GPU, Haswell will be far more potent solution for tablets when compared to ARM SoCs. Personally, I'd prefer performance over battery life any day, so an Haswell based tablet with 5 hours battery is a reasonable package IMHO :).
    dividebyzero likes this.

Similar Topics

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...