Forget Intel Haswell, Broadwell on the Way

Intel CEO says next-gen processors will improve battery life by 30 percent or more

I hope we are near the time of at least ULV (U series) without fans.

 

I doubt they will for near future, they have just released baytrail lines just for fanless design, for now it's in tablet.
For example like this : AnandTech | ASUS' Transformer Book T100: Atom Z3740 Inside, Available October 18th at $349

But it is a plausible action because Intel is well known for charging its customer more for minor incremental performance

 

Meet Intel's hardware level Siri-killer

Intel delays Broadwell PC chip production to early next year

 

BTW we were expecting to not even see broadwell desktops next year anyways. The laptops were the only 14nm...so sad too since laptop CPUs are just desktop ones :/

Also were we not already expecting 2014 Q1 for laptops? I thought that was expected and not 2013 Q4?

 

Chip production and chip sales are two entirely different things. Even if they start production in Q1 2014, consumers likely won't see them until late Q2 2014 or Q3 2014.

 

ah your right i had a brain fart....i keep thinking intel releases Q1...i forgot they pushed all lunches 6 months...lazy *mumbles*

 

first news I kept thinking siri is coming to the macs

2nd news is disappointing, if Im not mistaken haswell started production in october or earlier this will mean a very convoluted launch or intel is going to keep pushing towards late q3 launches

 

I hope it's Q2, and early Q2 at that. I'm ready for a thin and light ultrabook with serious CPU and GPU power coming from my old Sandy Bridge 15" MBP.

The saddest part is, I don't know how much CPU performance will increase over my current 2.0GHz i7.

 

The performance increase will be tangible, but we can't predict that yet for actual workflows.

What we (almost) know for sure is that the performance per watt will blow away the SNB (3 gen old) platform easily.

Especially on idle/low power usage modes.

 

Still waiting for haswell hq models to come out. I want to test one and see scalability and TDP range. That will be awesome for an ultra book. Especially broadwell version will be awesome

 

they are out and basically so far no one is using them except 1 dell and 2-3 msi

 

I upgraded my laptop to Haswell, because frankly, my single-core Conroe (65nm) wasn't cutting it anymore.

But Intel, you still haven't convinced me to upgrade my Nehalem desktop. Lower TDP means nothing to me on the desktop.

 

absurdly more performance does

 

the high end models no...only the U and super low end....er ULV. I want the 4850 or whatever

 

My OC'd i3-550 still outperforms the Haswell i3's, and the fact that the new ones are stupidly hard to overclock doesnt help.

Broadcom will probably be another 5% perf. increment L0L.

Only advantage i would see upgrading would be to an i5 or Xeon 1220/1230. And even there, with Next-gen coming out, AMD seems to be a bit more promising, especially if they would improve single-core performance.

 

lol...you are talking out of a hole in your body but not the one on your face.....or i hope it isn't on your face....most of what you said was absurd :/

find me a graph showing any of that... you won't. IB was a good performance boost over SB...nothing great but it wasn't meant to be. and an I3 550 vs even a haswell i3....haswell smokes it...seriously everything you said was ridiculous. my 920xm at 4GHz can't even touch my IB CPU. Post a intel burn test of your CPU and i'll post my 3720qm with no OC i bet mine will beat it....if i could over clock it would smash it.

NM you will probably beat my laptop 3720qm....i am throttling like made. I am rocking 3.2GHz out of 3.8GHz lol. Crap heatsink in the R4

66.2881 GFLOPS I know i have hit 72 or 76 and that was throttling too.

Assuming perfect scaling and my CPU not throttling from heat/TDP i would get 78.71711875 GFLOPS at 3.8GHz.

You'll probably beat it though assuming you have some 6GHz over clock. but 5% hahahahahhahah


Also it is broadwell not broadcom....I totally missed that. Amazing how the brain just makes assumptions in reading

 

You sound like you are really full of yourself. Could you be any more childish?

I don't think my 3 year old dual core can go against a quad. Clearly a 3720QM is an i7, i'm talking i3's. If you had an i3 (no turbo) 3xxxM then feel free to bench me.


And an OC'd i3-550 smokes the i3-2100. Possibly the i3-3220 too. Should tie or beat slightly a 4130, into something that is clearly not using AVX or new instructions ofc.

But if you want, i can pitch my laptop's 4700MQ against yours. And if your CPU wins, then we can say that Haswell offers no significant performance over IB. Now go back to your cave, keyboard warrior.

By broadcom i clearly ment broadwell, i'm shuffling 3 forums right now.

About the 5% thing, i'm talking about similar models. Whether you like it or not, the 3630QM and 4700MQ have a 5-8% difference in CPU power. Same goes for the 4770k vs 3770k, or i5-i3 equivalents.

 

things the same die size always have little change. point is saying an overclocked 32 nm to a 14nm CPU would have little gain is just stupid. Even 32nm to a 22nm will have a ton of gain....i still stand by your statements were dumb

 

things the same die size always have little change. point is saying an overclocked 32 nm to a 14nm CPU would have little gain is just stupid. Even 32nm to a 22nm will have a ton of gain....i still stand by your statements were dumb

 

I do agree there is maybe a 25-30% difference between Haswell and Nehalem (clock for clock, same amount of cores), but when the latter overclocks better and can reach the performance of the new one, why upgrade? For a lower TDP?

Like i said, the only reason i would want to upgrade ATM is to increase my amount of cores. The i7-875k is looking very attractive right now, considering i can get one for only 110$ and i don't have to buy a new mobo. For that price, i would get some crummy i3 or pentium if i were to upgrade to Haswell, no motherboard included.

As for broadwell, we shall see. But my bets are that Intel will pull off another Haswell. Face it, Ivy offered barely any performance over SB, and Haswell offered barely any performance over IB.

My statements aren't dumb. You are being ignorant.

 

It's not always about clock speed, Haswell brought some new instructions to the architecture.

Linpack on Haswell

Some throttling here, should really be hitting 160GFLOPS

Smaller die means smaller mass so things will heat up and cool down quicker. It'll be interesting to see what power reduction can be had with 14nm at full performance, reduced clocks or another hot chip?

 

did they use the crap tim on haswell? i never remember hearing about it? Also a decent heatsink solves that. My 3770 runs cold as can be with a meh heat sink at stock. Like 30-40c on load some ridiculously low stuff. Anyways just saying.

 

Jobine unless you've got your Nehalem i3 at well over 4 GHz (pfft...yeah right) you're not gonna be getting anywhere near a Haswell i3 with its already 40% clock-for-clock improvement not to mention being faster in other areas. If you need a refresher course on just how big Nehalem to Sandy Bridge was dig up the old reviews and look at the i5-2500K and i7-2600K easily beat the then-$1000 i7-990X in games and single-threaded benchmarks and even some multi-threaded ones. And Haswell is two generations of small improvements, but improvements nonetheless, over Sandy Bridge.

 

yeah talking about the non U cpus here, kevin already pooped my party showing 2-3 msi notebooks with it, and I know dell is going to use the 47w dual cores in the xps 15

jobine, reality disagrees with you

for one, I dont think you remember the backlash that was overclocking nehalem, then we moved to the venerable 2500k that everybody oh so loved despite having the same limitations, but it was actually a great arch, now that we have the same control from back them that we lost, people complain is too hard to oc because pumping absurd amounts of voltage is the healthy thing to do

 

wait what? the 47w quads with iris are out?

 

Being a mobile CPU there is no IHS. Temps are okay, the throttling I'm experiencing looks to be power derived for some unknown at this time reason. Overclocking on the laptop is limited to just the extra 2 overclocking bins due to the way it's configured. Maybe I might look into that later on.

I usually upgrade a laptop once every 5 or 6 years so try to look for something that will last that time so will miss out on Broadwell and others. The small low power factor does look tempting but for low power stuff I use my mobile phone but need the laptop for more intensive work. Just upgraded from core2 P8400. That one was hardware overclocked from 2.26GHz to 3GHz to give a bit more performance and lasted all this time.

Given what they have done with integration into the CPU over the years it really is amazing what Intel have achieved. I liked Lynfield when it came out and still is good for a lot of people today, all comes down to what each person wants really. Software generally takes years to catch up with the new tech anyway.

 

i was referring about the desktops -_-

 

I know, but just making a point about the mobile CPU since I was showing results for a 4700MQ on a laptop forum. FWIW I also have an IVB DT 3770k and run that at 4.7GHz with acceptable temps. I can't answer for Gen 4 DT CPU as I do not have one.

 

i only have the 3770... i wish it was a k CPU but i got the desktop for like 450 or 500 from some kid. It retailed at About 900 at the time granted i would consider it a 700 dollar PC since it was not the best built PC by price per performance but her i got it for like 450

 

they have been for for 1 or 2 months

currently the only model that I know that ships is the clevo w7450

I thought you were talking about the dual cores, those are also out, but I think they use the 4600 and thus not gt3, not really sure about the igpu config though

 

Don't you mean the W740SU?

 

you are correct, I confused the numbers

 

Intel’s 14nm Broadwell GPU takes shape, indicates major improvements over Haswell | ExtremeTech

 

So in other words the CPU will have maybe another 5% performance over Haswell?

Yawn.

 

so somewhere between xbox 360/ xbox one interesting.* An Iris SOC in an ultrabook is seeming more and more interesting.

*obviously intel soc is probably as strong as an xbox one (hell is it even stronger than the jaguar?) but counting the poor optimizations of PC vs console somewhere between seems reasonable to me at least. It still amazes me how good some of the PS2 games looked at the end of its life. The actual hardware of that thing was crap at the time when xbox 360 and such came out but the graphics they still pushed on the PS2 hardware were impressive.

you people are clueless Intel has never actually released a 5% increase. The lowest was a 10-15% increase. as far as i can remember for the entire mobile i7 history.

It still amazes me in todays world how people still spew crap when a 5 min google shows that is complete bullocks

http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Intel-Haswell-Processors.93189.0.html
http://www.notebookcheck.net/Review-Intel-Ivy-Bridge-Quad-Core-Processors.73624.0.html

 

From the link you posted:

"Is this a big change or an unnecessary update? In consideration of the performance, some might doubt that Intel's new architecture is a success. The performance gain is surely too small when running existing software to justify migrating from a Sandy Bridge or an Ivy Bridge CPU. At least this is true for the quad cores reviewed here."

 

your quote is irrelevant because if you read the article no where in there does any upgrade only give you a 5% or less boost (average) They range from 10-15% overall so quite being intellectually dishonest

I can be intellectually dishonest too.

26% faster!!!!!!

 

And this is the exact reason why I usually recommend the latest (Intel) platform: the improvements are real and easily visible in my day to day use of different systems (mine and my clients).

AMD may be stuck with a two steps forward and one step back cadence, but Intel has given real and observable improvements (consistently) since 2006...

And I'll stress once again that improvements are not limited to simply raw performance (at any cost): but also to power efficiency, less heat output (for same amount of work done) and phenomenal increases in battery life improvements (at idle) with Haswell, that will only continue with Broadwell.

For a very long time, Intel is showing the world how to do tech right. Whining about 'only' 5% increases (which even then are equivalent to whole cpu increases not to long ago) is just sticking your head in the sand - not to mention having total disregard for the truth ('truth' = real world use - not benchmarks, in my case).

And if your use case doesn't show these and other improvements from the latest Intel platforms; you're not pushing the system hard enough (or, you're using a brand/chassis that limits the true potential because of BIOS, thermal or other restrictions).


...

 

You can't quite compare that either, because clock speeds are not the same. What you need to do is normalize the % based on clock speed. But to your point, it would support your argument more since Ivy Bridge are ~ 200MHz faster clocks than Haswell, so slow down the Ivy Bridge 200MHz and the differential will be more substantial.

Despite what the % improvement in benchmarks are, they really aren't a very tangible increase from one generation to the next unless you are a heavy user of encoding, compiling, or compressing data very frequently.

 

but still a 5% change is still a complete damn lie.....that crap keeps being said in these threads even though a 5 min google has the proof that it is a bald face lie and we keep rehashing this every 3 months that the lowest global CPU improvement was a ~10% increase and that doesn't include all the other crap. my 920xm idles at 20-25w TDP lol (i think that includes me trying to throttle it...hard to remember was a long time ago). my 3720xm idles at 6-15w. I can't wait to see what broadwell brings with independent voltages on a lower process.

 

A 10% increase is not much. If I told my dad it was 10% faster, he would say "So?".

 

again 10% on average and that is accurate for the smallest increase,which was on IB-HW. not a whole lot can be done on the same process with keeping the same TDP...good god what do you expect miracles? Plus most was focused on GPU side which EVERYONE knew was happening so just stop trolling already.

Also how about you tell him all the other increases as well? because CPU only is not the only important increase....as tiller said. -_- *beats face into desk*

 

Personally I've upgraded my laptop pretty much with every Intel iteration since Core 2 and each subsequent bump was not that significant. If you look at Nehalem vs Haswell, sure you will see an improvement. But on an annual basis you will not. I do a small amount video encoding, so for me the extra few minutes saved really isn't noticed. General computing and gaming it isn't CPU critical either.

 

HTWingNut,

I've said it before: we're at the opposite ends of the sensitivity scale (when it comes to noticing performance differences) - how I notice it is that I either complete projects faster, and/or, I can play with (more) different versions of each image I'm editing/preparing for print.

I agree that we get used to the new 'standard' really, really fast (and therefore, it doesn't feel faster anymore). But I just have to jump to a workstation I haven't upgraded yet and I cringe with the 'only' 5% drop in performance (and you know, it always happens that I 'have' to use the older workstation when the deadline is 'yesterday').


Take care.

 

i live for better CPU performance and any boost for me is noticeable because so many programs i use are only single threaded. Many games i play are single threaded and opera is single threaded and opera eats crap and i have to kill it 1-3 times a day (sometimes less if i am easy on my browsing) but it is the only decent browser for me. Just glad i found the 64 bit version again....i can let opera eat up 10 GB of ram ^^

If every program was properly multithreaded i wouldn't have had a night and day experience from my 920XM to 3720qm. Even my 920xm at 3.33GHz going to IB was HUGE because of single thread was like a 50% boost. i don't have opera or Tor freezing every 10 mins when i opera or close 15 tabs.

Currently i am "light browsing" with ONLY 1 opera window with 23 tabs. I can have anywhere from 2-3 windows with up to 100 tabs if i get crazy with stuff. Usually happens when i do research projects and get bored and check the news.....tabs explode. Opera eats one whole thread which is max it can do, which is really annoying. I still haven't heard why a program can only use one thread and not one core (2 threads) It uses only 13% CPU and erks me.

I also have 3 chrome windows open right now with probably 20 tabs with mozilla with 1 tab.

I am interested in how much better the single thread performance of Broadwell will be "crosses fingers" I would love to get an ultrabook that wouldn't eat crap and die on me.


EDIT: i have no idea what i would have done back 5-10 years ago if i have this type of browsing style -_- It is largely because a million times more useful info is now on the interwebs


oh also dont get me started on how the single thread turbo boost is a complete lie...doesn't work. My 920xm and 3720qm will never go more than 1 multiplier higher than 4th core limit. I tried to force an example of it working like 38 20 20 20 or 27 15 15 15....what do i get 21 at best and 16 at best respectively -_- *beats head against desk* *repeatedly*

I was so exited for that back in Nehalem time period :/

 

Opera don't have some kind of multi process mode?

 

nope one thread -_- Figure they would of at least made each tab a different process like chrome -_- can't be that hard. One tab would be hard pressed to use a whole thread

 

I've said this before, but...

am i the only one here with never more than 5 tabs open at a time?

 

yes!

It takes too long to find it in bookmarks so if it something i'll need in the next month or so i keep it open hence the 20 constant tabs. I need to get into the groove of using sessions more. I used to use sessions a lot but stopped....thats probably because my computer can now handle those 20-100 tabs ^-^ I have like 5k bookmarks so i tend to leave things open when i might need them or also to keep reminding me of something that i was working on

 

I though the whole point of SSD's were so that people could shut down their PC's when not in use.

LOLNOPE.