• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

How many of you are going to get a Broadwell-E CPU?

Tell me about it - I still got my de-lidded FX-51 kicking about somewhere!.

Bit sick of Intel now tbh - anyone with a Sandybridge E setup will be laughing as all processors since have more or less been a joke from Intel. Lower nm, crapper clocking so it all balances out since SB.

Waiting on Zen for sure, even if it doesn't kick Intel butt all over the place I want to go non-intel again. If anything it will hopefully bring intel prices down too at some point.
 
I can and do blame Intel. They illegally stopped AMD from growing time and time again.

If they hadn't been stomped down in the K7 days they would have parlayed their success into something other than Bulldozer.
 
Last edited:
Orangey said:
I can and do blame Intel. They illegally stopped AMD from growing time and time again.

If they hadn't been stomped down in the K7 days they would have parlayed their success into something other than Bulldozer.
Click to expand...

Nothing we can do about it though, so pointless whining about it on some random forums.

Intel have the best performing CPU's available and have no competition, at least we still get the small incremental performance/efficiency improvements every 1.5-2 years.
 
spoffle said:
So intel aren't responsible for the things they do?
Click to expand...

Intel are not a charity and are no different to any other company. They price their product at what they believe is the optimum point to maximise their profits. Intel's responsibility is to their share holders not people who think they should sell their cpu's more cheaply. Just as long as they stay within the law its as simple as that. What's interesting is that Intel have not abuses their dominance in higher end consumer cpu's since at least sandybridge as I have shown before their pricing (in dollars) adjusted for inflation for the top end i7 consumer cpu's has remained constant....
 
So to help me justify my own spending to myself... it wouldn't be a totally silly idea to go 5820K X99 at this point right? From a purely "new system" perspective (this isn't an upgrade from an existing machine - so no need to worry if it's a "worthwhile upgrade" or not)
 
uncle_rufus said:
So to help me justify my own spending to myself... it wouldn't be a totally silly idea to go 5820K X99 at this point right? From a purely "new system" perspective (this isn't an upgrade from an existing machine - so no need to worry if it's a "worthwhile upgrade" or not)
Click to expand...

The low end broadwell-e hex core equivalent to the 5820k will be very similar. Stock clocks about 200mhz higher max. Similar overclocking ability based on consumer haswell to broadwell (potentially slightly worse is possible!), low single digit instruction. Per clock (ipc) improvement over haswell-e as its the same CPU design shrunken to a smaller process likely lower overall heat output at the same clocks but higher per area heat output due to smaller process.

Basically the entry level broadwell-e will represent a rather pathetic step up from a 5820k in all likelihood.

So it comes down to cost $/£ exchange rate is pretty poor at moment and may get worse. I would say if you can get a 5820k fir £275-300 go for it now... I reckon broadwell-e will start at least at £350...
 
If I can find something used I'm going to go X99 now, then upgrade to the 10 core a few years after release when they aren't silly money, should still be competitive with the mainstream chips.
 
Cool thanks guys, that's pretty much what I figured...

It certainly seems like the 5820k is a good option versus the 6700k (particularly if you are rendering etc. and will benefit from the extra cores)
 
LS_Chao said:
How do you guys thing broadwell e will overclock? Given that the i7 5775 was a terrible overclocker.
Click to expand...

The process (14nm) is more mature now and broadwell had some other big architecture changes from haswell (edram etc igpu etc) which wont be the same with haswell-e to broadwell-e.

Realistically overclocking is likely to yield rather similar results based on previous die shrinks. Most 5820k's and 5930k's can do 4.5 ghz with the 5960x average a little behind.

Expect similar results for the broadwell-e hex and Oct core processors. The ten core will likely be yet another bit behind, on average, the 5960x average due to the two extra cores.

In reality most people will get better performance out of the faster clocking hex core cpu's
 
Caracus2k said:
Intel are not a charity and are no different to any other company. They price their product at what they believe is the optimum point to maximise their profits. Intel's responsibility is to their share holders not people who think they should sell their cpu's more cheaply. Just as long as they stay within the law its as simple as that. What's interesting is that Intel have not abuses their dominance in higher end consumer cpu's since at least sandybridge as I have shown before their pricing (in dollars) adjusted for inflation for the top end i7 consumer cpu's has remained constant....
Click to expand...

Can you show me where I said any of this?
 
spoffle said:
Can you show me where I said any of this?
Click to expand...

Your post I was referring to read....

spoffle said:
So intel aren't responsible for the things they do?
Click to expand...

This was in response to someone saying that you could not blame Intel as they have no (effective) competition at most levels I the CPU market.

You seem to suggesting that Intel have a 'responsibilty' to sell you what you consider a suitably powerful cpu and a price you deem to be reasonable.

I merely pointed out that Intel are a publically listed company whoose aim like all successful businesses is to make the largest return for their investors.

For what its worth I think Intel have actually shown considerable restraint and corporate responsibility of late given their effective monopoly position
 
They are just doing the bare minimum to avoid being broken up.

I hate this "it's a business, you don't understand" rubbish. Nobody thinks you're smart for siding with the greedy monopoly.
 
Orangey said:
They are just doing the bare minimum to avoid being broken up.

I hate this "it's a business, you don't understand" rubbish. Nobody thinks you're smart for siding with the greedy monopoly.
Click to expand...

Businesses that are not 'greedy' tend not to do very well or go out of business. I take it you don't own any company shares? If so how would you feel at an share holder meeting if the ceo came on stage and said that there would be no dividend this year as the company thought it should just sell its product cheap despite there being no competition because some people were moaning on an internet forum!

I have been in this game long enough to remember when amd launched the fx51 cpu for $733 12 years ago!

http://www.extremetech.com/extreme/...d-the-world-amds-64-bit-fx-51-ten-years-later

Adjusted for inflation that's about $957 in 2016 dollars the 5960x is sold by Intel for $999.

Amd were pretty much as 'greedy' as Intel when they had the technological edge its just that they lag behind now and so cant sell their products for premium prices.. Or do I take it that you would have no complaint if Intel dropped the 5960x price by $42? And remember when Amd were selling that CPU Intel where relatively more competitive on performance than Amd are now compared to Intel
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom