***Official Intel Haswell Thread***

[Razyre]

sounds about right for a direct conversion of the US prices of current ivy, we seem to pay a 20% premium over the states

one thing i still cant understand though is why all the newer i5's dropped to 6MB cache when lynnfield had 8MB

Because Intel are moneygrabbing whores. Hence the whole new socket all the time for no reason thing, and far, far higher prices than AMD.

We need a company to uprise, make their own Linux distro, develop ARM processors, bring a whole new game to the table. I'm sick of inefficient x86 processors with tons of useless instructions and Windows. We need old software to be retired and emulated for compatibility and new software to be made for a better platform.

At the moment, I have little choice but to by Intel in the high end.

 

[tbh]

We need a company to uprise, make their own Linux distro, develop ARM processors, bring a whole new game to the table. I'm sick of inefficient x86 processors with tons of useless instructions and Windows.

If you're fed up of Windows then you can make the switch to Linux today; I'm dual booting Windows 7 and Linux Mint Debian Edition, and when I upgrade in the summer I'm going to take the plunge and only install LMDE.

ARM isn't going to replace Intel at the high end anytime soon though (read: ever), if anything Silvermont and Airmont are going to eat into ARM's market share in the lower end of the market.

 

[nightmare99]

Because Intel are moneygrabbing whores. Hence the whole new socket all the time for no reason thing,

That comment is stupid they do not change sockets for no reason.

 

[Razyre]

If you're fed up of Windows then you can make the switch to Linux today; I'm dual booting Windows 7 and Linux Mint Debian Edition, and when I upgrade in the summer I'm going to take the plunge and only install LMDE.

ARM isn't going to replace Intel at the high end anytime soon though (read: ever), if anything Silvermont and Airmont are going to eat into ARM's market share in the lower end of the market.

Linux doesn't have the software support I need just yet, because there isn't a distro with proper commercial backing that supports the user as much as Windows does. We need to move on from this horrible old OS, but I'm not going to until I get the game support and general software support I need. Thankfully, good old Gabe is starting to make a change, and the market share is quickly shifting due to W8 and tablets.

ARM aren't replacing Intel because they aren't trying to; If they brought out desktop processors, companies like Apple would jump straight to them (They already are in the mobile market - Mac Air) and the lower licensing fees and such would quickly bring the rest of the market too. No matter how hard Intel try, they're never going to make the same mark that ARM has in that sector. Yes, they have lots of money, yes they spend 10 bajillion pounds on R&D, but their fundamental failure in the mobile market is them being late to the show and the fact they're using their old decrepid architecture that sucks power like nobody's business because it's inefficient. It took Intel this long to make a decent powered SoC within the right power bracket. The only reason they managed it is because they have the world in money to spend.

x86 dates back many, many years and has only been added to, not refined. The ARM architecture is and always has been more efficient, and I firmly believe if ARM decided to make socket processor designs as well as their hot cake SoCs that they'd make a big mark in the desktop market too, particularly due to price.

I'm not saying ARM ever will do this, but by God I think they should.

That comment is stupid they do not change sockets for no reason.

Give me a good reason why Intel change sockets constantly. They never used to, never needed to and neither do AMD. It's a shameless act to get people to buy new mobos. They changed 5 contacts for the new processors!! 1150, mirite? They could have easily stayed with the old layout.

If you're really trying to defend Intel for this then you clearly are just a fanboy.

 

[melvis]

they do not change sockets for no reason.

id debate that tbh, changing sockets is a necessity sometimes, but doing it mechanically every 2 years isnt, 1156 and 1155 really was a socket change for no reason, especially at the sandy bridge level, socket 1156 supported ddr3 up to 1600mhz and usb3a new chipset with pcie3 and sata 6gbs would have been trivial and far more reasonable than a total socket shift. the cynic in me believes it was simply to keep intels partners happy and force a new motherboard upgrade with each cpu upgrade, and haswell would seem to be the same.

 

[Martini1991]

If you're really trying to defend Intel for this then you clearly are just a fanboy.

Well they've changed things with the CPU, so you've got some motherboard things on the CPU.

They probably didn't need to change things, but socket 1155 is over 2 years now.

What about AMD releasing AM3 and never giving it any exclusive CPU's, or introducing AM3+ when it was never needed (As the Crosshair IV Formula unofficial proves)

They're both as bad as each other for low blow moves.

 

[Razyre]

id debate that tbh, changing sockets is a necessity sometimes, but doing it mechanically every 2 years isnt, 1156 and 1155 really was a socket change for no reason, especially at the sandy bridge level, socket 1156 supported ddr3 up to 1600mhz and usb3a new chipset with pcie3 and sata 6gbs would have been trivial and far more reasonable than a total socket shift. the cynic in me believes it was simply to keep intels partners happy and force a new motherboard upgrade with each cpu upgrade, and haswell would seem to be the same.

Sometimes, yes. As you said, what Intel doing is, precisely as I said, moneygrabbing. If it was radical what they changed, sockets would be completely different, and the changes would be "mechanical" as you nicely put it.

Well they've changed things with the CPU, so you've got some motherboard things on the CPU.

They probably didn't need to change things, but socket 1155 is over 2 years now.

What about AMD releasing AM3 and never giving it any exclusive CPU's, or introducing AM3+ when it was never needed (As the Crosshair IV Formula unofficial proves)

They're both as bad as each other for low blow moves.

So you're still defending Intel?

"They probably didn't, but it's old"

So that means there needs to be a new one?

I'm not saying I like AMD more than Intel, or Intel more than AMD, to me they are companies and they are equal in their evil in that respect (debateable, but yeah) and Intel to my recollection have changed socket a lot more than AMD, and even where AMD has moved up socket the "+" series motherboards still support the older processors and such.

775 stayed in for a long time, so could have 1156 and indeed now 1155.

It is no problem for me, since I'm coming from an old AMD system which is dying in newer games, but it's criminal to make people upgrade their mobo every 2 years if they want to swap to a new processor.

 

[Martini1991]

So you're still defending Intel?
"They probably didn't, but it's old"

So that means there needs to be a new one?

I'm not saying I like AMD more than Intel, or Intel more than AMD, to me they are companies and they are equal in their evil in that respect (debateable, but yeah) and Intel to my recollection have changed socket a lot more than AMD, and even where AMD has moved up socket the "+" series motherboards still support the older processors and such.

775 stayed in for a long time, so could have 1156 and indeed now 1155.

It is no problem for me, since I'm coming from an old AMD system which is dying in newer games, but it's criminal to make people upgrade their mobo every 2 years if they want to swap to a new processor.

Well, who are we to say that the changes don't require a new chipset?
1156 to 1155 removed the South bridge from boards, I mean, do they need to have made that change? Could it have been avoided? etc

If it needs a new chipset, then you're still needing a new board anyway, what's the harm in changing the socket?

I wouldn't say I was defending Intel.

Socket 775 might have been around, but it had a variety of different chipsets, with newer 775 CPU's not working with the older boards, so the point is moot, same socket, but that didn't mean it all worked together. And I don't know how that could be construed as an Intel defence.

Also, the person saying a new chipset for 1156 for PCI-E 3.0, wouldn't do much good given the PCI-E controllers on the CPU, that said, it's not a defence, but a clarification.

 

[melvis]

If it needs a new chipset, then you're still needing a new board anyway, what's the harm in changing the socket?

not necessarily, if you have no need for what the new chipset provides, (anyone on a HDD has no need for sata3) (anyone on 1 card doesnt need pcie-3) you can upgrade your cpu without a pointless mobo upgrade.

Also, the person saying a new chipset for 1156 for PCI-E 3.0, wouldn't do much good given the PCI-E controllers on the CPU, that said, it's not a defence, but a clarification.

H61 is PCI-E 2.0, Z77 is PCI-E 3.0 both are socket 1155 though and both support sandy and ivy, the parts on the chip are therefore clearly compatible with both.

 

[Martini1991]

H61 is PCI-E 2.0, Z77 is PCI-E 3.0 both are socket 1155 though and both support sandy and ivy, the parts on the chip are therefore clearly compatible with both.

You've completely missed the point.
Neither are PCI-E anything till they've got a CPU in them, the Z77 is PCI-E 2.0 if it's gone an SB in it, the Ivy creates the PCI-E 3.0, in which case even the H61 in the primary lane would get PCI-E 3.0.

My point was, the chipset would do squat for PCI-E.

not necessarily, if you have no need for what the new chipset provides, (anyone on a HDD has no need for sata3) (anyone on 1 card doesnt need pcie-3) you can upgrade your cpu without a pointless mobo upgrade.

Which has what to do if the new CPU requires the chipset?

 

[ubersonic]

If you're really trying to defend Intel for this then you clearly are just a fanboy.

Or maybe he simply understands the reasoning instead of whining about it on the internet?

775 stayed in for a long time, so could have 1156 and indeed now 1155.

LGA775 is actually a good example of why sockets should be changed, if you pick a random 775 motherboard and CPU then chances are that 9/10 they will not work together, and that's because 775 stayed around far too long. Hell it spanned AGP 4x/8x, PCI-E 1/1.1/2, DDR-1/2/3, PATA133/SATA150/SATA300, etc. The transition from Pentium to Core architecture was screaming out for a new socket.

---------

Even if Haswell used LGA1155 new chips/boards would not be compatible with old ones so the only thing you could possibly achieve is to give n00bs the chance to build themselves a system that will not work.

 

[melvis]

Neither are PCI-E anything till they've got a CPU in them, the Z77 is PCI-E 2.0 if it's gone an SB in it, the Ivy creates the PCI-E 3.0, in which case even the H61 in the primary lane would get PCI-E 3.0.

i wasnt aware H61 would be pci-e 3 with an ivy cpu but if thats the case, it makes the new haswell socket seem even less needed.

Which has what to do if the new CPU requires the chipset?

that was the whole original point, intel are artificially changing sockets when its not needed, the cpu only "requires" the new chipset because intel make it to be so.

 

[melvis]

LGA775 is actually a good example of why sockets should be changed, -snip- The transition from Pentium to Core architecture was screaming out for a new socket.

totally agree there, i dont think anyones debating socket changes do need to happen, its just when they happen every 2 years regardless of need, 775 should have been 2 sockets and 1156 and 1155 really should have been the same socket.

 

[Martini1991]

I give up, I'm not sure how you're constantly jumping to conclusion without any evidence, given that you've already shown you don't know as much as you think you do.

 

[Doomedspeed]

I think the point your trying to make martin (correct me if im wrong) is that the motherboards need to be innovated with the CPU's to benifit from any performance increases, though this emphasis lies with the CPU.

Another rumour example is 2011 releasaing a new X99 chipset, as X79 won't support Ivy-E..

 

[ubersonic]

totally agree there, i dont think anyones debating socket changes do need to happen, its just when they happen every 2 years regardless of need, 775 should have been 2 sockets and 1156 and 1155 really should have been the same socket.

The issue is again compatibility though, what would have happened when people bought an i3 540 and it failed to work in their H61 or Z77? what would have happened when people put their i5 2500K in a P55 and it didn't work?

The only thing you gain from retaining the socket is the opportunity for mismatching incompatible configurations.

 

[Razyre]

Ignore post.

 

[ubersonic]

I see little reason why the socket itself has to change, I'm sure the same functionality could've been ported over.

No offense, but you're wrong. "A major change with the component arrangement in the platform that is affecting Haswell's pin map is that Haswell will have a higher bandwidth chipset bus, rearranged PCIe pins (with FDI pins), rearranged power pins, and miscellaneous pins. It does away with a separate power domain for the integrated graphics controller. "

 

[Razyre]

No offense, but you're wrong. "A major change with the component arrangement in the platform that is affecting Haswell's pin map is that Haswell will have a higher bandwidth chipset bus, rearranged PCIe pins (with FDI pins), rearranged power pins, and miscellaneous pins. It does away with a separate power domain for the integrated graphics controller. "

I already re-read what I said and it made no sense, hence post removed.

 

[GodAtum]

Is haswell the same as Ivy Bridge e?