Haswell-E ES, welcome the desktop monster!

[FlanK3r]

Look here guys.
http://wccftech.com/intel-haswelle-e...z-ddr4-memory/

Its awesome, if is it right. i7-5970X 8c/16t, 2133 DDR4, X99

[informal]

It looks awesome(ly expensive) .

[Particle]

I would have hoped for an 8C non-EE, but I suppose this is still a step forward.

[paulbagz]

It looks awesome(ly expensive) .

This.

Paying through the teeth as it is for decent Hex core Xeons let alone consumer grade 8C gear lol

-PB

[xVeinx]

8C = ~$1500
New Socket 2011 motherboard with supporting chipset = ~$500

One would hope it would make your coffee in the morning too while it crunches...

[Lightman]

8C = ~$1500
New Socket 2011 motherboard with supporting chipset = ~$500

One would hope it would make your coffee in the morning too while it crunches...

Don't forget super cheap DDR4 to pair it with

Very nice platform for enthusiasts but I'm afraid it won't be in my PC any time soon due to price / performance ratio.

[Zaxx]

8C = ~$1500
New Socket 2011 motherboard with supporting chipset = ~$500

One would hope it would make your coffee in the morning too while it crunches...

And the heat spreader better be 24ct gold and come with a high end water cooler with benchmarks that are orgasm inducing...tissues included.

[Chrono Detector]

If I read correctly, the release date is still a while away, late Q4 2014 or even early 2015, was hoping it would come out in mid 2014 or something.

[naokaji]

If I read correctly, the release date is still a while away, late Q4 2014 or even early 2015, was hoping it would come out in mid 2014 or something.

Which is a shame really cause if they really wanted to they could prob do a 16 core Broadwell in 2014 with the same TDP as Haswell-E lol.

[AliG]

Honestly I'd rather see a super binned quadcore. Even in CAE simulations I can't remember ever needing more than 8 threads; if anything I ran out ram first (it's almost commical that 16 gb isn't enough anymore lol). But if Intel would produce a stock 5 ghz super binned 4770 extreme that could hit those speeds with a reasonable TDP, I'd gladly pay an extra $200 over the k model. Just being realistic, after 4 cores single threaded performance is still more important for most of us. As for why 5 ghz, I picked it to match AMD's top offering.

[DefStar]

Honestly I'd rather see a super binned quadcore. Even in CAE simulations I can't remember ever needing more than 8 threads; if anything I ran out ram first (it's almost commical that 16 gb isn't enough anymore lol). But if Intel would produce a stock 5 ghz super binned 4770 extreme that could hit those speeds with a reasonable TDP, I'd gladly pay an extra $200 over the k model. Just being realistic, after 4 cores single threaded performance is still more important for most of us. As for why 5 ghz, I picked it to match AMD's top offering.

Exactly!

[vitchilo]

8-16 is still a joke compared to their xeon 15/30 shipping out next year.

I mean, they should AT LEAST get out a 12/24 for the EE platform.

[FlanK3r]

but 15/30 with clocks?... 1.6GHz around?...8c/16t around 3ghz+turbo seems better from my side

[vario]

but 15/30 with clocks?... 1.6GHz around?...8c/16t around 3ghz+turbo seems better from my side

Thats sadly something i want.However if it comes at the end of 2014 ...eh.Intel with no competition:
Were gonna give you 2 years old tech, with newer already available.
Were gonna price it thru the roof ,while you know that servers have more cores, mainstream desktops have newer tech.
Ok, and were gonna package it in mainboards that cost 2-3x times more than normal desktop ones for no apparent reason.
DDR4 all the way so you could pay probably a 100% premium on it also.

And after premiere were gonna about weak sales!

[PatRaceTin]

Oh Anybody know what is new socket ?

[Ace123]

Lga 2011-3

[crash5s]

8-16 is still a joke compared to their xeon 15/30 shipping out next year.

I mean, they should AT LEAST get out a 12/24 for the EE platform.

Doesn't make sense. The EE is a desktop chip, what desktop applications need loads and loads of cores, nothing really. Going even further typically the chips with insane core counts ship with fairly low clocks. Most people would be better off with fewer faster cores than more cores running at a slower speed.

[Iconyu]

Honestly I'd rather see a super binned quadcore. Even in CAE simulations I can't remember ever needing more than 8 threads; if anything I ran out ram first (it's almost commical that 16 gb isn't enough anymore lol). But if Intel would produce a stock 5 ghz super binned 4770 extreme that could hit those speeds with a reasonable TDP, I'd gladly pay an extra $200 over the k model. Just being realistic, after 4 cores single threaded performance is still more important for most of us. As for why 5 ghz, I picked it to match AMD's top offering.

I think the idea isn't bad, but if you're willing to pay that premium then you could simply buy three chips sell two at a loss and use the chip that gets closest to your goal. You can get most IB-E's past 4.4ghz, two extra cores is faster than the clock speed difference you're suggesting, and a real eight core at 4ghz is much much faster over eight threads than a 5ghz 4770k.

[Tenknics]

I've been wanting an -E chip ever since sandy-e was discussed...

but everytime they come out I'm let down by the cost/ lack of significant performance increase/ and missing features (cores).


I really think if Intel wanted, they could have put out an 8core Sandy-E desktop...but now 3-4 years later we'll finally get one. I dunno if I can wait that long...I guess we were really spoiled this last decade of having a new CPU released every year. Haswell-E will be too late and too expensive.

sigh

[AliG]

I think the idea isn't bad, but if you're willing to pay that premium then you could simply buy three chips sell two at a loss and use the chip that gets closest to your goal. You can get most IB-E's past 4.4ghz, two extra cores is faster than the clock speed difference you're suggesting, and a real eight core at 4ghz is much much faster over eight threads than a 5ghz 4770k.

I don't think so, for my application I think a 5 GHz 4 core would actually be significantly faster than a 4 GHz 8 core. It's not just about the theoritical performance, it's also about how well the software is coded

[TimPrice]

PS4 and XB1 were released already, this changes everything from a gaming perspective.

Maybe there will be another octa part for 600$, which I don't think it's pricey.
My only real concern is the longevity/support for the 2011-3 platform if it only has one gen of CPU's, which we don't know yet.

[Olivon]

8-16 is still a joke compared to their xeon 15/30 shipping out next year.

I mean, they should AT LEAST get out a 12/24 for the EE platform.

In case you didn't noticed, Intel is fighting with ghost regarding high-end x86 especially in the server market.
So, if you want a 15C/30T,buy a 3000$ xeon and a Proliant server and you will be happy.
Intel has no interest at all to push 15C/30T beast on the enthusiat side.

[Lanek]

In case you didn't noticed, Intel is fighting with ghost regarding high-end x86 especially in the server market.
So, if you want a 15C/30T,buy a 3000$ xeon and a Proliant server and you will be happy.
Intel has no interest at all to push 15C/30T beast on the enthusiat side.

Or buy a 32cores AMD for way cheaper of a 12cores Xeon.... if you need so much cores for Autocad render ( as example )..

Its not because the faster chip of AMD is not as fast of the higher sku of Intel, you cant find a good compromise in price perf in between. Why do you think most Cray system use Nvidia GK110 + 4 AMD CPU blades ?

Professional market is not as dumb of the big public running 2c/4t 1.6ghz Intel because they think the I7 4960x is faster of the offer of AMD.

[AliG]

Or buy a 32cores AMD for way cheaper of a 12cores Xeon.... if you need so much cores for Autocad render ( as example )..

Its not because the faster chip of AMD is not as fast of the higher sku of Intel, you cant find a good compromise in price perf in between. Why do you think most Cray system use Nvidia GK110 + 4 AMD CPU blades ?

Professional market is not as dumb of the big public running 2c/4t 1.6ghz Intel because they think the I7 4960x is faster of the offer of AMD.

In the professional market power is also a much larger factor though. Let's say you order a 1000 servers to do some type of extremely complex numerical analysis (aka wall street). Server A costs 25% more per SKU, but consumes 35% less power and is 20% more powerful than Server B. If they plan on keeping the same servers for 5 years, I would be the difference in power costs would probably make up for most of the cost difference, especially if you normalize power consumed to a specific amount of data crunched.

Not to mention there's also the effect of partnering with certain companies, etc; there's a lot more than goes into it than seems apparent. Thankfully, you can actually model all this stuff using differential equations (just check out the work of Dr. Carl Simon). Then it becomes much more of an optimal control problem, where people actually hire professionals to find the optimal number of servers to get X performance done for a specific Y dollars.

[Olivon]

Or buy a 32cores AMD for way cheaper of a 12cores Xeon.... if you need so much cores for Autocad render ( as example )..

Its not because the faster chip of AMD is not as fast of the higher sku of Intel, you cant find a good compromise in price perf in between. Why do you think most Cray system use Nvidia GK110 + 4 AMD CPU blades ?

Professional market is not as dumb of the big public running 2c/4t 1.6ghz Intel because they think the I7 4960x is faster of the offer of AMD.

AMD is marginal now in the professionnal server market. All the new x86 servers (hundreds and hundreds) I see are Intel only on the cold rooms.
On an other side, even Itanium or PowerPC are more present than x86 Opteron thing.