Info on new intel 8 and 6 core processors

[zalbard]

The enthusiast platform chips overclock as well (or better thanks to soldered IHS) as the mainstream ones.

[Levish]

I don't want an 8-core CPU...I want an unlocked 18-core, dual-capable chip...

I want some of the good games that I play to scale well beyond 2 cores w HT to give me a reason to care about building a dual socket system for gaming.
Hopefully the newer console generations excite dev's to build games that will.

[Tenknics]

OT, but just curious: isn't your workload becoming more GPU accelerated these days?

Transcoding, exporting of video and quick previews are being more and more accelerated by the GPU. But the CPU still plays a huge role when compositing and handling of layers and different sounds and scenes being spliced together.

Essentially by having more CPU cores and at a higher speed you'll experience less slowdowns and visible lagginess when traversing your video timeline and adding new content in to the time line. The way GPU's are being utilised is still mostly in its infancy.

Exactly this. Also, at least for premiere, the GPU speeds up certain plugins and video effects. The one major benefit is the lack of having to transcode or instant transcode with GPU acceleration (as mentioned above) and being able to drag and drop footage and play with it immediately (no rendering). For many years, at least for premiere, it was CUDA exclusive for gpu acceleration. Then a few years back its been opened up to OPENCL w/ AMD cards...No progress really has been made because of this.

The newest versions of Premiere Pro are extremely heavy on threading and will make use of all available cores/threads. The GPU acceleration with Premiere performance/load is decided first by the CPU's since the CPU's have to decode the data before the GPU's can process it. This means the CPU's drive/feed your GPU's and if they are slower in feeding (less threads, slower clocks) the data then far more of the GPU processing capability sits idle. This is why I want an 8-core Intel CPU.

[Tenknics]

sorry for double post, ahem, but back on topic. Price list for the HW-E

Supposedly they're marked up 10%+ so retail should be cheaper.


Core i7-4820K 4 / 8 3.7 / 3.9 GHz 10 MB DDR3-1866 130W $323
Core i7-5820K 6 / 12 3.3 GHz 15 MB DDR4-2133 140W $420
Core i7-4930K 6 / 12 3.4 / 3.9 GHz 12 MB DDR3-1866 130W $583
Core i7-5930K 6 / 12 3.5 GHz 15 MB DDR4-2133 140W $630
Core i7-4960X 6 / 12 3.6 / 4 GHz 15 MB DDR3-1866 130W $999
Core i7-5960X 8 / 16 3 GHz 20 MB DDR4-2133 140W $1100

source

[IanB]

Core i7-4820K 4 / 8 3.7 / 3.9 GHz 10 MB DDR3-1866 130W $323
Core i7-5820K 6 / 12 3.3 GHz 15 MB DDR4-2133 140W $420
Core i7-4930K 6 / 12 3.4 / 3.9 GHz 12 MB DDR3-1866 130W $583
Core i7-5930K 6 / 12 3.5 GHz 15 MB DDR4-2133 140W $630
Core i7-4960X 6 / 12 3.6 / 4 GHz 15 MB DDR3-1866 130W $999
Core i7-5960X 8 / 16 3 GHz 20 MB DDR4-2133 140W $1100

OK, I'll bite. I haven't been following the high-end recently as an end-user, as the -E parts were well out of my price range. But I'll ask the obvious question for this forum as someone without overclocking experience on these -E chips - how overclockable are these processors generally compared to the mainstream parts? A $200 difference for 0.2GHz premium all other things being equal seems crazy - surely the middle chip there (i7-5930K) with apparently identical specs is almost unnecessary if there's headroom on the lowest (i7-5820K) with decent cooling? Or is there more cut out on the lowest chip than this quick list shows?

[zalbard]

Exactly this. Also, at least for premiere, the GPU speeds up certain plugins and video effects. The one major benefit is the lack of having to transcode or instant transcode with GPU acceleration (as mentioned above) and being able to drag and drop footage and play with it immediately (no rendering). For many years, at least for premiere, it was CUDA exclusive for gpu acceleration. Then a few years back its been opened up to OPENCL w/ AMD cards...No progress really has been made because of this.

That's a pretty sad state of affairs. :\

A $200 difference for 0.2GHz premium all other things being equal seems crazy - surely the middle chip there (i7-5930K) with apparently identical specs is almost unnecessary if there's headroom on the lowest (i7-5820K) with decent cooling? Or is there more cut out on the lowest chip than this quick list shows?

You're right, something seems off.

Hopefully it's just because Intel is planning to retire 5930K quickly in favor of an 8-core replacement.

[Iconyu]

OK, I'll bite. I haven't been following the high-end recently as an end-user, as the -E parts were well out of my price range. But I'll ask the obvious question for this forum as someone without overclocking experience on these -E chips - how overclockable are these processors generally compared to the mainstream parts? A $200 difference for 0.2GHz premium all other things being equal seems crazy - surely the middle chip there (i7-5930K) with apparently identical specs is almost unnecessary if there's headroom on the lowest (i7-5820K) with decent cooling? Or is there more cut out on the lowest chip than this quick list shows?

The mainstream chips aren't six cores for starters, and the $200 premium between the 5820k and 5930k is PCI-E lanes.

[Tenknics]

The mainstream chips aren't six cores for starters, and the $200 premium between the 5820k and 5930k is PCI-E lanes.

This. the 5820k has only 28 native pci-e 3 lanes.

Also different sites are reporting the clocks wrong. I'm fairly certain the clocks listed above are the base clocks.. .

5820k will turbo to 3.8ghz
5930k to 4ghz
5960x to 3.3ghz

[IanB]

the $200 premium between the 5820k and 5930k is PCI-E lanes.

That makes more sense. Given I'm not a gamer, and am more interested in PCI-e lanes for extra storage bandwidth than filling slots with tri/sli setups, but still want the cores and onboard cache for transcoding etc., this makes the lowest chip there very interesting if there's a good overclock possible and means (for me) it's not worth wasting that extra $200.

[josh1980]

I want some of the good games that I play to scale well beyond 2 cores w HT to give me a reason to care about building a dual socket system for gaming.
Hopefully the newer console generations excite dev's to build games that will.

I've built dual-socket systems 3 times for gaming. The first was in 2002 or so (build cost was about $5k), the second in 2006, and the third in 2010(SR-2).

They all worked great as workstations, but as a gaming platform they had major limitations.

As those types of boards use chipsets that are targeted as high-end workstation and servers they don't always play nice with your gamer equipment. Stuff like gaming video cards and that high end sound card you bought may not work "quite right". You may have random problems ranging from a BSOD to stuff just not working at all.

When I went with the SR-2 rig my primary decision maker was that I love to run multiple VMs simultaneously (and do WCG crunching). All of those machines worked very well for that application. But for gaming it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. Diablo 3 has always had a weird bug where my video frames would display out of sequence. Other games had problems that were intermittent and impossible to isolate. Why was this? Because of the data paths being used between different CPUs in relation to the PCIe lanes.

So while it sound great in practice, in reality you are better off buying one of those single CPU boards and a 6c/12t CPU and boasting about it. I actually traded my SR-2 for a 6c/12t system a few months ago because I got tired of not being able to game like I want.

[lutjens]

I've built dual-socket systems 3 times for gaming. The first was in 2002 or so (build cost was about $5k), the second in 2006, and the third in 2010(SR-2).

They all worked great as workstations, but as a gaming platform they had major limitations.

As those types of boards use chipsets that are targeted as high-end workstation and servers they don't always play nice with your gamer equipment. Stuff like gaming video cards and that high end sound card you bought may not work "quite right". You may have random problems ranging from a BSOD to stuff just not working at all.

When I went with the SR-2 rig my primary decision maker was that I love to run multiple VMs simultaneously (and do WCG crunching). All of those machines worked very well for that application. But for gaming it wasn't all it was cracked up to be. Diablo 3 has always had a weird bug where my video frames would display out of sequence. Other games had problems that were intermittent and impossible to isolate. Why was this? Because of the data paths being used between different CPUs in relation to the PCIe lanes.

So while it sound great in practice, in reality you are better off buying one of those single CPU boards and a 6c/12t CPU and boasting about it. I actually traded my SR-2 for a 6c/12t system a few months ago because I got tired of not being able to game like I want.

Boasting about a 6-core CPU...

It depends on how the board is implemented. The SR-2 uses PCI-E bridge chips and from what I understand doesn't properly allocate the PCI-E lanes from both CPUs, using the lanes from one CPU with the bridge chip and ignoring the lanes from the second CPU, resulting in an outcome that's somewhat less than ideal and that may have been the source of your issues. Before building my little putt-putt gaming system, I used my HP ProLiant ML370 G6 for server/workstation AND gaming duties...and it performed flawlessly, and even I even ran SLi GeForce GTX 690s in it for a while (with the SLi Patch of course). It's still going strong today, although strictly as a server. Dual CPU systems can game and game quite well, as well as do things that single CPU systems can only dream about.

I want some of the good games that I play to scale well beyond 2 cores w HT to give me a reason to care about building a dual socket system for gaming.
Hopefully the newer console generations excite dev's to build games that will.

Not all enthusiasts here are 100% gamers and some actually do things with their computers other than game. It's becomes old when people constantly say unlocked CPUs with high core counts aren't needed by enthusiasts, that they are a waste of time, etc because they personally don't have a use for them (or more likely can't afford them). Many enthusiasts use their computers for tasks that would benefit immensely with an unlocked high core count CPU, and even with two of them in a dual CPU system. I'm personally desperate for such a chip and would gladly pay a king's ransom for a pair of them. If the new 18-core CPU is actually unlocked as has been rumored, I'll be buying three of them for my own personal use.

[SoulsCollective]

Tom's has an article with estimated US pricing for you US folks, based on Dutch pre-order listings - USD ~$400 for the 5820K, ~$600 for the 5930K, and ~$1,000 for the 5960X.

[aznsniper911]

Tom's has an article with estimated US pricing for you US folks, based on Dutch pre-order listings - USD ~$400 for the 5820K, ~$600 for the 5930K, and ~$1,000 for the 5960X.

That's similar pricing with a leaked amazon listing of haswell-e the other day. The 5820k was $393 and the 5960x was $1050.

[Iconyu]

That's similar pricing with a leaked amazon listing of haswell-e the other day. The 5820k was $393 and the 5960x was $1050.

How the hell have you managed to sneak around calling yourself 'Asian Sniper 9-11'?

[Charles Wirth]

Hours from release, I seen a doc that said that these CPUS are available August 2014.

[bearcatrp]

will let you folks with deep pockets to buy and post results of your thoughts on the 8 core monster. Isn't there another 8 core version thats a bit cheaper coming out later?

[SoulsCollective]

Australian pricing - I'm surprised, we usually have more of a premium added on than this.

[TimPrice]

Maybe some of you would be interested in this:
http://ark.intel.com/products/83356/...Cache-2_40-GHz
Socket FCLGA2011-3
8 cores
20 Mb cache
2.4 GHz
3.2 GHz turbo (1 or 2 cores probably)
~660 USD

Close to the $590 they ask for the 5930K, no overclocking though.

[Kai Robinson]

If you're after a monster Xeon, why not go for one of these?

http://ark.intel.com/products/81061/...Cache-2_30-GHz

[zalbard]

If you're after a monster Xeon, why not go for one of these?

http://ark.intel.com/products/81061/...Cache-2_30-GHz

They don't even list the price. You can imagine how bad it must be.

Besides, the frequency is way too low. Even fanless tablets run at 2.5Ghz nowadays...

[Kai Robinson]

Can you not lock xeon's into turbo?

[bearcatrp]

They don't even list the price.

Looks like 4100 bucks if cpu world states it right
http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Xeon/I...2699%20v3.html

[lutjens]

If you're after a monster Xeon, why not go for one of these?

http://ark.intel.com/products/81061/...Cache-2_30-GHz

Because it's a fully locked down POS, whose top speed is a whopping 2.8GHz (all core turbo). Whoop-de-friggen-do...thanks Intel for screwing us over yet again...