So after 4.5 years, my 2600k seems to finally be showing the first bit of age. Since Broadwell was never released to retail, I don't know a whole ton about the improvements over Haswell outside of the iGPU performance. Do you guys think it's worth waiting a few months on BW-E, or should I just go for a 5820k or 6700k?
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Worth waiting for Broadwell-E?
- Thread starter bpizzle1
- Start date
Yeah I'm in the same boat as you. From what i can gather Skylakes 6700k will gain me 20% IPC (give or take a few points) and hit similar OCs. But I want another Extreme series with at least 30% per core. Probably not the ten cores like rumored, likely the higher end 6 or maybe even the 8 if it fits the bill.
Be nice if they just come out with Skylake-E, but then they'd probably havw to change the chipset from X99 so that probably won't happen. And there was a Broadwell for the desktop, the 5775c, apparently due to client demand, but then the customers didnt want it anyway, just as Intel originally predicted.
Be nice if they just come out with Skylake-E, but then they'd probably havw to change the chipset from X99 so that probably won't happen. And there was a Broadwell for the desktop, the 5775c, apparently due to client demand, but then the customers didnt want it anyway, just as Intel originally predicted.
GotNoRice
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2001
- Messages
- 12,028
Remember, Broadwell is just Haswell with a die shrink, it's not new like Skylake - and even Skylake's IPC increases were very modest. Some might be excited about Broadwell-E based on how well Broadwell (5775c) performed on the desktop, but that got almost all of it's performance boost from it's huge eDRAM L4 cache. The only reason Broadwell (5775c) has that eDRAM at all is because it's shared with it's onboard GPU, which Broadwell-E will not have... From what we've seen with the 5775C vs previous quad-core haswell chips, broadwell-e is unlikely to bring with it any new amazing overclocking ability either.
Perhaps wait until Broadwell-E is released, and then pick up a cheap Haswell-E.
Making the decision to go with Broadwell-E (or even Haswell-E) vs a 6700k comes down to what you use your computer for. Most games today probably benefit more from the slightly faster quad core. A hex-core is somewhat of a bet on the future, that more games will continue to use more cores, especially with things like DX12 and Vulkan becoming a reality. It also depends on what else you do with your computer (video encoding, etc?), what you do in the background, etc.
Also, perhaps you can elaborate a bit on how your 2600k is starting to show "the first bit of age"? There really should not be any "need" to upgrade from something like a 2600K @ 4.5. I upgraded from a 2500k @ 5Ghz to a 5820k @ 4.5, but only because I wanted to re-purpose the old computer into a second gaming machine for friends when they visit. Tell us about the ways in which you feel your current CPU is now lacking, and that might give us some insight as to which processor might better fit your needs in the future.
Perhaps wait until Broadwell-E is released, and then pick up a cheap Haswell-E.
Making the decision to go with Broadwell-E (or even Haswell-E) vs a 6700k comes down to what you use your computer for. Most games today probably benefit more from the slightly faster quad core. A hex-core is somewhat of a bet on the future, that more games will continue to use more cores, especially with things like DX12 and Vulkan becoming a reality. It also depends on what else you do with your computer (video encoding, etc?), what you do in the background, etc.
Also, perhaps you can elaborate a bit on how your 2600k is starting to show "the first bit of age"? There really should not be any "need" to upgrade from something like a 2600K @ 4.5. I upgraded from a 2500k @ 5Ghz to a 5820k @ 4.5, but only because I wanted to re-purpose the old computer into a second gaming machine for friends when they visit. Tell us about the ways in which you feel your current CPU is now lacking, and that might give us some insight as to which processor might better fit your needs in the future.
95% of what I do with my PC is gaming (though I have started streaming a little for friends). I'm not trying to kid myself or anything. I know a major reason that I'm thinking of upgrading is simply because it's been a while, and the itch has been growing for about a year now. That said, some of the newer games have been giving me a few more frame rate dips than I'm accustomed to, and a bit of browsing around shows other SB owners are starting to notice similar things. Don't get me wrong, everything is still very playable, but I think it's just about that time.
As far as HW/BW-E vs Skylake, I am still torn on that front. The HEDT would actually be a bit cheaper right now, and the future of the extra cores looks fairly solid with more games starting to become multithreaded and with DX12's potential. Outside of that, Skylake is the better choice for the present state, and Z170 seems like a pretty good platform with the potential to perhaps have an upgrade path (unlike X99). Ugh, it's a tough choice, tbh.
I was in the same boat as you and after reading some good threads at [H}F, i decided to wait until at least Skylake-E but the more I read the more the itch to upgrade became and I said the heck with it, so I just started to order a new 5820k (was going to go 5960k but used the saving to other parts), x99 mobo, 32gb ram and new case.
In the same boat.
Running i7-920 Quad (8xHT) at 3.5Ghz/12GB RAM/SATA-3 SSD Samsung 850 Pro/GTX970. Pretty much everything runs, and fast. Browser runs from RAMdisk and is insanely fast.
However, when I do a lot of things at the same time, I can saturate primary core and often multiple cores.
Just by doing some Excel back-testing my system becomes unresponsive.
Opening 40 tabs simultaneously in Firefox (all of them containing lots of UI JS/graphics) and CPU utilization quickly spikes at 80% and stays above 50% for long making even the PS/2 keyboard (with it's dedicated, non-shared hard IRQ line) choppy and unresponsive.
The times they are a'changing.
So I'm hoping to get to 8 real cores, hopefully at 4.5Ghz or slightly above, nvme PCIe M.2 4x (two of those) and at least 32GB of RAM DDR4 (have large datasets, going to disk costs lots of time).
However, I'm also confused by:
- how much faster can Broadwell-E be?
- Should I go for even more cores (10x) or try to keep at a lower core count and hopefully a higher clock speed?
- How much memory can X99 efficiently utilize, and does 2166Mhz vs 3400Mhz DDR4 make any difference in large dataset number-crunching?
I'm aware that any combo will be more than enough for daily browing, games, word processing, etc.
But if anybody has any information on benchmarks on different Intel i7 CPU generations, clock speed, number of cores and amount of RAM for big data set calculation, please give us a linky, thanks!
Running i7-920 Quad (8xHT) at 3.5Ghz/12GB RAM/SATA-3 SSD Samsung 850 Pro/GTX970. Pretty much everything runs, and fast. Browser runs from RAMdisk and is insanely fast.
However, when I do a lot of things at the same time, I can saturate primary core and often multiple cores.
Just by doing some Excel back-testing my system becomes unresponsive.
Opening 40 tabs simultaneously in Firefox (all of them containing lots of UI JS/graphics) and CPU utilization quickly spikes at 80% and stays above 50% for long making even the PS/2 keyboard (with it's dedicated, non-shared hard IRQ line) choppy and unresponsive.
The times they are a'changing.
So I'm hoping to get to 8 real cores, hopefully at 4.5Ghz or slightly above, nvme PCIe M.2 4x (two of those) and at least 32GB of RAM DDR4 (have large datasets, going to disk costs lots of time).
However, I'm also confused by:
- how much faster can Broadwell-E be?
- Should I go for even more cores (10x) or try to keep at a lower core count and hopefully a higher clock speed?
- How much memory can X99 efficiently utilize, and does 2166Mhz vs 3400Mhz DDR4 make any difference in large dataset number-crunching?
I'm aware that any combo will be more than enough for daily browing, games, word processing, etc.
But if anybody has any information on benchmarks on different Intel i7 CPU generations, clock speed, number of cores and amount of RAM for big data set calculation, please give us a linky, thanks!
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
When you run excel get Task Manager to show logical cores and see how many threads its using.
Thats if that comes to fruit, it's a wild one. But if you do get hold of it by chance, let me know where you work, and where your servers are kept XD
I bet that sucker will give out some heat AND use some watts!
Porter_
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Sep 10, 2007
- Messages
- 8,467
I'm waiting until Broadwell-E releases and then evaluating options from there. If I wait until then and end up just buying a 5820K or 6700K no biggie. But I'd hate to buy a new setup now, this close to release of Broadwell-E, and regret it if (for example) the 6800K ends up being a beast.
GotNoRice
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2001
- Messages
- 12,028
There shouldn't be much unknown when it comes to Broadwell-E. We already know how Broadwell performs based on existing Broadwell chips (when you discount the L4 cache). IPC isn't going to change much just because of a few extra cores. At most you might benefit ever so slightly from a larger L3 cache. Broadwell is nothing more than a Haswell die shrink, not a design change. In the past moving to a smaller process has brought overclocking advantages, but lately it has done the opposite (why you now see 5 year old Sandy Bridge chips with higher clocks than a brand new Skylake chip). It wouldn't surprise me at all if Broadwell-E actually overclocks worse than Haswell-E.
I'm kinda in the same boat right now. I was planning on building at the start of the month but car decided it needed new tires and AC repair(thanks car, I still love you though).
Personally I think it is worth it to wait just a little bit to see what it does to the pricing. I know I will not be buying the top CPU for it, but maybe it will drive the cost down for the 5820k be a little more affordable.
Personally I think it is worth it to wait just a little bit to see what it does to the pricing. I know I will not be buying the top CPU for it, but maybe it will drive the cost down for the 5820k be a little more affordable.
D
Deleted member 290925
Guest
I'd wait a few months but if you could find a cheap used 5820K/5930K and use it with x99 board. X99 boards will support Broadwell-e CPUs. In fact, my Gigabyte x99 board already has the bios that support Broadwell-e CPUs.
It seems like you don't upgrade your computer very often, 6-core is probably a better option for you.
It seems like you don't upgrade your computer very often, 6-core is probably a better option for you.
morningreis
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 1,574
If you can wait, I'd say wait. There is always something new around the corner, and you're better off buying the newest tech when you actually need it in my opinion. Skylake-E and a new socket is slated for Q1 2017.
If you don't want to wait, I would go for the 5820K. You'll be able to upgrade to Broadwell-E when it's out, and the 5820K should have a good resell value. You could maybe even upgrade to a Xeon in the future once prices drop like the X58 guys are doing.
If you don't want to wait, I would go for the 5820K. You'll be able to upgrade to Broadwell-E when it's out, and the 5820K should have a good resell value. You could maybe even upgrade to a Xeon in the future once prices drop like the X58 guys are doing.
I'll respond to this thread when I get a concrete date. I am trying to get my hands on the 5.1ghz Xeon as that would be the fastest gaming/general purpose CPU around for a while. I don't think this CPU will be available to purchase by itself. I believe the only way to get this CPU is to have it built into a server and delivered fully configured. The good thing is that if I ask nicely my sales people will order things like this for me to play with.
CreatedTheMultiverse
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Feb 3, 2016
- Messages
- 339
I think the rumors I read pointed toward 4 cores only. Clocked that high, it wouldn't shock me if it was limited to 4, either.
Where did you read this? Can't find any info on Skylake-E or the new HEDT chipset (X99 successor) roadmap.
I'm almost pulling the trigger on LGA2011v3 with Broadwell-E in H2 2016, when they hopefully chip, BUT:
- Still no M.2 RAID 0 booting on X99 (minor letdown)
- nVidia Pascal and AMD Polaris HBM2 variants have both been postponed to later in 2017 (only GDDR5(x) variants in 2016, which is a miniscule upgrade for HE)
- USB 3.1 on most X99 boards (TB3) is a kludge
- You can choke up 40 lanes with just 2 x 16x PCIe gfx and a couple of 4x PCIe M.2 drives. Not much left for TB, USB, SATA, SATAe and the rest
- no DMI3.0 on X99
- Optane support is coming (in 2017 I hope)
- LGA 2011v3 CPUs seem to have plateauedd at c. 4.5GHz on conventional cooling (OCed). Yes, the 5.1Ghz 4-core Broadwell-E might be coming in 2016...
- Skylake is stuck on 20 lanes (Z170) and Kaby Lake gets 4 more. Dual channel memory. Just not there for HEDT, even if it gets two generation newer CPUs.
I'm still rocking i7 920 @4Ghz, tri-channel, USB3.0 upgraded, GTX970, plenty of RAM, fast SATA3 SSD. This is enough for daily tasks - just the hard crunching is looking for more cores/clock/ram/bandwidth. And this system is getting long in the tooth (from 2009). It's just that an x99 upgrade is not big of an upgrade, after 7 years of waiting... It feels like we've been on an undulating plateau for the past years.
The only thing tempting me to upgrade is the great drop in DDR4 prices, which doesn't look like it has bottomed out yet, though.
Now, if I knew with 90% probability that in Q1-Q2 Intel will ship a new HEDT chipset + Skylake-E (+ perhaps native TB3, more PCIe lanes, Optane support, more cores and/or higher clocks, M.2 RAID booting support on UEFI, etc) I would definitely wait. I don't upgrade main system every year.
I don't need the speed so much for games, more for large data set calculations in Julia/R and 4K video work. It's mostly freelanced and self-financed, and I don't have anymore a steady $8k/mo income stream to finance this from. If I had, I'd just upgrade for the hell of it.
I guess in August (IDF 2016) we'll know more. Mobo makers might offer some clues at Taipei in June (Computex Taipei 2016). Till then, doesn't look like there's a lot of information going around, or is there?
morningreis
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 1,574
Upgrade to a Xeon x5675 or x5680. You can get them cheap off eBay. Faster stock clocks, 32nm, 6 cores. Great chips all around and should hold you over for a while.
Intel to launch its new 10nm CPUs in early 2017
I wouldn't hold your breath for it but it is coming with a new socket, LGA 2017. You're right, the first gen i7s are still powerful. I'm on x58 myself with an x5675. It's not for lack of processing power that I want to upgrade, but newer features. If you've held out this long, I'd say hang in there a little while longer!
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
I do not believe we will see any 10nm processors other than Atom processors in 2017 at all. Also if Broadwell-E is Q3 or Q4 2016 I do not see Skylake-E in Q1 2017.
That is unless Zen (possible Q4 release for the AM4 platform and sometime in 2017 for server and APU) performs better than AMD has publicly announced.
That is unless Zen (possible Q4 release for the AM4 platform and sometime in 2017 for server and APU) performs better than AMD has publicly announced.
Last edited:
4330thgink
Gawd
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2001
- Messages
- 659
I couldn't wait any longer. I pulled the trigger on a 5820K and Asrock Extreme4 at Microcenter near Cleveland over the weekend. My current system is giving me too many problems lately.
Just have to wait for the RAM to roll in from Newegg(didn't care for what MC had in stock). And for my Samsung SM951 256gb to arrive from Staples(cashed in $95 worth of gift cards I received from work on it - $129.99 + tax out of my pocket).
Just have to wait for the RAM to roll in from Newegg(didn't care for what MC had in stock). And for my Samsung SM951 256gb to arrive from Staples(cashed in $95 worth of gift cards I received from work on it - $129.99 + tax out of my pocket).
Thanks. Hunting down x5680 now locally first, then on eBay. Hopefully will get beyond 4.5Ghz. Am thinking of upgrading the CPU cooler and de-lidding the Xeon to get down the temps.
Next stop: Find a way to build M.2 RAID 0, perhaps using this M.2 RAID Controller from StarTech:
2x M.2 NGFF SSD RAID Controller Card plus 2x SATA III Ports - PCIe
And then making it bootable on x58 using an additional SATA drive, which has the Clover EFI bootloader:
Clover EFI bootloader
If those work, I'm more than happy with what I have. Can snatch a second GTX970 on fire-sale when GTX1080 and GTX1070 ship this summer. That SLI should push me nicely beyond 2017 onto Skylake-E and next chipset.
morningreis
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 10, 2005
- Messages
- 1,574
If you're looking for a PCIE solution, consider this also:
Amazon.com: Apricorn Velocity Duo SSD Upgrade Kit and Disc Array for PC and Mac (VEL-DUO): Computers & Accessories
With the 2x M.2 card you posted, you're not going to see the full benefit of M.2 because you're going to be bottlenecked by SATA III. I'm using the Apricorn card with 2x850 EVOs, and RAID 0 works right out of the box, bootable, and it supports TRIM. The trouble is it's only PCIE x2, which means max 800MB/s (I do actually get close to this amount) and this is close to the limit of SATA III in RAID 0. Also the other major benefit is that it's cheaper to get 2x high capacity SSDs than 2x M.2 cards. You could get 2x512GB traditional SSDs for the price of one 512GB M.2 SSD. You don't have to get the fastest SSD for this since neither are going to be maxed out, so there is real potential to get a lot of capacity, with good speeds, for a decent price here.
Another option is something like the Kingston Predator 240GB/480GB. Not 100% sure if they are bootable on X58, and cost per GB is higher. I've heard of some people successfully booting, but that it's also not completely stable.
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
Great find, thanks! Already have 1 850Pro 1TB, could easily buy another one and RAID those. Would finally have enough space on the system drive for all the apps and games
Had not checked the StarTech M.2 interface, bummed it is SATA3 not nvme. Ah well. Currently I cannot find any PCI-e nvme controller cards that have m.2 slots/connectors. The Kingston E1000 with 1+ MOPS is coming, but it's going to be wayyyyy too expensive.
Some of the PCIe nVME add-on cards like Zotac Sonix 480GB are enticing, but probably also require external SATA drive + clover for bootability under the x58 chipset, plus the price is not the cheapest. Not sure about the performance either, can't find reviews yet.
http://www.thessdreview.com/daily-n...pcie-gen3-interface-and-phison-e7-controller/
Yes, this Xeon + SATA-RAID upgrade seem like a sane choice for now. If I can make this work, I can easily surf until the X99 successor ships with hopefully more future proof tech and more PCIe lanes.
As an Amazon Associate, HardForum may earn from qualifying purchases.
SomeGuy133
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2015
- Messages
- 3,447
get SKL unless you need more PCIe lanes, cores, and quad channel. If you dont need thoise get s 6700K. We still dont know how good the single thread on BW will be. BW quad had terrible clocks.
I went ahead and went with a 5820k. I set it to 4.4ghz with 1.25v and it passes everything I've put it through. That was literally the first speed/voltage I tried, so I there's a chance I could lower the voltage a bit or up the clocks some. Bottom line is that I didn't get a dud, so I'm happy with that. I went with a bet on future games using more cores. Worst case scenario, I have a solid PC that's slightly slower than a Skylake setup in games and better at just about anything else.
Upgrading from an i5 2500K to an i7 3770 definitely made a difference in gaming performance for me. I haven't done any terribly scientific benchmarking, but the framerate counter basically never drops below about 55 now, whereas it previously would get down into the lower 40s sometimes This is with a GTX970, using Assassin's Creed Syndicate and Rise of the Tomb Raider as the most recent games I can remember playing.
I think my GPU is my limiting factor now, but the 3770 definitely seems better matched to it than the 2500K did.
Anyway, the only motherboard I had that would work with my 3770 died this week, so now I'm left in sort of the same position as the OP where it seems attractive to upgrade, even though the actual difference in performance isn't really much more than 20% or so, versus just sourcing another 1155 board from ebay or something.
Did the following for my X58 Nehalem i920:
- Xeon X5675 hexa-core off eBay + new cpu-cooler. Hopefully will get 4.2-4.4GHz out of it. Let's see.
- Lycom DT-120 PCIe x4 + Samsung SM951 AHCI - should be bootable and c. 3x faster than SATA-3 on this
- ASM1142 based USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type C + Type A PCIe controller
- 24GB RAM - might try 48GB if 8GB DIMMs work as RAM is dirt cheap (up from 12GB) 1866Mhz DDR3
- Waiting for Vega and Pascal (HBM2) before upgrading GTX970
Should last me until the new platform for Skylake-E and related Xeons are out and hopefuly available 2nd hand off eBay :-D
- Xeon X5675 hexa-core off eBay + new cpu-cooler. Hopefully will get 4.2-4.4GHz out of it. Let's see.
- Lycom DT-120 PCIe x4 + Samsung SM951 AHCI - should be bootable and c. 3x faster than SATA-3 on this
- ASM1142 based USB 3.1 Gen 2 Type C + Type A PCIe controller
- 24GB RAM - might try 48GB if 8GB DIMMs work as RAM is dirt cheap (up from 12GB) 1866Mhz DDR3
- Waiting for Vega and Pascal (HBM2) before upgrading GTX970
Should last me until the new platform for Skylake-E and related Xeons are out and hopefuly available 2nd hand off eBay :-D
ochadd
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,324
Recently I started thinking about a Broadwell-E build. Now that the Broadwell Xeon reviews are in the only thing that could make me pull the trigger is pricing an 8 core CPU in the $500-700 range. I'd bite for <$600 for sure and have to really think about it between $600-$700. Priced anything over that and I'll just live with what I have until Skylake-E or Kaby Lake. I've wanted to make the jump to HEDT platforms for years but couldn't justify buying into dated platforms compared to the mainstream.
ochadd
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- May 9, 2008
- Messages
- 1,324
Fairly soon I would say. Intel is updating it's documentation.
Intel Core i7-6950X Extreme Edition listed in support docs - CPU - News - HEXUS.net
Intel Core i7-6950X Extreme Edition listed in support docs - CPU - News - HEXUS.net
drescherjm
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Nov 19, 2008
- Messages
- 14,941
I am somewhat interested in the E5 V4 xeons (that are 145W TDP and greater / workstation chips) although I will certainly wait to see what Zen has to offer. With that said I my guess is that I will end up getting a 10 core / 20 threaded Skylake-E on Black Friday of 2017 to replace my i7 970 based windows development box.
Last edited:
I'm hopeful about the spacing of the launch of Broadwell-E some time after that of Broadwell-EP. One of the criticisms I've levied at Intel in the past (especially to their marketing departments) in regards to the HEDT i7 is that it has been the Xeon reject bin chip. A die that's not quite good enough to be a Xeon, so it becomes an i7. I'm hoping that Intel is making all of the Broadwell-E dies to the same standard as the EP dies, and that is the source of the two month delay in launch (which would be great news in my opinion). A very high manufacturing standard would be a great help in maximizing what people can achieve with these chips.
PliotronX
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2000
- Messages
- 2,070
I'd more call it Broad Canyonwell but I am fairly interested in Broadwell-E. I am thinking I can go the distance and wait to see what Zen does competition wise. Even if it doesn't smash Intel equivalents, I will be in a better position to decide which DDR4 platform to go for because I'd like to support the underdog if I'm not sacrificing a huge performance and power efficiency hit but Skylake-E does make me drool a little bit.