Back to Article

  • madwolfa - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    Ah... Celeron 300A... I still remember taping it with scotch with my dad. Been running it on 450MHz with enormous radiator on it. Reply
  • gobaers - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    Coppermine, if I recall correctly. What an awesome CPU, it was the prefect complement to a Voodoo 2 3D card. Reply
  • gobaers - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    No, it was Mendocino. Coppermine was the 533MHz part that followed. Reply
  • Wolfpup - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    Coppermine was multiple generations (and years) later. It was the second version of the Pentium 3, which competed with AMD's early Athlons, and was the second CPU to cross the 1GHz border. Reply
  • RU482 - Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - link

    Coppermine 550e - ah, my first build! how quickly 13 years have flown Reply
  • mules - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    So, when can I buy a new Haswell with 4600 GT3e laptop? Reply
  • Galatian - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    Never? GT3e is HD5200. Reply
  • Azethoth - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    Thanks for the tease, I am starting to dream up my next desktop build!

    "especially given AMD's current competitive position". Well, unless they change their mind, AMD has said they are permanently out of the fast CPU race. So its really a permanent position right?
  • HisDivineOrder - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    Unless you believe the rumored Centurion 5ghz FX chip is coming. Even then, I'm not sure if I'd call that a "fast CPU' beyond the actual speed its running. Reply
  • chizow - Sunday, April 14, 2013 - link

    Yeah almost feel that should read "AMD's current non-competitive position". The way it is now gives AMD far too much credit imo and implies they have a competitive solution.

    Anyways, looking forward to Haswell, hopefully all this fused mainboard/socket situation is overblown, but I'm looking forward to some IPC gains, soldered heatspreader and similar or better overclockability compared to SB/IVB. It's been 4 very good years on X58, but my Nehalem main rig needs updating.
  • Hrel - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    Damn, I'm still running Nvidia 650 sli with a Core 2 Duo E8400. Haha, use that desktop almost exclusively for watching tv shows and movies at this point though. Plugged into a tv with bluetooth keyboard/mouse. 4GB DDR2-800, GTX-460 768MB with a USB 3.0 add in card, a 256GB SSD and it's overclocked to 3.53Ghz. But I only overclock when I'm going to be rendering video or editing pictures on it. Old girl has held up well over the years, Asus motherboard is fantastic. Certainly seen it's fair share of upgrades. Originally had a Celeron, then Pentium 4 HT, then Pentium D 830 I believe, then Core 2 Duo E6600, finally the E8400. GPU's, X1650XT, or something, 256MB vRAM.. Then 8800GT, 512MB GDDR3. Then money got tight so sold that and got HD4670 512MB DDR3. Then finally the upgrade to GTX460 768MB. You're comment made me get all nostalgic, sorry for carrying on. Reply
  • stickmansam - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    Will be interesting to see if they will return to solder to help cool the extra heat from more things on the die. The 22nm process maturity should help too.

    The bclk likely won't change max stable OC too much except for providing more flexibility
  • Hubb1e - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    So this means the return of i3 overclocking. AMD had better really step up their game or really hope that game developers produce ports that require lots of cores. Reply
  • A5 - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    Indeed. The i3s are unlocked downwards, right? You could do a 167 BCLK x 27 Ratio to get a 4.5GHz overclock with a good chip and the right cooling. Reply
  • stickmansam - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    BCLK may be locked on lower level chips or in the chipset, we shall see Reply
  • epobirs - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    With the next generation of consoles pushing multi-core, it seems likely the PC versions of games will follow suit. Reply
  • Navier - Friday, April 12, 2013 - link

    If this is true: "The default BCLK for Haswell parts will remain at 100MHz, however now you'll have the ability to select 125MHz or 167MHz as well."

    Then with good air/radiator cooling could a 25% OC may be posible with i7 4770?

    Or maybe a i7 4770S with lower base clock + BLCK overclock to 125MHz may be a very interesting performer, and still have all the features (VT-d and TXT) without buy a "K" (feature Killer) model.
  • MrSpadge - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    THe multiplier is unlocked downwards anyway, so no need to go for a S model. Reply
  • HardwareDufus - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    I hope they reverse their decision not to include GT3 for the Desktop Variants of the CPU. I still enjoy building mITXmachines with decent video performance without adding a discreet card. At the moment, I enjoy my I7-3770K @ 4Ghz in my mITX machine. But I need to build a 2nd machine... so I hope the I7-4770K will be available with GT3, though I have heard it will not.. Reply
  • sherlockwing - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    You can get desktop chips i5 or i7 with GT3e, however those are the R SKU BGA modeals. You should be able to get MITX models with those soldered on. But it is unlikely for Intel to offer 4770K with that GPU since most CPU overclockers would have no use for GT3e in their system. Reply
  • HisDivineOrder - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    It's the chicken and the egg. People won't find a use for their integrated GPU until they start making it widely available and take seriously the idea of switching between the integrated GPU and the discrete, letting the two take different tasks. For example, imagine your discrete GPU focusing on the game's graphics and your Intel integrated GPU (that's already taking up space anyway) focusing on secondary tasks like physics or AI routines.

    Once the integrated GPU becomes an expected feature that everyone has, why shouldn't it be used instead of just sitting there like chopped liver? Right now, Intel seems intent upon mostly keeping everyone thinking like you.

    Whereas if they'd work to get everyone using it, even if not as their gaming GPU, eventually they might convince people that it's "good enough" for a lot of them (when they actually are). As of now, many of their biggest customers wouldn't know if it were good enough as they never even bother to turn it on.
  • sherlockwing - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    You can get GT3e on the desktop, problem? I just think it is a bad fit in term of power/thermal with a 4770K people are looking to push 5 Ghz on. Do we need a GT3e sized IGP on the flagship, probably, but that can wait until 14nm die shrink to Broadwell. Reply
  • sherlockwing - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    Have you even seen the die size of that BGA Haswell chip with GT3e? it would drive up 4770K die size significantly(thus increaseing cost a lot) for something that most people looking to get a 4770K wouldn't use. Reply
  • mayankleoboy1 - Saturday, April 13, 2013 - link

    get a Trinity now/Richland later ? Reply
  • juhatus - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    what is wrong with font? reading this with chrome 26 on 1440x900 resolution and the font looks (even what Im typing) that its written on typewriter that is almost out of ink.

    Please dont abandon us little people still using pc's...
  • nyogen - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    You probably, recently installed Microsoft's latest and infamous platform update KB267838. It's been causing a lot of issues for a lot of users, one of which is what you are describing. Everything should return to normal after you uninstall it and mark it as hidden for further updates, at least until they sort the issues. Reply
  • epobirs - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    An update for IE 5.5? I somehow doubt many people have been installing that lately. Reply
  • Sabresiberian - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    Font looks fine om my PC. Maybe something to do with Chrome? I'm using Firefox.

    Suggesting that Anandtech is in any way "abandoning" PCs or making them somehow second-class on their website is just silly.
  • UltraTech79 - Wednesday, May 01, 2013 - link

    Stop shedding your tears and being dramatic, little girl. Learn to zoom in. Reply
  • mooninite - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    So now that Intel has integrated voltage regulation, how long until they start charging to allow changes? Will Broadwell or Skylake limit voltage changes to only "K" or "Extreme Edition" models? Maybe they will invent a new model for this "limited feature". Reply
  • Hrel - Monday, April 15, 2013 - link

    "The integrated voltage regulator will support all of the same adjustments than we're used to on current Ivy Bridge platforms."
    same adjustments that* we're used to ( I believe).
  • boogerlad - Tuesday, April 16, 2013 - link

    Will haswell-e also have unlocked base clock straps? It's quite upsetting how their top of the line 8-core xeons today can't overclock at all, and the i7 3960x is only 6 cores, a crippled xeon. Reply
  • JimmiG - Wednesday, April 17, 2013 - link

    "Intel made good on this tradeoff by giving us a couple of K-series SKUs with unlocked multipliers, but it pretty much killed the market for buying low end Intel CPUs and overclocking them to deliver the performance of much higher end parts "

    I disagree, the K models aren't really any more expensive than the non-K ones. Sure you can get something like the i7-3930K for nearly $600, but there are also several models in the i5 range that come unlocked and sell for around $200. So you can still buy a lower-end CPU and overclock it to the same level as a more expensive one.

    The bigger problem is that all "K" models lack hardware virtualization, which is a strange artificial limitation. If you want to have an overclocked system for gaming, but still want to do e.g. labs with virtual machines (studying for Microsoft certifications etc.) then you'll have to build a second system for virtualization.
  • canthearu - Friday, April 19, 2013 - link

    The K models actually do support most virtualization features.

    The only feature they don't support is VT-d, which is used to give virtual machines direct access to hardware, and requires specific motherboard support as well. Most people really have no use for this, as it denies access to the hardware from the host OS, and means that hardware is locked to a single VM. The loss of this feature, in my view, isn't terribly important for the K series target market.
  • lucky9 - Tuesday, April 30, 2013 - link

    Agree with the target market comment. However I run VMs regularly so I always want all the features turned on. Buying a processor that doesn't have all the virtual machine-specific features doesn't make sense for me. Of course I despise what INTEL is doing. And the thought of the difference in pricing doesn't figure in either. $5 or $10 does not a difference make. Just cheezy. Reply
  • erikroberts - Friday, May 03, 2013 - link

    my history:
    80286 10 > 12
    Pentium 90 > 112
    Pentium 166 > 183
    Celeron 300a > 450
    Celeron 566 > 850
    Northwood 1600a > 2400
    Conroe E6700 2.66 > 3.33
    IvyBridge 3570K 3.40 > 4.00

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now