POST A COMMENT

38 Comments

Back to Article

  • piroroadkill - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Extremely uninspiring refresh. Reply
  • damianrobertjones - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    ...? Maybe there's more to these new parts than clock speed Reply
  • ericloewe - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    The only thing that would make sense is a revised memory controller that can actually use 16GB UDIMMs - however, since that is a rather large update, we'd probably have heard something by now... Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    I suppose this memory controller upgrade won't happen, because this requires changes in the silicon logic, and I suppose "Refresh" uses essentially identical (OLD) silicon dies - it can be even the same C0 stepping (for quad core parts).

    In a few words, I think it's going to be like Core i7-2600K -> Core i7-2700K:
    same stepping, essentially nothing new, just 100 MHz overall frequency increase.
    Reply
  • mczak - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    All mobo makers are saying there's new bios for proper support of "Haswell refresh" parts, which suggests these are indeed a new stepping.
    But I wouldn't really expect new functionality neither.
    Reply
  • MrBlonde - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    The BIOSes need to be updated with the new CPU IDs for "proper support", not really an indication that the CPUs use a new stepping. Reply
  • Cellar Door - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    I agree, I got a 4670K last summer in anticipation for this refresh - as in a new stepping, ironed out K parts, with less of a silicon lottery. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for now but it looks like that is not going to happen. Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Being more realistic, I would not expect "ironed out K parts, with less of a silicon lottery".

    It's probably going to be the same C0 stepping with the same poor paste between the chip and heat-spreader. Just +100 MHz in stock, which for K parts means essentially nothing (go to BIOS and add these +100 MHz in 2 minutes) :)
    Reply
  • lurker22 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    It's what happens with no significant competition in the x86 market Reply
  • KAlmquist - Wednesday, March 05, 2014 - link

    My thoughts exactly. Intel is lowering prices on the Pentium models a bit, but if you need anything faster... Reply
  • HardwareDufus - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Meh,
    Thought we'd see HD5200e as the IGP on an unlocked desktop part for a mid cycle refresh.
    Peter
    Reply
  • S3anister - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    That Core i7-4790 looks really attractive for a f@h box. Reply
  • SetiroN - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    It does? And here I was thinking it had a 3% frequency difference from what we've already had for an year...
    Thank you Intel, this is a folding revolution!
    Reply
  • Eurasianman - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Slight typo: Core i5-4771 should be Core i7-4771 Reply
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    No new K edition parts? Nothing to really interest me then. Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    New K edition parts (like Core i7-4790K & Core i5-4690K) are supposed to come later, but their sense is diminishing, because the old ones were already unlocked, and new ones probably won't overclock any better than the old ones. So, these new K parts will be released probably just for the formal completeness of the new ("Refresh") lineup. Reply
  • fokka - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    would only be a real improvement if they soldered on the heat spreader. very underwhelming update. Reply
  • MrSpadge - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    They used to roll out small frequency increases of existing chips every few months, now they're bundling them all together and call it a refresh. Big deal, not. The only differences between the former times are:
    - longer refresh cycle
    - smaller frequency increase
    - lower price cuts
    Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    I guess, there will be no price cuts this time - just the newer ("Refresh") models will displace the previous ones - with no real price change at all. Reply
  • Ken_g6 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    I see one piece of big news: There's finally an Intel chip that officially runs at 4GHz. I wonder if we'll ever see 5?

    But no Crystal Well parts? 0-well.
    Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    "There's finally an Intel chip that officially runs at 4GHz".

    To be more precise, there finally going to be an Intel desktop "MAINSTREAM" ~$320 chip that officially runs UP TO 4.0 GHz.

    Because formally UP TO 4.0 GHz (stock - without OC) was first reached by Intel relatively long time ago on the desktop:

    1) There was Core i7-3970X, running UP TO 4.0 GHz released back in November 2012, but it was an "EXTREME" $1000+
    2) There is Core i7-4960X, running UP TO 4.0 GHz released in September 2013, but it is an "EXTREME" $1000+
    Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    "I wonder if we'll ever see 5 [GHz]?"

    I think, NO. No (even UP TO - in few threads active Turbo) 5 GHz mainstream user CPUs at stock (without OC) in the foreseeable future - not on the current stack of silicon manufacturing technologies, at least.
    Reply
  • extide - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    There was also an E3 Xeon, I think v2 and/or v3 series that was up to 4Ghz stock as well. Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    That's right about E3 Xeons (I just limited myself with desktop parts in that post)
    There is an even 3.7/4.1 stock Ivy Bridge Xeon E3-1290 v2.
    That's about the formal top frequency at stock for Intel.
    Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    I meant, Xeon E3 is formally a server/workstation part, despite often working in regular desktop motherboards because it shares the same silicon die with the corresponding generation of desktop i7's. Reply
  • jardows2 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Let me know when they release a version that does not have integrated graphics. Kind of a waste to put in when you are using a high-end discreet video card. Reply
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Buy LGA2011 parts if you want IGPless. Discrete GPU users aren't a large enough part of the consumer market to justify a separate product line (and all the validation, inventory, etc costs that come with one) any more. Reply
  • jimjamjamie - Saturday, March 08, 2014 - link

    The i5-3350P may interest you Reply
  • anonymous_user - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    What does the HD 4000 Series mean for Core i3-4150? Is it a downgrade from Core i3-4130's HD 4400 or is it the same? Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Probably, it will be the same HD 4400 as in case of Core i3-4130, because both are Core i3-41xx series. Reply
  • iwod - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    No News on Haswell -E ? Reply
  • BadThad - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Listen Intel! All we really want are Celeron and Pentium K parts with unlimited multipliers. It really sucks that they have pretty much turned overclocking into the "pay to play" arena. We want a repeat of the 300A! Reply
  • BadThad - Tuesday, March 04, 2014 - link

    Anyone else here dreaming of a $50 processor running at 4.5+GHz? Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Wednesday, March 05, 2014 - link

    Now, Captain Obvious answers your question and rules the stage:

    OK, suppose you have it - say, dual core Celeron with no HT and 2 MB L3 Cache.

    Then it will overclock nicely beyond 4.5 GHz, and you will get better single-threaded performance than locked i7 at 3.9 turbo (going to be4.0 soon with Refresh).
    However, in striking difference with Celeron 300A times, NOW the key point is the big CPUs costing $$$ are multicore and multithreaded.
    But with just 2 cores and no HT, your modern overclocked Celeron will have the overall maximum performance just 2 times its single threaded performance (at best). In multithreading tasks (games included these days), even being overclocked, your overclocked Celeron will still be no match to the STOCK frequency Core i5 (which has 6 MB L3 cache instead of your 2 MB), not even mentioning the mainstream LGA115x i7 with 8 HT threads and 8 MB L3.

    So, because of multithreading (no less than 4 cores/threads is serious these days), your overclocked to 4.5+ GHz $50 Celeron will perform overall around $120 Core i3. No better than that. Not bad, but no overall comparison to Core i5 or especially Core i7.
    Reply
  • TiGr1982 - Wednesday, March 05, 2014 - link

    So, Celeron and the likes are for modern "typewriters"/web surfing :) Reply
  • fteoath64 - Thursday, March 06, 2014 - link

    This is what you get when there is no competition in the cpu space!. Yeah 100Mhz increase there. Fast enough already. Not even giving HD 5000 or 5100 graphics upgrade to i3 and i5 which might just negate a discrete gpu purchase for some. Talk about doing little to nothing!.
    AMD's APU is going in a different direction as Intels, so the segmentation of the market is just fractured for each to carve out their own niche. This is actually a dangerous duopoly cartel in the x86 world. This stagnation is likely going to last for a while as each tried to maximise their current process (Intel on 22nm, AMD on 28nm SPH) while the PC market declines further.
    So is Intel going the route of HSA in the near future or not ?. That is something they cannot really ignore unless they have a better solution than HSA up their sleeves ?. Sure there is time to see AMD ramping up the software side of things on HSA and tries to diversify the lower end segment. Intel can rest on their laurels and cut prices without doing much!. Tick-Tock ?!. There is Tock and more tocks we are going to hear and not a Tick until their 14nm kicks in whenever Intel feels it can reap more gains in the market. Not on a down turn but maybe on the up swing.
    Reply
  • LancerVI - Wednesday, March 26, 2014 - link

    Been using Intel for a while now and for obvious reasons, but I have to say, this is non-sense. A new motherboard is required for refreshes now!!! That's just plain outrageous!!! I don't care how slow AMD is, it might be time to build an Athlon box. Reply
  • OCguy - Friday, April 04, 2014 - link

    There is definitely word of K series processor...the article was right here on AT:

    http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=23742...
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now