POST A COMMENT

52 Comments

Back to Article

  • AJdaBoss - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Yeah! 1ST COMMENT!!!!! 4790k ! First intel cpu at 4.0ghz out da box, and only 4 more watts to sacrifice!! Ok waz hoping for more... but atleast the expected finally came way afte r expected time, true devil canyon 6core 12 thread 2015? :P broadwell 2020? Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    No Sale , No Profit here, they didn't even bother to add a slightly better AVX2 SIMD, or release at least one desktop core with eDRAM GT3e before their new updated version arrives whenever...

    nothing to see here, move along, those new octacore ARM cortex look nice for my next device spend...
    Reply
  • Galatian - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Wut? If you were considering a 4790K with all it's power, I'm not sure how you can be satisfied with a ARM CPU. That being said, it sound like you are just trolling. Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    you are of the "one core to fit them all" then !, i however have different uses for different cores/SOC.

    i already have a i7-4770 but that's irrelevant, im looking for something new that "i want to actually buy" and is worth the costs , it is not here with these re-badges and a process tweak + some good thermal solder they should have used from day one
    Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    "If you were considering a 4790K with all it's power"
    you also seem to equate 4790K with lots of power over a i7-4770 , i can say for sure you have never taken a standard 1080P blue-ray and put it through http://www.makemkv.com/download/ to make a generic 1080p.mkv with all the subs etc, then ffmpeged it , if you had, you would realize that on visual quality settings -crf 18, high profile, slowest -vf hqdn3d,unsharp=5:5:0.5,gradfun etc its not got "with all it's power" you seem to think it does.
    Reply
  • nathanddrews - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Why compress it further? Storage is cheeeeeeeeeap! Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    you pick the options on a sliding scale for your need and longer term storage use, in my case i try and hit the sreaming over the LAN to anything i might wish to view on, be it the large hdtv, the android 10" tablets or the pc/linux/other OS im using at the time...

    for instance i have an average of 600KB 720P files for the android tv stuff, and straight -crf 16 1080P for the hdtv/monitors
    Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    600MB .... Reply
  • piroroadkill - Thursday, June 05, 2014 - link

    I prefer an nice single MKV container and a reasonably sized file.

    No, storage isn't cheap if you store thousands of bluray images.
    Reply
  • Galatian - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Seriously...I'm completly lost by your statements:

    1.) You claim no improvements

    Ok there are only slight improvements if you are coming from a i7-4771, but what about everybody on older chips?

    2.) You then go on to claim that an Octacore ARM is a somewhat better proposition.

    I already called you out on that one: An Octacore ARM is in a completely different league then a unlocked 88W TDP Core i7.

    3.) Upon my previous point you are trying to make a point about "something new that you actually want to buy"

    I'm little lost here: you spend money for the hack of it? I mean if you already have a Core i7-4770 then yeah this is not something for you...not sure why you are complaining though?

    4.) You are then making the point of ripping/encoding videos.

    If you are serious about this, you wouldn't get this processor but rather a HEDT porcecessor, but better yet even a Xeon with even more cores. For everything else Quicksync is fine and included in this processor. Your ARM Octacore will be even slower...so again I'm not sure what your point is?
    Reply
  • Alexey291 - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    why do you bother replying to him seriously? He is comparing an arm octa-core which is these days either a big.LITTLE (aka 4 REALLY slow cores and 4 slow cores) or the one mediatek is making which is simply 8 really slow cores (a7's are terrible yes yes).

    Unless he is actually stupid (i tend to assume this is not the case usually) he can't be seriously comparing arm cores (especially A7's) to i7 cores...
    Reply
  • BMNify - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    "Galatian: You then go on to claim that an Octacore ARM is a somewhat better proposition."

    "Alexey291:why do you bother replying to him seriously? He is comparing an arm octa-core which is these days either a big.LITTLE (aka 4 REALLY slow cores and 4 slow cores) or the one mediatek is making which is simply 8 really slow cores"

    LOL, you two seem very good at reading things into posts that simply don't exist, i don't compare anything to anything here.

    i commented that in this update i will look to spend my cash elsewhere (in this case a good quad cortex, next time it will be something else oc) as there's nothing here for ME, the key point being "worth the costs"
    "that "i want to actually buy" and is worth the costs , it is not here"

    i give a working example of how and why the current i7 is not up to the task for highest quality real time encoding in this case, nothing more.

    "I'm little lost here: you spend money for the hack of it?" LOL that's funny, seriously, what use is money other than what it actually gets you, you cant eat it, it doesn't compute data, it might keep you warm for a few seconds on a deserted island if you can use it as kindling , everyone spends money for the heck of it, you work to live or you live to work, ether way you use it to get what you want/need nothing more.

    but 4 was best of all, a HEDT processor as of today is a crap "Ivy Bridge-E." that does NOT have AVX2 and its 945.77 US Dollars for a single Intel Xeon 2.3 GHz Processor again NO AVX2 and still using the crappy Intel QuickPath Interconnect (QPI) using A clock rate of 2.4 GHz yields a data rate of 19.2 GB/s...

    so your advice to use a so called serious core amounts to a Galatian: fool and his money being wasted by a large margin, research man, then and only then make your choice
    Reply
  • Thorburn - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Its a Haswell speed bump, not a new micro-architecture.
    i7-4790K looks quite a replacement for the i7-4770K - means the K-SKU is once again the fastest chip at stock as well.

    Not sure I see a big argument for a GT3e SKU in the desktop either, the pricing means you're better off just buying a discrete card.
    Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    your assumption is that gfx are the primary reason for wanting a eDRAM GT3e so a discrete card would fit there, however its the eDRAM that makes things like x264 UHD encoding faster here, the GT3 is just a free bonus for http://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?t=162442 Intel QuickSync Decoder - HW accelerated FFDShow decoder with video processing when you dont want the best visual quality Reply
  • Galatian - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    But if you are already using quick sync as a fast but cheap solution for encoding h264, why would you spend the extra money on the eDRAM equipped chips just for a few seconds less encoding time. Anandtechs Benchmarks on the Crystal Well chips don't show such a huge improvement. Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    its not a few seconds and its always about retaining as much visual quality as is possible from the original content, right now for instance im "avisynthesizer" ffmep AVS batching a QTGMC x2framerate encode to keep best quality while doubling framerates at an average of 20FPS and 90'ish% Reply
  • Kevin G - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    One thing not tested is how well the eDRAM scales with clock speeds. Traditionally larger caches showed better improvements at higher clock speeds due to the much slower growth of memory speeds. With a 4.0 Ghz CPU, the L4 eDRAM cache could show more of a tangible benefit than say at 2.4 Ghz. Reply
  • ZeDestructor - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I don't care for the GT3e very much, but I would like the 128MiB of L4 a lot... Reply
  • dennilfloss - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    That 4790K looks mighty tasty! Reply
  • Acquire - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I must have one of those 4790K Reply
  • NA1NSXR - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    It all really hangs on how overclockable these things are with the new thermal solution. Reply
  • SnAgCu - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    There were rumors that Devil's Canyon K series would support VT-d. The CPU-Z screenshots don't list that feature, are you able to confirm either way? Reply
  • Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    On ark.intel.com, it say no vPro, no VT-d, but yes TSX-NI. It's a shame about the VT-d, but at least they give you the new instructions (which I thought was a really dumb restriction on the previous K-series processors). Reply
  • Galatian - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    TSX-NI is actually big, as the former K chips didn't support it. Wonder why Intel changed their mindset? Reply
  • Old_Fogie_Late_Bloomer - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I wasn't in the market for a new desktop when the original Haswell chips were launched, but I would have found the choice between a few hundred extra megahertz and instructions that promised significant multi-threaded performance increases to be pretty unpalatable, personally. Reply
  • Heffa - Thursday, June 12, 2014 - link

    http://ark.intel.com/products/80807/Intel-Core-i7-...

    Says VT-d is yes
    Reply
  • coolhund - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Still waiting for Broadwell.
    Plus I want to see how much cooler these run now. Though if they are not soldered, I dont have high hopes. Maybe 10 degrees cooler at most, while delided ones with liquid metal get up to 20 degrees cooler.
    Reply
  • Kevin G - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I wouldn't expect a huge drop in temperatures as power density isn't going to go down. I would predict that raw power consumption will be going down a bit though.

    The other factor is that Intel doesn't seem motivated to use better thermal material across the board due to the added cost. Any new or better materials will likely be isolated to K series chips.
    Reply
  • YazX_ - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    so its same CPUs factory OCed, nothing you couldnt do with 4770k or 4670k, here you have it folks, nothing new this year, repackaged last year CPUs Reply
  • Iketh - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    how do you come to that conclusion when they're 4ghz higher at nearly the same TDP is beyond me Reply
  • jimjamjamie - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    4790K is the only interesting offering there, nice clocks. If it can reasonably hit 5GHz with the added overclocking improvements, I think it will find success among enthusiasts. Reply
  • Dovahkin - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Will this G3258 be better than an Athlon 750k...both stock and over clocked?
    I kinda like that this CPU will give me a better upgrade path...but people are telling me games will become optimized for quad core CPUs,..
    Reply
  • BMNify - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    i wouldnt if i were you as the Athlon 750k has AVX SIMD

    this G3258 doesnt have avx or avx2 , if moneys tight you would be better going for at least an i3 even if that is only 2 cores two threads but it does have avx2 and you could swat out a better core later, but it all depends on what you want to do , game, video encode, simple video streaming to the lounge hdtv with LAN NAS etc....
    Reply
  • Soubriquet - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Mystical nomenclature aside upgrading from a QX9650 the 4790K has a big blue arrow over its head saying pick me.

    The only question is the TIM under the lid. If that has not been fixed it will be disappointing.

    I dont fancy delidding but if its that big a difference for cooling it can't be avoided and we will have to hope they haven't changed the glue either. Only question is whether the new packaging material can survive the process. Will be watching AnandTech's promised delidding review with interest.
    Reply
  • Spirall - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    There're rumors of these CPUs having unlocked (sort of) base frequency like SBE/IBE, if true would like to see it's impact in memory access speed (say 1.25 or even 1.50 multiplier versus 1.00). Reply
  • The Von Matrices - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    The unlocked Haswell processors have always had adjustable BCLK ratios. This is nothing new. Reply
  • geok1ng - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    meh. where is the unlocked Haswell-E 8 cores? Reply
  • tviceman - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I would like a review to show any potential power draw and overclocking differences between z87 and z97 boards with the 4790k. Thanks! Reply
  • bludragon - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    My guess is that it is more down to the implementation of the power regulation on the board itself. What I'd like to see is the spec list that shows how much current the different boards can deliver, some testing of the quality of the onboard power supplies (like psu testing is done today), and then some oc comparisons across a barebones board for ~$100, a mid range one for ~$150, and then a higher end board $200+. As it is, I am considering paying an extra $50 just to get more power delivery phases and a few nice marketing bullets. I've no idea if that is worth it! The other nice to have would be audio quality testing of the boards. That $50 also gets me claimed better onboard audio. Reply
  • formulav8 - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Wow, talk about an overhyped Press Release/CPU release. Reply
  • Pheesh - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    ...how is it overhyped? Seems it's exactly what they said it would be. Reply
  • xrror - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Like others I was hoping for an unlocked crystalwell part.

    Even if it turned out not to help much, it still would be fun to see what overclockers could tweak/abuse out of the eDRAM as a L4 cache.
    Reply
  • bludragon - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Nice to see confirmation of the high clock speeds on the i7. Even without overclocking that makes a nice upgrade in speed over the existing chips. Unfortunately this means I am now more tempted by the i7, rather than being able to save money and get almost the same performance with the i5.

    As for the underwhelming factor, yes, this is a minor upgrade to the existing Haswell chips, so if you already have Haswell, or even Sandy Bridge, upgrading will not make much difference. However, I am sitting on a core2duo and so my major dissappointment is that "mid year" has now passed and I am still waiting for reviews or even an availability date.
    Reply
  • bludragon - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Just noticed that the Asus H81M-E supports the i7-4790k and it only has a 3 phase supply. I know... it can't OC, but it you can get it for <$60. So, rather than i5-4690k + $150 z97 mobo + fancy cooler, you could get the i7 and an H81M-E, a basic cooler and probably still have some money left over. Now the challenge is how to hack the H81 mobo to support multiplier OC? Reply
  • AnonymousGuy - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    I direct-die watercool my 4770k, and I can tell you from my experience with 5 3770k's and 3 4770k's that Haswell is a dog when it comes to overclocking. I can throw 1.6V at it and not be able to get 4.8 Ghz stable, where my 100% load temps won't go above 50C.

    So the TIM upgrade doesn't matter to me. What does matter is whether the 4790K is really any different than a 4770k...2 ways this can happen. First, they can tweak the fab process a bit to get faster silicone / lower leakage. Second they can "bin" the die that somewhat-randomly have lower leakage and faster silicone as 4790k's and they'll overclock like monsters.
    Reply
  • AnonymousGuy - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    Forgot my main point: hopefully the 4790K is truly better silicon (either through fab process changes and/or improved binning/cherry picking) than a 4770k and it's not just a rebadged 4770K with better TIM and a higher stock clock speed which would still suck at overclocking for hardcore enthusiasts like me where temperature and voltage aren't the limiting factors. Reply
  • haukionkannel - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    It is the same stepping as 4770K so it is only a rebadge. Hopefully it will last a little bit longer because it has better materials... It will not be faster, but maybe the deviation between chips is smaller, so not so big change to get a chip that overclock really poorly. Upper limit will remain the same though, because there are not improvements in that sector. Reply
  • AnonymousGuy - Tuesday, June 03, 2014 - link

    5.498 Ghz from Team MSI presumably on air/water with all 4 cores enabled: http://hwbot.org/competition/intel_occ_computex14/

    Hopefully Intel didn't cherry pick die specifically for that event. Even if they did I haven't heard of anyone with a 4770k being able to get past 5.1 or 5.2 Ghz without phase change, dICE, or LN2.
    Reply
  • MrSpadge - Wednesday, June 04, 2014 - link

    If people are disappointed by this their expectations were really unrealistic. It's the same die, as nothing else would make economic sense. BUT it's got a massive clock speed advantage over any other current offering from Intel. This won't mean much for OC (unless it means stricter binning), but it can mean a lot for people running stock CPUs!

    This CPU is getting >10% more performance than any other desktop CPU. For lightly threaded workloads it's actually by far the fastest desktop CPU you can buy. I fail to see any reason to complain about this, even though I'd obviously rather have Broadwell + Crystal Well. But those will mean far higher cost for Intel, in contrast to this offering.
    Reply
  • Choppedliver - Thursday, June 05, 2014 - link

    I decided a few years ago my next upgrade would come when I could get >8 threads, ie hyperthreaded with more than 4 cores, and also not generate so much heat I could use it as a space heater... Getting closer . Anyone have any idea when we will see >4 cores in a lower tdp than the current 6 core i7's? those things are getting long in the tooth... 2011 , 39xx series Reply
  • poohbear - Wednesday, June 11, 2014 - link

    Can you please compare the performance of the 4690k and the 2500k? Alot of us are still using Sandy Bridges and would like to know if this is worth the upgrade overclocking and performance wise. Thank you! Reply
  • bigbrave - Friday, July 11, 2014 - link

    With the Haswell CPUs, the voltage regulator is built into the die, but Intel will move the regulator back onto the motherboard for the Broadwell CPUs. So my question is if I have a Z97 motherboard, does it already have a built in voltage regulator in case I decide to upgrade to Broadwell in the future? How will that work?

    In regards to the first 8 core CPU from Intel, the 5960X, how much will Windows 7 bottleneck it? Would it be better to go with that god-awful Windows 8 crap? I'm sure Windows 8 will handle the 8 cores, 16 threads better, but just how much better is my question. Please comment
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now