Have Intel put an end to this or could it be down to board manufactures?
I was thinking of picking up a Haswell E3 1200 Xeon and trying.
Cheers.
Have Intel put an end to this or could it be down to board manufactures?
I was thinking of picking up a Haswell E3 1200 Xeon and trying.
Cheers.
Probably only on K versions, but it is faintly possible that it is merely a MB limitation that may be addressed by a future BIOS revision.
I would assume you can't but I would love to know if you find otherwise.
I would imagine they'll lock the xeons something chronic. The IB/SB Xeons didn't even have the 4 bin OC non-ks had. Unless you don't mind being stuck I would hold off until concrete comes up. They need to make the k series attractive somehow :/
The K series are already pretty attractive, the 4670k only costs 6% more than the 4670.
So you only need a 6% overclock (3.8 -> 4ghz) in order to justify the price.
The issue is more whether this means extra cost on the MB/cooler.
A bit over 20%.
Thanks Willzzz! 20% not bad.
Well yes, that's an average, on many things it would be more.
It's difficult to put an all round percentage on the performance.
From what I've seen its about a 4-500Mzh. ie a 4.6Ghz Haswell is neck and neck with a 5.1Ghz Sandy.
That would imply a mere 10% increase which may be true for certain applications but would not be typical.
Video encoding 25% faster
Photo processing 20% faster
Some tasks are not much faster at all, but this is usually because there is bottleneck elsewhere in the system, GPU, memory, etc.
For tasks that are CPU limited the improvement is usually 20% or more, sometimes even over 40%.
It completely depends on what your doing though. A 4670k might be 20% faster than a 2500k at stock but the 4670k has a 4x100mhz clock speed advantage off the bat and frequency alone in some cases is an advantage and you have to take that into account when making comparisons with K versions.
The performance gap between Sandy, Ivy and Haswell shrinks the more you push clock speed and a lot of the 22nm chips start to fall away to the point that the extra frequency of the 2500K can yield more performance because of the sheer grunt the extra clock speed is offering to apps.
Throwing a blanket percentage over both chips is not really the best way to get an understanding of what performance in on offer IMO.
The performance gap only shrinks if Sandy overclocks better, now this may be true on average, but it depends totally what clock speeds your chip can manage. If the both overclock by the same amount then the relative performance remains the same (on CPU limited tasks).
If you take a fairly typical 4.5ghz Haswell you'd need your Sandy to exceed 5.2ghz.
Such as?
I think at 4.5Ghz v 5.2Ghz Haswell would struggle to out perform Sandy bridge in most situations. A lot of game engines would benefit from higher clock speeds and it seems multitasking favour a higher clock speed.
Have a quick look at this if you don't believe me.
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/201...l-cpu-review/1
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)