Intel’s Haswell: Quad-Core Desktop Processor SKUsby Jarred Walton on June 1, 2013 10:01 AM EST
Intel’s Haswell is here, or at least the first salvo of quad-core parts has arrived. Just like we saw with Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge, Intel will be releasing Haswell in stages, starting at the high-end and trickling down from there. Today, we can tell you about the quad-core desktop and mobile parts, and we have several other articles going into greater detail on the performance and features you’ll get. These two Pipeline posts are going to strip out all the other stuff and just focus on the processors being launched today. We’ll have a few short tables showing the currently-announced quad-core SKUs for desktops and mobile, and we’ll have another similar post covering the dual-core parts when those are officially announced.
|Intel 4th Gen Core i7 Desktop Processors|
|Model||Core i7-4770K||Core i7-4770||Core i7-4770S||Core i7-4770T||Core i7-4770R||Core i7-4765T|
|CPU Base Freq||3.5||3.4||3.1||2.5||3.2||2.0|
|Max Turbo||3.9 (Unlocked)||3.9||3.9||3.7||3.9||3.0|
|HD Graphics||4600||4600||4600||4600||Iris Pro 5200||4600|
|GPU Max Clock||1250||1200||1200||1200||1300||1200|
Starting at the top of the product and performance stack, we have the desktop Core i7 parts. All of these CPUs feature Hyper-Threading Technology, so they’re the same quad-core with four virtual cores that we’ve seen since Bloomfield hit the scene. The fastest chip for most purposes remains the K-series 4770K, with its unlocked multiplier and slightly higher base clock speed. Base core clocks as well as maximum Turbo Boost clocks are basically dictated by the TDP, with the 4770S being less likely to maintain maximum turbo most likely, and the 4770T and 4765T giving up quite a bit more in clock speed in order to hit substantially lower power targets.
It’s worth pointing out that the highest “Test TDP” values are up slightly relative to the last generation Ivy Bridge equivalents—84W instead of 77W. Whether that reflects a change in how they determine TDP or if it’s simply to give more headroom to the top performing parts isn’t clear. On the desktop, this is probably not particularly important—7W in TDP could often end up being just 1-2W in practice—so we’re not really concerned. Mobile TDPs are a different matter, and as we’ll discuss elsewhere they’re all 2W higher, but that could also be thanks in part to the higher performance iGPU.
Nearly all of these are GT2 graphics configurations (20 EUs), so they should be slightly faster than the last generation HD 4000 in graphics workloads. The one exception is the i7-4770R, which is also the only chip that comes in a BGA package. The reasoning here is simple, if flawed: if you want the fastest iGPU configuration (GT3e with 40 EUs and embedded DRAM), you’re probably not going to have a discrete GPU and will most likely be purchasing an OEM desktop. Interestingly, the 4770R also drops the L3 cache down to 6MB, and it’s not clear whether this is due to it having no real benefit (i.e. the eDRAM functions as an even larger L4 cache), or if it’s to reduce power use slightly, or Intel may have a separate die for this particular configuration. Then again, maybe Intel is just busily creating a bit of extra market segmentation.
Not included in the above table are all the common features to the entire Core i7 line: AVX instructions, Quick Sync, AES-NI, PCIe 3.0, and Virtualization Technology. As we’ve seen in the past, the K-series parts (and now the R-series as well) omit support for vPro, TXT, VT-d, and SIPP from the list. The 4770K is an enthusiast part with overclocking support, so that makes some sense, but the 4770R doesn’t really have the same qualification. Presumably it’s intended for the consumer market, as businesses are less likely to need the Iris Pro graphics.
|Intel 4th Gen Core i5 Desktop Processors|
|Model||Core i5-4670K||Core i5-4670||Core i5-4670S||Core i5-4670T||Core i5-4570||Core i5-4570S|
|CPU Base Freq||3.4||3.4||3.1||2.3||3.2||2.9|
|Max Turbo||3.8 (Unlocked)||3.8||3.8||3.3||3.6||3.6|
|GPU Max Clock||1200||1200||1200||1200||1150||1150|
The Core i5 lineup basically rehashes the above story, only now without Hyper-Threading. For many users, Core i5 is the sweet spot of price and performance, delivering nearly all the performance of the i7 models at 2/3 the price. There aren’t any Iris or Iris Pro Core i5 desktop parts, at least not yet, and all of the above CPUs are using the GT2 graphics configuration. As above, the K-series part also lacks vPro/TXT/VT-d support but comes with an unlocked multiplier.
Obviously we’re still missing all of the Core i3 parts, which are likely to be dual-core once more, along with some dual-core i5 parts as well. These are probably going to come in another quarter, or at least a month or two out, as there’s no real need for Intel to launch their lower cost parts right now. Similarly, we don’t have any Celeron or Pentium Haswell derivatives launching yet, and judging by the Ivy Bridge rollout I suspect it may be a couple quarters before Intel pushes out ultra-budget Haswell chips. For now, the Ivy Bridge Celeron/Pentium parts are likely as low as Intel wants to go down the food chain for their “big core” architectures.
For those interested in the mobile side of things, we’ve broken out those parts into a separate Pipeline article.
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
Vinas - Sunday, September 1, 2013 - linkNo, VT is included with most (all?) intel cpus now a days. VT-d is a subset of commands that gives direct I/O to guest OSes. It's not required to use virtualization technology, and in most cases will drastically impact the performance of your non-server host OSes as VT-d can create competition for direct access to disk, graphics, memory, etc.
Vinas - Sunday, September 1, 2013 - linkThank god someone finally pointed out how useless VT-d is for non-dedicated workstations.
critical_ - Sunday, June 2, 2013 - linkTook the words right out of my mouth.
With the advent of "K" series processors I have been stuck with trying to address this issue. I rotate old hardware to the role of a home server. These days "home server" also implies virtualization. My use cases necessitate passthrough functionality provided by VT-d for all-in-one boxes with large storage arrays. Like many enthusiasts, we dabble with overclocking, virtualization, and can use ECC memory. I don't want or need a Xeon CPU but Intel has found an effective way to upsell me to this line of processors. Here are the non-ideal solutions I'm stuck with:
1) Buy Intel Exteme Editions CPUs. This will get you VT-d but won't get you ECC. Both are functions of the memory controller. I have bought laptops with the 2920XM, 2960XM, and now the 3940XM (I'd kill for ECC in my laptop). I find Intel's market segmentation to be annoying (the CrystalWell issue is a manifestation of the same problem but in a different area) but, like I said above, it effectively leads to #2...
2) Buy Xeon E3 processors. Xeon E3 gets you VT-d and ECC but the CPU is locked. I have a Xeon E3-1240v2 and it is just as quick as a 3770. Still not good enough?
3) Buy a Xeon E5-1660. This is an unlocked Xeon (it is a Core i7 3960X) with VT-d and ECC. It has 6-cores and can run gobs of memory. I have one with 128GB of RAM running at stock frequency.
4) Get a massive multi-CPU 8-core system in the Xeon E5-2600 series but they are all multiplier locked but have all the other features.
Intel will offer a Haswell-based Xeon E3-1200v3 series eventually. I'm sure (or I'm hoping) an Ivy Bridge-E replacement for the E5-1660 will come. However, Intel has no 8-or-more core "ultimate" part which has every feature under the sun. If they did then it would probably cost well above Xeon E5-2687W levels but some of us might buy it. Quite frankly, I wish Intel would throw enthusiasts like me a bone with a Core i7-4770KX part with vPro, TXT, VT-d, ECC memory, and an unlocked multiplier.
Back to the original issue. A "K" part can run VMs on it later on in its life as a home server but do the fancy ECC and VT-d stuff on a separate Xeon box. For example, ECC and VT-d benefit a ZFS box which can run a storage array that can be shared over iSCSI or NFS with a Core i7-4770K box running only VMs. It will work but it will require two computers and some compromises. Right now, Intel gets extra money out of us. Perhaps that will change. Perhaps not.
Ktracho - Friday, June 7, 2013 - linkHow can you tell if a Xeon CPU is unlocked? I didn't see anything on Intel's website indicating the E5-1660 is unlocked.
Vinas - Sunday, September 1, 2013 - linkIf you're buying non xeon CPU's to run i/o heavy servers with 64GB + RAM, you need to re-evaluate your hardware priorities. I call BS on your home server vm needs and reasoning for "needing" a XK CPU. Expand horizontally and provision your CPUs correctly and you will not need a single CPU @ 5GHz on your host.
stennan - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - linkJarred, if i remember correctly Intel is loosening up the possibility to overclock the "non-k" SKU:s, http://www.anandtech.com/show/6898/intel-details-h... .
If i understood the article correctly, "Clock Speed = BCLK * Ratio", so we can increase the BCLK and thus increase the clockspeed. But if the CPU cant handle that frequency we have the option to lower the ratio (Multiplier?) too reach a stable result.
Question (for future article perhaps) : Will the non-k variants have the same potential as the k-variants, or is BCLK overclocking more inferior compared to increasing the multiplyer if one is aiming for 4-4.5 GHZ?
Omoronovo - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - linkBCLK in Haswell, just like BCLK in sandy and ivy bridge processors, isn't just used to determine the CPU frequency. If you increase this frequency by more than a few mhz, you would be pushing the limit of these components. As such, it is not the cpu that is the limiting factor in BCLK overclocking, it's everything else that's tied to this frequency.
Right now, you can overclock any non-k intel processor by increasing the BCLK, but the tight integration of components that run off (directly or indirectly) the BCLK frequency since sandy bridge means the system becomes unstable very quickly, regardless of which multiplier you set.
Meaker10 - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - linkExcept there is a new ratio.
CPU = Base clock x CPU multi
Everything else = Base clock x their multi x ratio
So with the 5:6 ratio the CPU sees 125mhz x CPU ratio where as everything else sees 5:6 x 125 x ratio which = 100 x their ratio.
stennan - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - linkExactly, (100/125/167MHz), but some sites mention that intel scraped BCLK overclocking on non-k models. Probably was to effective :/
Omoronovo - Saturday, June 1, 2013 - linkI misunderstood the original poster - modifying the BCLK strap in haswell still requires a K-Series CPU, which is the point I was making. Regardless of the modifications made to the bclk in increments, you'll still it a wall after a few mhz.