KitGuru KitGuru.net – Tech News | Hardware News | Hardware Reviews | IOS | Mobile | Gaming | Graphics Cards
While we have been hearing rumours surrounding Intel's release of Broadwell-E, today we actually have something a bit more concrete. According to the patch notes of a recent Gigabyte X99 motherboard BIOS update, Intel will be launching Broadwell-E during Q2 this year- which covers April, May and June.
Over on the Gigabyte website for the X99 SOC Force motherboard, a batch of BIOS updates were released earlier this month. If you look at update F20, we can see that Gigabyte has listed support for a “2016 CPU coming Q2”. Right now, it seems likely that this will be Broadwell-E.
In the past, all we've had to go off of in regards to Broadwell-E have been rumours and potentially dodgy leaks. However, this information has come straight from a motherboard manufacturer so it seems like it could be pretty concrete.
So aside from the Q2 release date, what else can we expect from Broadwell-E? Well, an earlier specification leak that we reported on seemed to show that Intel has a ten-core Extreme Edition processor in the works for us this year. There is also some talk of Intel adding on another tier with four E-series CPUs this time around hitting the $400, $550, $1000 and $1500 price points. If what we hear about the ten-core extreme edition is true, then that will likely be the top tier processor, with an 8-core sitting at $1000 and two six-core CPUs occupying the two lower price points. However, do keep in mind that a lot of this is unconfirmed at this point.
One last thing worth noting is that Broadwell-E coming out this year could also mean that Skylake-E won't make it out until next year.
KitGuru Says: Quite a few of our readers have been waiting on Intel to release Broadwell-E this year and now it looks like we have a good idea as to when to expect it. Are any of you currently running an enthusiast-grade CPU? Are you planning on upgrading this year?
My wife is always accusing me, when it comes to computers, of having more money than good sense so I may just prove her right and grab a 10 core i7 6950X (I think that’s the right number). A waste of money, yes, but if I don’t buy one, I’ll just waste money on something else without any bragging rights.
Your wife should be Keepin a close eye. You’ll have to fend off babes with a pitchfork!
it seems that chicks are enjoing something other
LOL. We’re both 65 and neither of us requires watching, though she rules the roost except when it comes to my toys.
A down payment on a house? Seems bragworthy to me 😛
I’ve got a 5820k, should i change to the 6700k if i mainly game? There’s some differences in minimum fps in some (but not a great number) of games.. Got the bug to change and don’t know why, though I’d be downgrading to 4 cores.. I’m not sure how much better the IPC will be in these broadwell-e chips but i suspect it won’t be much.
I got a 5820K and I am ok with it. If Star Citizen requires more….then im screwed.
Because HEDT is cut-down or failed Xeons. Intel doesn’t specifically make HEDT chips. You get the scraps from the server-class rejects.
Bragging is for yuppies….. who cares what cpu you have it is what you do with it that counts
haha way to make him feel good. He might be getting a 6700k right now 😉
I’m really waiting for the Xeons to finally put in an appearance.
Looking forward to getting the higher 6 core and waiting for AMD and Nvidia to release their 14/16nm cards. All to build the ultimate VR rig.
I actually don’t know what you can use ten cores on. Seriously, someone inform me why this would be useful in a PC. (By which I mean: I want one, I just don’t know why)
If you need to ask, you DON’T need ten cores, heh.
Some chicken…some neck…
Nah, don’t bother. They are close enough that you will not see much of a difference. My requirements for an upgrade is to have at least a 10% increase in real world performance. Turns out my Devil’s Canyon at 4.4GHz is does better than Skylake, heh.
graphics cards is where you see the most bank for the buck. Follow NVidia’s guidelines for cards, games, and screen resolution as they are just about spot on.
These ARE consumer grade pared down Xeon chips. As a consumer, you do not want nor need a Xeon chip unless you are doing stuff like servers or professional graphic design.
Thats like saying.. Sorry you couldn’t get Odin All Father’s Staff so you’ll have to settle for Thor’s Hammer..Shiiiittttt ill damn well take that!
Also on an i7 5820k @ 4.2 Ghz
Exactly. I’m looking to buy a bunch of new servers but as it stands I’ll have to go with Xeon v3… Somehow the timing is always a bit off with me and Intel.
“I’m a babe magnet, just the wrong end.”
^- Usually said by people with i3s..
Virtualization if nothing else.
video encoding? 3d rendering? virtual machines? and all other computational tasks that can’t be run on GPUs.
“Babe, you look hot. Let me cool you down with my liquid cooler”
“Baby, I’m gonna make you scream like a referance cooler”
I have a 2.8 ghz Lynnfields i7. It’s like the first i7 ever LOL. Going from that to this 400 dollar 6 core beast is gonna be epic!
Same boat here. I’m not spending about a couple grand on a build that wouldn’t even do 4K/90 fps ─ which a current 5960X + 980Ti SLIx2 can’t do, currently ─ when a GPU die shrink + CPU die shrink is just ’round the corner, matter of months.
These new platforms (especially GPU) are the beginning of a whole new cycle, and everytime you buy top-of-the-line right before a cycle change, you get screwed ─ like, double the price/fps on Y+1 AAA titles.
While that statement is generally true and I certainly don’t want to imply that people shouldn’t follow it, it’s still a shame that Intel restricts ECC to their “pro”, i.e. Xeon line.
ECC is just a good thing in and out of itself and should be available to all platforms ─ especially at a time when memory is cheap and its speed/performance is largely irrelevant to real-world performance (DDR3/4), so literally the only thing between ECC and consumers is Intel’s will to support it. (don’t know about the AMD side, we’ll see with Zen I suppose).
Pretty much. Need to do your research before building a gaming PC. Another big factor are consoles. Since many titles are designed around consoles and ported to the PC you need to look at if the next generation of consoles are going to release soon and what are their specifications will be so you can plan a build to be a bit more powerful and hence play all console ported AAA titles. However PS5 and XB2 probably won’t be until 2019-2020 despite people whinging how underpowered they are, so isn’t too much of an issue yet.
Interesting remarks on consoles, I agree. Notable exceptions are PC-only or PC-first titles, which largely ignore consoles. Or those that do the job of porting properly.
I quite like TotalBiscuit on YouTube for solid info on ports quality etc. Also recently discovered pcper.com (through their podcast), looks like anandtech quality in benchmarking, actually doing some R&D in the field of measuring.
$1500 for 10 cores is too much .
I wish Intel Prices Their CPU in $200 intervals
that is
$399,$599 for 6 cores
$799 for 8 coes
$999 for 10 cores
Thanks
“You have an attractive complexion… you might say a ‘thermal paste'”.
For that reason, I’m not even going to try to build a 4k VR rig this year. I’m going to build a $1k one and then in a couple years build a next gen one. It seems more logical based on how far we are from 4k 90 FPS.
For that reason, I’m not even going to try to build a 4k VR rig this year. I’m going to build a $1k one and then in a couple years build a next gen one. It seems more logical based on how far we are from 4k 90 FPS…
I guess that’s what happens when there is no more innovation to be found. Instead of releasing products with decent improvements from the last generation at the same price point they just improve most products <5% and then add add more cores or whatever with a ridiculous jump in price. Basically you'll always pay too much for decent performance improvements these days, unlike years ago where two similarly priced products bought three years apart would have huge performance differences.
My guess is he runs C2 Duo 🙂 and has covinced himself its better than Skylake so no need to upgrade
He already has a house dumb ass!
Thats funny I can tell for a fact you dont own a 980ti let alone SLI and a 4k display! I however do in fact own a skylake i5 at 4.6 gz with SLI EVGA 970 SSC+ cards overclocked to 1400 and they can easily do 90 frames keeping gameplay on my 43 inch Vizio 4k M series TV which tops at 60hz smooth as youre mommasvfat ass. So stop citing so called facts claiming an SLI 980ti cant handle 4k at high frames when the fact is a good pair of SLI 980ti’s can handle any game out there at 4k without breaking a sweat.
For whatever this is worth there is something enticing about a 10 core processor that one can over clock. I will probably swap out my 5820 just because.
Us.
Even an SLI can’t get 90 FPS on 4K if it’s a great game. What he told was in fact a fact 🙂 The new cards will be made for 4K whereas these were 4K ready.
Lol it won’t need more CPU power. GPU power though…
What domyou base that claim on? I in FACT own the setup I listed and play games like Star Wars, COD Black Ops 3, Battelefield 4 and BF hardline at well over 90 FPS with overclocked 970’s in SLI. Its also A FACT that a single 970 will do 4k smoothly with no problem in lower settings. Two 980ti’s in SLI chew the current games up and spit them out.
Ofc I’m talking 4k max as he was saying and in superb games, although SWTOR and BF4 are superb. And those games don’t have super graphics. You should be getting those FPS as those games don’t have high textures. This explains your comment.
That explains it you are talking a fantasy test laboratory world as few people actually play at the absolute max settings. I can promise you that your jaws would drop playing any game in 4k even at low setting the experience is that amazing. In reality it’s more than worth it to upgrade to the world of 4k in 2016 if you have the money.
It also seems you will always be waiting to buy a new card because at any time you consider buying a new card it will NOT be able to play the most recent demanding games at the absolute max settings. In fact I would say over the last 10 years it has taken on average at least 2 years past the launch of a game for the current cards of the day to be able to actually handle such high FPS with the highest settings/resolution.
This was my whole point its pure BS to say a 980ti SLI setup is not worthy of playing the latest demanding games at 4K when even 970’s in SLI handle them extremely well. If we spew logic that games must be played at the most ultra settings few people will dare enter the realm of PC gaming.
Intel does whatever they want and this is what we get when there is basically no competition or free market in an industry. Consider Intel along with Microsoft has been allowed by government regulators to basically monopolize the market with often times unfair trade practices. This goes back to the 90’s and what us old heads called Wintel. Hell back then we at least had Cyrix and Power PC along with AMD viable in making chips yet today it’s basically all Intel all the time.
True but when we talk about if it’s worth getting smth we mean future-proofness and this isn’t good enough for that. Just better to wait for new ones in 4 months. Then it’s more worth it and may even cost the same. Hope that helps someone that reads this. Anyway enjoy your 4k ;/
Compilation… with jom / make -j X speed up is huge.
Intel has consistently upped core counts with each extreme edition iteration at about the same price of $1000.
Was really expecting to upgrade with Broadwell-E but this change leaves a pretty bad taste. Looks like another year of wait n see.
Does it matter how the HEDT chips are made? The specs are the specs. Whether they are purpose built or are Xeons that didn’t make the cut, what’s the diff? You can still buy a Xeon if you want one.
Yes you can, but with this extra waiting time, some will breakdown and buy 1600 series Xeons hoping for decent BCLK overclocking (some reach 130+), and for those that get burned, a couple will also break down and buy an HEDT chip. It’s more money for Intel.
I’m not following. Because some people will choose to buy a Xeon and a HEDT chip Intel is somehow bad?
Let’s say you make and sell gold bracelets. Some are excellent. Due to manufacturing issues, some are less excellent. You charge top dollar for the excellent ones and then re-brand the less perfect ones and charge less for them. You both of them for what the market will support. Is this wrong or shady? Some people may choose to buy top quality bracelets and lower quality ones for less money so they have both.
Is there something wrong with this business model? If not, how is it any different than what Intel is doing?
No one buys both unless they have to in my experience, and I suspect Intel has a more concrete calculus than that, but Intel wouldn’t do this if it believed the action would make the company less money.
You’re confusing me. You said some would buy both. Then you said nobody buys both. Of course Intel is in this to make money – why else would they do it?
You seem to be accusing Intel of something. I’m asking what that is. And you’re dodging my questions like a politician. I don’t see the issue with how Intel makes or sells high end i7s. If you don’t want one, don’t buy one. You can buy other processors for a lot less money, Intel or not.
I’m not accusing Intel of anything. I was only saying to the others from before that the schedule makes perfect sense.
I’m seriously thinking about an upgrade from my i7 3930k might go with the i7 6900k…