Is it worth waiting for Haswell?

[Chaitanya]

Similar dilemma here , i7-3770K or wait for 4770K to arrive in India and buy it?

Wait for Haswell

 

[d3p]

Sorry to hijack this thread , but I don't really want to create a similar thread for the same request.

I was planning on getting the i7-3770K series , but with the Haswell series into the mix.. I'm confused. On paper, there doesn't seem to be any major difference between the i7-3770K and i7-4770K (which is unavailable now in India, since I only found the regular 4770 in TheITDepot and SMC).

Similar dilemma here , i7-3770K or wait for 4770K to arrive in India and buy it?

Wait for the Prices to stabilize & for good high end motherboards from different makers.

 

[harshilsharma63]

If one is opting for an Intel config, then its better to wait for Haswell, but if one is going for an AMD rig, then there isn't much (or probably no) sense in waiting.

 

[magnet]

Isnt the haswell facing serious heating issue.
Instead of soldering they have used thermal paste within the CPU to connect the inner parts which might be an issue.

Also the way rupee is and the way intel pricing it so high chances of 3770k getting cheaper looks too less.

 

[Chaitanya]

Instead of soldering they have used thermal paste within the CPU to connect the inner parts which might be an issue.

Ooh! is it so??
BAD BAD BAD idea by intel cause no thermal paste can conduct as good as metal itself.

 

[Bhargav Simha]

Isnt the haswell facing serious heating issue.
Instead of soldering they have used thermal paste within the CPU to connect the inner parts which might be an issue.

Also the way rupee is and the way intel pricing it so high chances of 3770k getting cheaper looks too less.

Any concrete evidence of that.. I mean if you have the link from any reputed site confirming your doubts, please share it with us.

yes ... these 220W TDP close to 5 Ghz cpus ( FX 9000 ) are AMD's flag ship product so they can price it around 20k for sure ( similar to i7 4770k) but who knows these can cost even more and won't be a VFM deal for the most for sure.

One more thing I would like to mention is haswell indeed has support for many new features and extensions but applications taking advantages of such unique features are very less or yet to be released ( only god knows when ? ) and for most of the people they will be of no use unless softwares most commonly used stats integrating these features but this is on the devs to decide but from an average users point of view these features does not mean much so people who got a 2500k/2600l for gaming is still happy with what they have got and will be happy till a few successor of haswell comes out ( unless they can perform significantly better in many apps like SB did ) ..

I think manufacturers are now too busy to just release their half baked products to get publicity which would help with their other products rather than going to the drawing board and making a striking new product but as all the chip manufacturers are focusing mainly to the mobile market it's hard to get a new performance product for desktop and that;s why we are getting cpus with less power consumption and less OC capability based on old limitations ( haswell ) or old cpus with finer chip to achieve high clock speed and TDP based on old architecture ( FX 9000).

Manufactures should really make some new performance cpus for desktop with balanced power consumption and nice OC capability and keep it apart form mobile cpu market instead of making some fusion products which will work well in both desktop and and as a mobile platform with little modification.

Why is the oc capability a requirement at the factory level.. do you mean higher base clock rates?
The reason for my doubt is, oc is to get more juice from a processor.. above the ideal clock speeds right?!. So what is the point of uderclocking a proccy, just to increase its oc capabilities.
Also why is not a 4700 better processor than OCed 8350...you get better performance without the hassle of overclocking? dosent it justify the extra money?
Please someone help if I am missing anything, as I have this doubt from a longtime (mainly because I am afraid of OCing as it may damage the product, decrease its life time, increase heat and electricity consumption.. there by indirectly increasing the costs)...

 

[magnet]

Haswell heat surprises system builders | bit-tech.net

 

[Bhargav Simha]

Thank you

 

[topgear]

waiting for haswell .. well haswell has heating issue and is a bad OCer - so getting a 3770K makes more sense but then again i7 2600/2700K was better than that gee, firt AMD and now Intel .. amd literally bulldozed their cpu line with BD cpus and now with the haswell word I really hope Intel does not mean that the old cpus were better than this hence they choose the name has ( or was ) well

 

[magnet]

Intel removes modest 'free' overclocking from standard Haswell CPUs - The Tech Report

No chance to overclock non k series haswell

 

[topgear]

al-right, Intel has a valid point there that the non K cpu is mainly targeted at business and consumer market and paying $20-30 extra for K part mainly due to OC capability thus performance increase is good as well but they should not have done this :

Buying a K-series Haswell processor will set you back an extra $20-$30 over the equivalent standard model. The Core i7-4770K is priced $30 higher than the Core i7-4770, while the Core i5-4670K is $20 more than the Core i5-4670.

Paying the extra for a K-series product also means giving up support for one of Haswell's key features, the TSX extensions that enable transactional memory. Intel has stripped out the VT-d device virtualization and vPro management features in the K series, as well.

In the end, enthusiasts face a rather unfortunate set of choices in Intel's Haswell-based product offerings. We can't help but think this situation wouldn't exist if AMD were putting more competitive pressure on Intel.

why cut on features when you are paying for the manufacturer's flagship product ?

 

[harshilsharma63]

al-right, Intel has a valid point there that the non K cpu is mainly targeted at business and consumer market and paying $20-30 extra for K part mainly due to OC capability thus performance increase is good as well but they should not have done this :



why cut on features when you are paying for the manufacturer's flagship product ?

Maybe to shift commercial/high end users to Xeon?

 

[topgear]

no no you get me wrong .. I mean many gamers and enthusiastic users needs VT-D feature to run apps like virtual box and they definitely won't get a Xeon cpu just to run/test some OS other than their primary OS.