Intel next-gen Haswell CPU line-up leaked, Core i7-4770K the flagship

VR-Zone has managed to get their hands on the line-up for Intel's upcoming 22nm Haswell desktop processors, revealing that there will be initially 14 CPUs across the Core i7 and Core i5 brands. These processors will be utilizing a brand new CPU socket - LGA 1150 - on Lynx Point chipset motherboards, and are split into six standard power SKUs and eight low power SKUs.

The flagship chip out of the bunch will be the Intel Core i7-4770K, bringing a 3.50 GHz base clock speed across four cores and eight threads, with a 3.9 GHz boost speed and an 8 MB cache. The on-die graphics gets updated to Intel's HD 4600 offering with a 1250 MHz dynamic max frequency, but perhaps more interesting is the TDP boost to 84W (from 77W in Ivy Bridge chips) across the "standard power" range.

All Core i7 chips in the Haswell line-up will feature 4 cores and 8 threads with 8 MB of cache, while the majority of Core i5 chips have 4 cores and 4 threads with 6 MB of cache. For the low-power range, TDPs range from 65W down to 35W, and you'll be able to pick up a CPU with a clock speed between 3.10 and 2.00 GHz.

Haswell is the successor to Intel's current Ivy Bridge line of CPUs, keeping the same 22nm process but introducing a brand new microarchitecture for improved performance. The first round of processors are expected to be released in Q2 of 2013.

Source: VR-Zone via: WCCFTech

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Firefox drops animated themes in version 18

Next Story

WSJ: Apple is testing designs for a TV set

58 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

I NEED HELP!!!

Ok, remember when the i7 920 was "the choice" at the time? But then there was the i7980x for those who wanted an extra 2 cores/power? I bought a Rampage III Extreme and i7920 and I was pretty happy with it. OCd to 4.2GHz stable.

For this next generation, recommend me the i7 920 equivalent (the one that supposedly OCs the best) and also the 980x equivalent (the one I'll never hope to buy, but can dream about.)

The best value processors since SB are always the cheapest i5 unlocked processor. The cheapest i7 unlocked processor is the next best value and a decent amount stronger. The unlocked i7s that cost more than the cheapest one barely add any performance but add a lot of cost.

The A57 core chips will take much of the low-end market in 2014 i bet. The future for arm looks very good, they just can't compete on desktops and laptops YET.

The spec sheet does not look like anything significant over Ivy Bridge, except the models start with a 4 instead of a 3. I'm sure they have 6 and 8 cores ready to go but they are just holding them up their sleeve for when AMD finally catch up they will something to go that extra step ahead again. I think that they are being really careful not to let AMD take the lead ever again.

The extra graphics power doesn't really matter because all it needs to do is run the Desktop (or Start Screen I guess) on a monitor, anyone who cared about graphics would have a dedicated GPU instead.

Interesting that their K CPUs which cost more and are aimed at enthusiasts actually have less features. VT-d is actually useful for running virtual machines.

Simon- said,
The extra graphics power doesn't really matter because all it needs to do is run the Desktop (or Start Screen I guess) on a monitor, anyone who cared about graphics would have a dedicated GPU instead.

The extra graphics power will be utilised by Virtu/Intel controller to speed up video encoding, and can be used instead of the discrete GPU when not gaming to save power.

http://www.lucidlogix.com/product-virtu-gpu.html

ivy bridge max dynamic clock speed is 1150mhz so this is only 100mhz faster under loads, lets hope those extra EU units help performance a lot.

I don't understand, maybe I've missed something... My i7 3820 is 4 cores clocked at 3.6 base.. Isn't that more powerful than most of these?

ashpowell said,
I don't understand, maybe I've missed something... My i7 3820 is 4 cores clocked at 3.6 base.. Isn't that more powerful than most of these?

You need to take a lot more into account than your clock speed. This is a new microarchitecture with a new instruction set. Intel says these processors will be 10% faster than Ivy Bridge processors at the same clock.

It will be interesting to see how intel's power management performs, we've been used to 8 and 16 power phase control by 3rd party mobo manufacturers, now intel has integrated it into the apu. Those used to run pretty hot too.

It's only the VRM controller which has been integrated AFAIK. The higher TDP is probably most likely due to the much improved GPU. The idle usage however, will - according to their slides - be much lower.

IB-E will be emerging just before these and will be on a (revised) X79 for those seeking 6 cores, haven't seen anything at all to confirm that Haswell-E even exists.

Definitely seems that Intel are abandoning the enthusiast market, and with a switch to soldered on chips their roadmap is becoming clear. Also looking at the unlocked chips, their virtualisation options are neutered??

Noticed no visualization for K chips as well. That's really wired. Intel now aimes to help AMD to regain market share??

Socket 1150.

Yeah, no. Not even 6 cores.

Call me when they release their higher-end 8 core CPU platform (they're not releasing 8 cores you say? Screw em!). This is isn't worth the platform change cost at all if using SB/IB.

alwaysonacoffebreak said,
Somehow this makes me feel like they are just holding back not to kill off AMD all in all. If they wanted to they could have done it a long time ago already.

either that, or they hit a performance wall on the i-series architecture and since they have some advantage over AMD they can still play along the small improvements game as no one would notice.

I'm gonna have my 2600K for about 6-8 years, see if I can handle it until I cave under pressure to start a new build lol

I will upgrade from my original i7 when the new 8 Cores come out till then I'm totally fine with my system

If you are already on Sandy Bridge, there is no reason to look back. Especially when Haswell requires new Motherboard. If you are on a much older and you need a new PC generally, then sure, why not.

ivy bridge didn't use proper thermal paste inside the apu, that is why they didn't run cool. Intel saving money forcing us to have noisy fans on our computers

Depends on how big the "tock" is, TDP is going up by ~9% so they need at least that performance improvement to keep on par.
Take into account that Ivy Bridge was only a 2-4% improvement in IPC, so this tock basically needs to triple the performance improvement Ivy had over Sandy.

I agree, i was used to intel charging people extra for their best onboard graphics, it is nice to see it in all the i5 and i7 range. I hope they do that with their laptop processors too.

Shame AMD are such a complete failure at competing on performance. Intel have no reason to push core counts or even performance that much.

1Pixel said,
Shame AMD are such a complete failure at competing on performance. Intel have no reason to push core counts or even performance that much.

Shame that you actually know nothing about AMD's architecture and try to turn this topic into a troll bait.

On topic tho. It seems the IGPs are getting pretty decent already.

Uhm sure.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.p...50_visherabdver2&num=10

Can't see it underperforming anywhere in it's price range. Yeah, ST is bad, MT on the other hand is over Intel, it just comes down to what you need not what you think.

You also need to take into account the socket life time, motherboard costs etc. It doesn't just come down to benchmark results.

While BD sucked in x87 benchmark people laughed. Now when PD took over on stock people started complaining on numbers of cores. You blues are never happy with anything or should just grow the f*ck up. I've suggested 3 of my friends to buy Intel i-series just because of what they do with the PC so hardly I'm an die-hard and biased on it but clearly you are biased on benchmarks.

Wow I retract my statement. I admit I don't keep fully upto date with specs and benchmarks like I used to. But those benches are impressive considering the price.

I'll also retract some things I said before Can't really edit it anymore. But yes, AMD is making good progress. While Intel is still trying to push the limits on Singlethreaded apps AMD is going the other way, and that is exactly why choise is good, you pick what you need the most

I'm not sure about desktop performance but I know server performance for AMD is very bad compared to intel. And that's not just on speed and whatnot, it's because intel has things like TXT and the inbuilt AES functions which make these a LOT faster and AMD doesn't have them.

What does it matter if its Linux or Windows? We're comparing CPU's not OS. If one CPU is underperforming on one OS it just means MS is too lazy to optimize their s***.

Why should it be clocked to 4.5? There's also an stock 8350 which I was comparing, I usually don't compare overclocked results.

Edited by alwaysonacoffebreak, Dec 13 2012, 6:08am :

Once again. What does it matter what OS it is? We are comparing CPU's. Just because one CPU is underperforming on a certain OS doesn't mean it's the CPU's fault or that the CPU is crap.

LOL take it easy mate, i'm not saying the CPU is crap. I'm saying, for ME, linux benchmarks are pretty useless as MY mine objective is gaming, which on linux, for ME, is non-existent.