dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
32884
share rss forum feed


Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1

Haswell vs Ivy Bridge Benchmarked Compared Clock-for-Clock

Intel "Haswell" Quad-Core CPU Benchmarked, Compared Clock-for-Clock with "Ivy Bridge"

quote:
Russian tech publication OCLab.ru, which claims access to Intel's next-generation Core "Haswell" processor engineering-sample (and an LGA1150 8-series motherboard!), wasted no time in running a quick clock-for-clock performance comparison with the current Core "Ivy Bridge" processor. In its comparison, it set both chips to run at a fixed 2.80 GHz clock speed (by disabling Turbo Boost, C1E, and EIST), indicating that the ES OCLab is in possession of doesn't go beyond that frequency.

The two chips were put through SuperPi 1M, PiFast, and wPrime 32M. The Core "Haswell" chip is only marginally faster than Ivy Bridge, in fact slower in one test. In its next battery of tests, the reviewer stepped up iterations (load), putting the chips through single-threaded SuperPi 32M, and multi-threaded wPrime 1024M. While wPrime performance is nearly identical between the two chips, Haswell crunched SuperPi 32M about 3 percent quicker than Ivy Bridge. It's still to early to take a call on CPU performance percentage difference between the two architectures. Intel's Core "Haswell" processors launch in the first week of June.

»www.techpowerup.com/179631/Intel···ot-.html

See link for pix

HarryH3

join:2005-02-21
kudos:1
Reviews:
·Suddenlink

Wow, if a 3% improvement is their "tock" then I'll wait for their next "tick".

I suppose that there isn't really much incentive for them to take a huge leap forward in processing speed. There are so few apps (and users) that can take advantage of the current speeds that an uber-CPU just isn't as important as it once was. Heck, just take a look at some of the antiques still in use in this thread: »Oldest running MAIN PC?

(Typed on my C2D 2.2 GHz antique)



ccallana
Huh?
Premium,VIP
join:2000-08-03
Folsom, CA
reply to Octavean

While I know nothing about the CPU performance, I think there are many other compelling attributes of Haswell over Ivy Bridge for several segments of the user base. Power consumption on certain SKUs is likely to be much better - making for thinner/lighter Ultrabooks. I'm pretty sure graphics performance will be increased as well - for those who care (most folks here put in add-in cards anyhow)

Haswell is not my program, so I can't speak definitively either way
--
"We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us.... We are far too easily pleased." C.S. Lewis


me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO
reply to HarryH3

I think intel may be giving amd a chance to catch up, so they dont become a monopoly which could cause the government to break them up. Kinda like how the p4 and PD werent as good as amd so they got a bit more cash, then the c2d/c2q came out and BOOM.

Is what I would say were I a conspiracy theorist.

In reality they are trying to catch up to amd's apus. The integrated haswell gpu went toe to toe with a 650m supposedly(»Haswell iGPU will equal GT 650M performance). Truth be told I would be surprised if amd's next gen apu wasnt better than that since they are already so far a head of intel.

Putting their emphasis on the gpu makes the cpu lack behind.



koitsu
Premium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:23
reply to Octavean

So let's pretend for a moment the performance between the two models is more or less the same (just assume give or take 3-5%). That's not a big improvement, agreed -- but I rarely upgrade my CPUs these days purely based on getting a performance boost.

So what does Haswell offer that Ivy Bridge doesn't? Lower TDP? Lower average power usage (not the same as TDP)? More on-die features? I haven't researched the model.

My point is this: if Haswell is "marginally faster" (~3%), yet its power draw is, say, 25% less, then that's a still an improvement, just not in the performance category. This sort of thing would matter especially to folks who run in low airflow environments or hae mass numbers of these processors (25% power savings is pretty dramatic when you have, say, a hundred boxes).
--
Making life hard for others since 1977.
I speak for myself and not my employer/affiliates of my employer.



Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
reply to Octavean

I wouldn't put too much stock in an early engineering sample. That said, I want to believe it's a significant improvement, so perhaps I should just buy an i5-3570k and be done with it.
--
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.



trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

I thought that Sandy Bridge was the "tick" and Ivy Bridge was the "tock".



Mike
Premium,Mod
join:2000-09-17
Pittsburgh, PA
kudos:1

Haswell appears to be the "flop"



ccallana
Huh?
Premium,VIP
join:2000-08-03
Folsom, CA
reply to trparky

Tock is the new process with older architecture - Sandy Bridge.
Tick is the new architecture with proven process - Ivy Bridge.

Haswell is the Tock - sticking with the 22nm process, new micro-architecture.

--
"We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us.... We are far too easily pleased." C.S. Lewis



racer9876
Defender Of The Universe
Premium
join:2000-07-03
Rosamond, CA
reply to Octavean

Hickory dickery dock.



El Quintron
Resident Mouth Breather
Premium
join:2008-04-28
Etobicoke, ON
kudos:4
Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·TekSavvy DSL
·WIND Mobile

said by racer9876:

Hickory dickery dock.

The mouse didn't run up the clock...
--
Support Bacteria -- It's the Only Culture Some People Have

Chrno

join:2003-12-11
reply to Octavean

I think they are missing the point here. The current processor performance metric shouldn't be superpi anymore as the modern processor contains 1 or more arithmetic as well as 1 or more graphics processing cores. I think the major focus for this tock is on the GPU which they failed to take measure of. If my guess is correct, there should be a 150%-200% increase in performance for the on-die GPU.

BTW, a tick is suppose to be a new processing node while a tock is new architecture


me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

Most of us here have getter gpus anyway, and amd may even have better gpus. Intel is ignoring the one thing they did best.



ccallana
Huh?
Premium,VIP
join:2000-08-03
Folsom, CA

What, like sell a bazzilion processors and hold 80%+ of the tradition client market?

What the big chip companies did "best" last year is no longer good enough. Low power is the name of the game - performance per watt. That is where the effort is going these days Go read the analysts reports. According to them, the "pc" is dead - mobile computing is where it is at. Can't put a Core i7 in a tablet.... (yet). Of course, still can't make the top end *slower*..
--
"We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us.... We are far too easily pleased." C.S. Lewis


me1212

join:2008-11-20
Pleasant Hill, MO

1 recommendation

To buggery with the 'analysts', they know crap. The desktop is not dead, nor will any of the computing markets ever die.

I'm all for getting lower power consumption and more PPW, but that is no excuse to not progress technology power. Just because the isheep dont use a desktop doesn't mean those parts cant be used to progress out world.


Morris0

join:2011-05-14
kudos:1

We don't need innovation to save power. The slower existing processors do that just fine.



pnjunction
Teksavvy Extreme
Premium
join:2008-01-24
Toronto, ON
kudos:1
reply to ccallana

That's fine for consumer stuff but people like me doing CAD and stuff still want all the performance they can get. I'm not going to have as much motivation to drop huge money on new compute servers and workstations if the performance gains aren't significant. The machines we are buying now pack two Xeon E5-2690's that run about $2k each, that's $4k straight to Intel of the ~8k price!

More performance per watt is obviously good, it means more cores per chip with the same power consumption.

Unfortunately however not every computation is threaded to take advantage of many cores. We see this in the gaming scene where a dual core i3 can beat an 8-core AMD CPU because it's single-thread performance is superior. »www.tomshardware.com/reviews/far···9-7.html And let's not forget that in the consumer market, gamers are the ones dropping the big cash for high-end CPUs on relatively short upgrade cycles.

I think much of this could be addressed in software. Not sure about the games but I know for a fact that calculations that could be threaded in the software I use are not. For example I want to analyze a circuit at 1000 different frequencies, and I bang my head on the desk as I watch 1 core of my 16-core process each frequency in order. That is a blatant example that could be fixed pretty easily, but there are other problems that are much harder to break up.

(One piece of good news on the gaming front is that both next-gen Xbox and Playstation are rumoured to be packing 8-core AMD CPUs. This may give game developers the kick they need to develop increasingly multi-threaded games, and x86/64 compatible to boot.)

In summary performance, and thread performance, are still important to many consumers and businesses, not to mention the consumers and businesses which are buying the highest quantities of Intel's most expensive processors.



CylonRed
Premium,MVM
join:2000-07-06
Bloom County
reply to Morris0

said by Morris0:

We don't need innovation to save power. The slower existing processors do that just fine.

They want to use less power (cooler) with no drop-off in performance.
--
Brian

"It drops into your stomach like a Abrams's tank.... driven by Rosanne Barr..." A. Bourdain


KrK
Heavy Artillery For The Little Guy
Premium
join:2000-01-17
Tulsa, OK
reply to Morris0

Actually, it's more important then you think. Less power usage and less heat allows for more shrinkage and circuits onto ever smaller areas of silicon. In effect, less power usage and lower heat production allows for more powerful CPU's in a smaller form factor.

The Haswell has several revolutionary aspects to it. The new form of "3D" (ug) Transistors, for example.

Clearly, however Haswell IS aimed at the "whole system on a chip" applications such as tablets, Ultrabooks, etc etc.
--
"Fascism should more properly be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." -- Benito Mussolini



ccallana
Huh?
Premium,VIP
join:2000-08-03
Folsom, CA
reply to me1212

I agree they know crap - but the reason Intel stock is still at $21 is because of what *they* say.

Intel is king of the existing market, is making huge strides in the low power space and has a killer lineup of products over the next few years - but all the analyst folks can say is "the pc is dead, so Intel must be dead too"

Intel will still serve the top end of the market, that is not going away. Anyone who actually thinks that hasn't followed things very long.
--
"We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us.... We are far too easily pleased." C.S. Lewis



jchambers28

join:2007-05-12
Alma, AR
reply to Octavean

I Hope Intel does not scrap sockets.

»www.tomshardware.com/news/LGA-BG···594.html



Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1
reply to Octavean

We've seen changes before in the industry,....

The race to 1GHz and overall raw speed gave way to dual cores / quad cores / oct core with speed-step / turbo. Smarter processors and so on,....

Right now it looks like Intel is very concerned with competition from ARM, which, necessitates focusing on the efficiency that the industry shift towards mobile computing requires.

So performance gains look like they are being sacrificed for efficiency gains or at least that has been my prediction for a while now. With little to no competition from AMD it makes sense for Intel to go after the ARM threat. The problem with that though is that its an approach similar to Microsoft's approach with Windows 8,...that is to say going in a direction that not everyone cares to go in.

Its still a little too early to say what the performance of Haswell will be.

However, if Ivy Bridge wasn't a significant performance increase over Sandy bridge then Haswell really should be IMO.



Krisnatharok
Caveat Emptor
Premium
join:2009-02-11
Earth Orbit
kudos:12
reply to jchambers28

said by jchambers28:

I Hope Intel does not scrap sockets.

»www.tomshardware.com/news/LGA-BG···594.html

Buddy... this has been discussed ad naseum.

I think we will have sockets stay for a couple desktop models, but the trend will be towards doing away with them for small form factor/mobile applications.
--
Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.


ccallana
Huh?
Premium,VIP
join:2000-08-03
Folsom, CA

1 recommendation

reply to Octavean

Performance gains in CPU maybe are not as big, but performance gains in the GPU are increasing significantly. More and more die space is being used for GPU instead of CPU (percentage wise).

I wouldn't say the direction is similar to Microsoft's at all.....
--
"We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us.... We are far too easily pleased." C.S. Lewis



Octavean
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-31
New York, NY
kudos:1

said by ccallana:

Performance gains in CPU maybe are not as big, but performance gains in the GPU are increasing significantly. More and more die space is being used for GPU instead of CPU (percentage wise).

I wouldn't say the direction is similar to Microsoft's at all.....

That depends on ones perspective,....

I personally don't really care much about iGPU. My main system right now is Core i7 3930K based.

The Intel iGPU does have its place (Quick Sync, mobile and so on) but not everyone is into that. Keeping CPU performance stagnant in favor of increasing iGPU performance isn't a decision that I find favorable.

Mobile computing may receive Windows 8 a little better then desktop so it might be a lot more like it IMO then one might think.

And for the record I use Windows 8 Pro (3 licenses) with the new UI / Metro and like it just fine. I'm not sour on Windows 8 I'm just using it as an example and that example is that it isn't for everyone,....


signmeuptoo
Bless you Howie
Premium
join:2001-11-22
NanoParticle
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast
reply to Octavean

I think what Octavean is saying is right and reasonable. Has Intel backed off because they don't have competition? Are we reaching a wall already in the tech? I should think that expecting 30% performance gain in the CPU for the dollar should be reasonable. I realize a wall is approaching with lithography, but we're not there yet, are we?
--
Join Teams Helix and Discovery. Rest in Peace, Leonard David Smith, my best friend, you are missed badly! Rest in peace, Pop, glad our last years were good. Please pray for Colin, he has ependymoma, a brain cancer, donate to a children's Hospital.



ccallana
Huh?
Premium,VIP
join:2000-08-03
Folsom, CA

30% gains in any product are not reasonable year on year. Especially in a mature market.

And I would venture to say Intel is *not* slowing down on CPU performance - but if you look at the general computing market, for the *vast* majority of users, there is no need for huge jumps in performance. So where the huge volumes are, there is no need to spend a bunch of money to increase basic desktop/laptop CPU performance by huge leaps and bounds. So in the volume products, other areas are likely being focused on. In the performance markets, Workstation, Server, high-end desktop, etc - there is plenty of new horsepower coming.

Keep in mind Intel is a publicly traded company, with a huge advantage in their old market, but is a nobody in the market that most people care about these days - tablets and phones. As a company, they *have* to become a major player in that market, or be moved into irrelevance. So don't be surprised when much of the company's energy is being sent that way - it is vital for the survival of the entire company.
--
"We are half-hearted creatures, fooling about with drink and sex and ambition when infinite joy is offered us.... We are far too easily pleased." C.S. Lewis



signmeuptoo
Bless you Howie
Premium
join:2001-11-22
NanoParticle
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

Show us a provable significant drop in PC and laptop sales that will support them backing away from those consumers.

A new Win OS is out. With every new rollout of OSs there has been a need for more "horsepower" or the new OS meant a slower system. There IS a need to provide hardware that will work up to the OSs ramp up.

You don't slough off a hand that feeds you because you see another hand in the distance. Sure, Intel NEEDS to get on the ball with the new industries, but this is hardly the time to back away from their loyal consumer base that got them to where they are, they have a responsibility to their consumers.

But debate aside. What percentage performance increase IS reasonable?1/10 of 1%? or something measurable? When AMD failed to give noticeable increases, they were slammed badly. Why shouldn't Intel taste the same medicine from critics?

OR at least a reasonable explanation of what is going on.

Just a more electrically efficient processor after years of more power is not going to settle well with the cognoscenti out there. There needs to be justification to spending a whole, what, $150-$600 on a new mainboard, plus $100-$300 on RAM, plus $100-$1000 on a new CPU, or even more.

To remain relevant you need to keep your customers, and give them a reason to buy something new over something old. Not taking risks, not pushing the envelope, shifting resources significantly away from established consumers? If that is what is happening, AMD might have a chance at a comeback...

I think Intel is jumping the gun if they are already backing out of the PC business. Are they? Are they partly?

Over reacting to the infancy of a shift in consumer attitudes, walking away from a bread basket, that certainly doesn't bode well for the new base.
--
Join Teams Helix and Discovery. Rest in Peace, Leonard David Smith, my best friend, you are missed badly! Rest in peace, Pop, glad our last years were good. Please pray for Colin, he has ependymoma, a brain cancer, donate to a children's Hospital.



trparky
Apple... YUM
Premium,MVM
join:2000-05-24
Cleveland, OH
kudos:2

said by signmeuptoo:

A new Win OS is out. With every new rollout of OSs there has been a need for more "horsepower" or the new OS meant a slower system. There IS a need to provide hardware that will work up to the OSs ramp up.

Actually, Windows has gotten smaller as of late. Remember the release of Windows Vista and how high the Recommended Specifications were? Then Windows 7 came out and its Recommended Specifications were lower.
--
Tom
Boycott AT&T uVerse! | Tom's Android Blog | AOKP (The Android Open Kang Project)


signmeuptoo
Bless you Howie
Premium
join:2001-11-22
NanoParticle
kudos:5
Reviews:
·Comcast

1 edit

But WEI moved up even so. I'm not so sure that Win7 wasn't a new challenge to hardware on some levels. And Win8 is something of a significant change under the hood and in interface.

Even so, if a new OS flately and absolutely doesn't justify a measurable increase in performance, there is still software, games, apps, more demanding web use...

The bottleneck hasn't been the CPU in countless years, I hope it won't be in the coming years.

If Win8 would mean my aged Phenom Quad would deliver more performance, maybe I need to get it? What measure of increase in performance is there? I've heard nothing of this, so I have to ask.

Furthermore: if the only improvements are a better iGPU and less power used, why must consumers have to live in yet another socket change? Is intel expecting they have the right to force people into a new socket and new mainboard chipset because of those reasons?

Sounds more like change for changes sake as I reflect on this. I guess it's good since I cannot afford a new build anyways. My old Phenom II Quad will remain adequate then, so why bother getting an Intel system? Better I put any money I have into SSDs perhaps?
--
Join Teams Helix and Discovery. Rest in Peace, Leonard David Smith, my best friend, you are missed badly! Rest in peace, Pop, glad our last years were good. Please pray for Colin, he has ependymoma, a brain cancer, donate to a children's Hospital.