Supposed Intel i7-3770K vs. i7-4770K Benchmarks Leaked
Some Benchmarks have been leaked where the i7-3770K has been pitted against the upcoming i7-4770K.
A user over at the Coolaler forums has leaked some benchmarks of the Core i7-4770K; it compares them against what we're most interested in, its predecessor, the i7-3770K.
The i7-4770K will be a quad-core part with HyperThreading, resulting in eight threads. It will have a base clock frequency of 3.5 GHz and a boost clock of 3.9 GHz. There will be 8 MB of cache, HD 4600 "GT2" graphics iGPU, and a Thermal Design Power (TDP) of 84 Watts, seven more than the current i7-3770K. Earlier, it was leaked that the chip would cost about $327.
While the benchmarks aren't necessarily reliable, based on the rumors regarding Haswell's performance, they do not seem out of line. It remains a leak though, so do take it all with a grain of salt.
CPUMark99:
- Core i7-3770K: 613 Points
- Core i7-4770K: 676 Points
SuperPI 1M:
- Core i7-3770K: 9.344 Seconds
- Core i7-4770K: 9.220 Seconds
- Core i7-3770K: 8:38.717 Minutes
- Core i7-4770K: 8:15.059 Minutes
- Core i7-3770K: 7.87 Points
- Core i7-4770K: 8.55 Points
Overall, we can see that the CPU shows an increase in performance between 5 and 10 percent. Again, following the rumors from earlier, this doesn't come as a massive surprise. It mainly verifies what we already knew.
Coolaler also mentioned that, while Haswell will be very nice for overclocking, it still suffers from the same temperature problems that Ivy Bridge does, although perhaps not to as great an extent.
This was an over-baked Ivy issue anyway. As a 2600k and 3770k user I never found 3770k to be wildly hotter at all. Clock for clock, yes, it is a bit warmer - few degrees C. Something to worry about or a reason to avoid as some did, not at all. Is the chip "suffering"? That is just clown stuff.
The performance jump was unbelievable. It also draws much less power and runs cooler. The phenom bottlenecked my gtx670 even when overclocked to 4ghz.
The performance jump was unbelievable. It also draws much less power and runs cooler. The phenom bottlenecked my gtx670 even when overclocked to 4ghz.
hmm...that's weird, the gtx 670 didn't bottleneck my phenom ii x4 955 much at all really, not noticeably so. i was playing bf3 ultra at 1080p with no real lag at all. don't remember the fps exactly, but it rarely dipped into the 30s if i remember correctly.
I have hard time believing that CPUMark99 scores were achieved on stock speeds. A bit of searching across forum boards show scores below 600 and scores themselves correlate to CPU speeds. This is for both AMD and Intel processors. Here is one for reference: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2057154
Jump to 10% is quite significant when it runs non-optimized code for specific processor. This is due to simple fact that instructions on CPU cannot be executed faster than they already execute, unless you apply speed factor of clock speed. And since CPUMark99 is single threaded benchmark, clock speed plays important role.
Just keep in mind that Intel is not looking at improving raw performance right now. Their largest competitor is not AMD, but the hordes of ARM manufacturers who are looking to break into the desktop and laptop space over the next few years. While the chip wattage is up a little bit this generation, the platform wattage is down, way down. The wattage increase is due to better IGP and integrated voltage regulation. These are useless improvements for desktop users, but it means a lot to laptop/netbook/tablet/AIO/server manufacturers where power usage vs performance is one of the largest considerations when choosing a chip.
Broadwell will take this to the next level by integrating more and more stuff on the chip. Eventually Intel will move the chipsets themselves onto the CPU so that you essentially have an SOC solution to properly fight against ARM. Once they get to that point then we will see a move back to improved raw performance again.
Until then I will enjoy my SB i7 and just throw money at the GPU as needed.
I'm tired of Intel getting away with this lazy junk
If AMD had a rabbit they could pull out of their hat, they would/should have done so already.
The cold reality is that single-threaded performance has pretty much reached as high as it is going to go so improvements there will remain pretty slow. With very few mainstream applications making reasonable use of more than two cores, there is very little demand for more than that so do not expect a desktop core-count race any time soon either.
Expect the number of people upgrading their PCs only every 5-7 years to increase - provided they do not fail first or get prematurely replaced due to degraded performance from push-pin HSF no longer making adequate contact.