Intel Launches Xeon E7-8800, 4800 v4 Broadwell-EX Family

Intel announced its newest Xeon E7-8800/4800 v4 Broadwell-EX series of processors. The Broadwell-EX E7 v4 series features an additional QPI lane to increase scalability compared to the E5-2600 v4 Xeons we recently reviewed, and increases the LLC (Last Level Cache) to 60 MB and the core count to 24 (an increase over the 18-core maximum found with the previous-generation E7 v3 Haswell-EX family). The E7 v4 Series is socket-compatible with the previous generation E7 v3 series Brickland platform after a BIOS update.

Latest Videos FromTom's Hardware
Paul Alcorn
Editor-in-Chief

Paul Alcorn is the Editor-in-Chief for Tom's Hardware US. He also writes news and reviews on CPUs, storage, and enterprise hardware.

  • TechyInAZ
    It's pretty cool to see what's happening on the server market. That is a lot of cores. :)
    Reply
  • jimmysmitty
    18078432 said:
    It's pretty cool to see what's happening on the server market. That is a lot of cores. :)

    The real crazy thing is that servers can and will benefit from every aspect of this unlike consumer desktops. Servers are just better at utilizing cores and performance enhancements than consumer desktops are.
    Reply
  • derekullo
    Servers are just better at utilizing cores and performance enhancements than consumer desktops are.

    Handbrake can use all 16 of my i7 threads just as well as a xeon could
    Reply
  • bit_user
    For instance, a dual-socket E5 v4 system provides 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes
    Did you mean 64, or did I misunderstand how it works?
    Reply
  • Nuckles_56
    For instance, a dual-socket E5 v4 system provides 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes
    Did you mean 64, or did I misunderstand how it works?
    It is 64 lanes for the E7 v4 CPUs which are being announced, whilst the E5 CPUs which are already on the market will support 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes. This is for dual socket configurations
    Reply
  • Aspiring techie
    I was drooling until I saw the $7000+ price tag. Who would have though a chip about the size of a square inch could be that much?
    Reply
  • bit_user
    18080322 said:
    For instance, a dual-socket E5 v4 system provides 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes
    Did you mean 64, or did I misunderstand how it works?
    It is 64 lanes for the E7 v4 CPUs which are being announced, whilst the E5 CPUs which are already on the market will support 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes. This is for dual socket configurations
    That's certainly what I thought.

    I'm guessing they repurposed the pins for 8 PCIe lanes for the extra QPI channel. Even if you don't get all 3 QPI channels per slot, it's still pretty impressive that existing boards can support these with only a BIOS upgrade.

    The article also states that these CPUs have 8 memory channels, but the specs on ark.intel.com indicate only 4.
    Reply
  • bit_user
    18080604 said:
    I was drooling until I saw the $7000+ price tag. Who would have though a chip about the size of a square inch could be that much?
    At $6841.00, I wonder if the E7-8893 v4 is their most expensive quad-core, ever...
    Reply
  • Paul Alcorn
    18080678 said:
    18080322 said:
    For instance, a dual-socket E5 v4 system provides 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes
    Did you mean 64, or did I misunderstand how it works?
    It is 64 lanes for the E7 v4 CPUs which are being announced, whilst the E5 CPUs which are already on the market will support 80 PCIe 3.0 lanes. This is for dual socket configurations
    That's certainly what I thought.

    I'm guessing they repurposed the pins for 8 PCIe lanes for the extra QPI channel. Even if you don't get all 3 QPI channels per slot, it's still pretty impressive that existing boards can support these with only a BIOS upgrade.

    The article also states that these CPUs have 8 memory channels, but the specs on ark.intel.com indicate only 4.

    Yes, only 32 PCIe lanes on the E7 v4.

    The move up to eight memory channels comes via the Brickland platform, which allows up to eight DDR3 or DDR4 channels per socket. I added a graphic in the article (and a bit of text) to help clear it up. The platform links the on-die memory controllers to memory buffers, codenamed Jordan Creek, through four of the Intel SMI Gen 2 channels, thus inflating the memory channel count. Very exciting tech, it helps Intel compete with the impressive per-socket RAM capacity on the Power8 architecture.

    Reply
  • Haravikk
    Servers are just better at utilizing cores and performance enhancements than consumer desktops are.

    Handbrake can use all 16 of my i7 threads just as well as a xeon could
    I suspect they meant in terms of total workload; even with Handbrake you're probably not encoding 100% of the time and most consumer desktops aren't used for anything near as demanding as that. Traditionally if you require a machine for encoding and similar tasks you buy a workstation, but there's certainly less need for it these days.

    For example my main working machine used to be a 2008 Mac Pro with 2x quad core 3.2ghz xeon CPUs and a Nvidia 8800 GT. I've since replaced it with a tiny system using an i7-4790T (quad core, eight threads, 45W with HD4600) which actually outperforms the Mac Pro at most tasks, and in areas where the Mac Pro does still have an edge it's only a small one. But that's the nature of the game these days; processors are getting so efficient you can do a lot with a system made from consumer grade components. That said, I'd hesitate to call an i7 desktop as "consumer" desktop, more like "prosumer" as you don't spend the money for an i7 unless you think you're going to need that kind of performance; even in gaming systems it's usually a waste of money, so things like video encoding are more suitable tasks for it, but they're not really regular consumer tasks.

    But ehm… yeah, for the kinds of systems these xeon processors are for you're looking at close to maximum utilisation at all times, probably using some kind of virtualisation to run as many jobs as possible on as many systems are required to meet demand. That usually means pushing the minimum number of servers to their limits so you can let others sleep until demand increases.

    Anyway, as much as I'd love a 24 core (48 thread) CPU I think the price is a little steep for me ;)

    I wonder, is the decrease in PCIe lanes a result of the increased memory lanes?
    Reply