BROADWELL E is Around the Corner and I am Concerned

SCANNERMAN777 said:

"I have the same concerns. Newegg had that board in stock last Wednesday and I managed to get my order in before they ran out (why on Earth doesn't make more of these boards? They sell like hotcakes.) although they haven't shipped the darned thing yet (and I'm getting as nervous as a long tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs). If I shelled the shekels for a Broadwell-e CPU and found out afterwards that Win 7 wouldn't get full support, I would be livid and going for blood (legally).

Does anyone know what Broadwell-e actually gains over Haswell-e? If it isn't much or isn't anything I would be interested in, I might be better off just getting a 5930K."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Perhaps these links might help a little.Intel Unleashing its Broadwell-E HEDT Lineup At Computex 2016 in June - 10 Core/20 Thread Core i7 6950X Leads the Pack



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b-Zrtnotgic

Just noticed you use the same o/s as I do. You have good taste! :)

SCANNERMAN777 said:

The 5930K has six cores (12 threads) whereas the 6900K has 8 cores (16 threads). Both run at roughly the same temps and both use the same maximum number of pcie lanes. Although the 5930K runs at a slightly higher standard clock speed both the 6900K and 5930K share the same turbo speed of 3.7 GHz. The 6900K will also be sporting a larger cache of 20 MB compared to the 5900K L3 cache of 15 MB. And then there is the die shrink to consider: The 6900K is 14 nm compared to the 22 nm of the 5930K. You may have noticed that I haven't spent much time forecasting the anticipated virtues of the ten core/20 thread 6950 chip. Frankly, I think it's overkill and a waste of money. I would say that overall the 6900K will be a better chip than the 5930K but the proof is in the pudding and evidently the 6900 series won't be available for tasting (testing?) at the consumer level until June this year. The real question is will Intel give full support for this chip on a Windows 7 platform or will they reneg on what they claim they offer with the motherboard that supports the chip. Time will only tell coz Intel isn't telling.


Intel Broadwell-E i7-6950X, 6900K, 6850K, & 6800K Specs Leaked | Gamers Nexus - Gaming PC Builds & Hardware Benchmarks

Thanks for all that. So far, the two big questions are if the both of the six core chips (I need eight and ten cores like I need another hole in the head; I could do quite nicely with four cores) will support 40 PCI-e lanes (the 5820k at the low end of Haswell-e supports only 28 lanes) and whether the Win 10 restriction will apply, same as the belated one the Skylake owners had sprung on them (I had been holding out for Skylake-e since there was a possibility it would have more PCI-e lanes, more SATA ports, and better USB 3.1 Gen 2 support but MS and Intel cruelly killed that idea).

So far, other than added cores (which, again, I don't need) and a bit more speed (which, again, I don't need; I'm not a gamer), I really don't see any improvements (yet), based on the above articles, which will be of benefit to me, unlike Ivy Bridge-e had over Sandy Bridge-e, which added support for PCI-e 3.0 instead of 2.0, something that was "leaked" (or, at least, speculated) well before Ivy Bridge-e was released.

Yep well my building days are done now partly because of my circumstances and definitely because of the cost . Currently relying on my ROG gamer laptop with the Intel® Core™ i7-4700HQ and 8GB RAM and to be honest it and the smaller work laptop (Asus P2520LA i7 dual core 8GB RAM) both outperform my Ivy and Sandy Bridge builds by a mile - my small Asus boots in 15 seconds for example.

To be honest I am really wondering why anyone wants something a little faster than what I have - I hit the button it does it so why this must have rush for the newer processors? unless of course one does some ridiculously extreme gaming.

Having said that I do miss building because anything electronic to me is addictive. Plus with all the nonsense going on with Windows 10 and it's band of faithful and compliant manufacturers I simply think even if I did want to build and could I could not use anything but 10

ICIT2LOL said:

Yep well my building days are done now partly because of my circumstances and definitely because of the cost . Currently relying on my ROG gamer laptop with the Intel® Core™ i7-4700HQ and 8GB RAM and to be honest it and the smaller work laptop (Asus P2520LA i7 dual core 8GB RAM) both outperform my Ivy and Sandy Bridge builds by a mile - my small Asus boots in 15 seconds for example.

To be honest I am really wondering why anyone wants something a little faster than what I have - I hit the button it does it so why this must have rush for the newer processors? unless of course one does some ridiculously extreme gaming.

Having said that I do miss building because anything electronic to me is addictive. Plus with all the nonsense going on with Windows 10 and it's band of faithful and compliant manufacturers I simply think even if I did want to build and could I could not use anything but 10

Fortunately, I can still build but it sure is a chore (Betty Davis spoke the truth when she said old age ain't for sissies) that takes a toll on the old carcass.

I agree about speed; I'm happy with the speed of my present rig. The reason I want to upgrade is to get more SATA ports, more RAM (although I could do that on my present machine), more USB 3.0 support and onboard support for USB 3.1 Gen 2. The board I bought (and hasn't been shipped yet; they sure are taking their sweet time), while technically has 40 PCI-e lanes, has the ability to run like it has more than that (up to x16, x8, x8, x8, x8, x8, x8 plus an M.2 x4 with minimal lane sharing). This will kinda sorta future proof the machine by having enough lanes for expansion cards for new technology, such as Blunderbloat Thunderbolt or the next version of USB to come down the pike.

I had been holding out Skylake-e but miserable, misbegotten MS and Intel pulled that rug out from under me (mutter, mutter, mumble, mumble).

I'm concerned aswell, because i might be upgrade in the near future and Windows 10 is just not like Windows 7...

Laith said:

I'm concerned aswell, because i might be updating in the near future and Windows 10 is just not like Windows 7...

Hello Laith well mate I am trying out 10 one more time on a plain clean install of 7 with none of my email or major programs on it. When upgraded I intend trying out the Classic Shell software to see if that makes using 10 less "convoluted" as I do think or at least I get the impression that a few of the older bugs have been ironed out.

The Classic Shell I have used before on 8 installations which made a huge difference to it. Anyway am waiting on the upgrade download - if it I do still not like it I only have to wipe the drive and try something else or flip the drive with Linux Mint back in and catch up with it.

townsbg said:

Laith said:

Whoops, i wrote update instead of upgrading. But anyways it has really let me down that i have a limit to how much i can upgrade, as i want to avoid Windows 10 as much as possible. This is straight up Microsoft saying that if you don't upgrade to Windows 10 we'll make it worse for you and let you not upgrade any further.

Where did you read that?

Intel and MS announced recently that Skylake users would be forced to upgrade to Win 10 by 07/17/2017 or support would be reduced. They since extended the deadline to 2018 and backed off on some of the update after enterprises raised a ruction. What bites about this is many people already had Skylake before this bombshell was dropped. Also, Skylake has no support for installing Win 7 via USB. See Skylake support on Windows 7 and 8.1 given a one-year extension | Ars Technica

I had been waiting for Skylake-E until this nonsense erupted. Since I won't be able to fully utilize Win 7 with anything newer than Skylake, I'm now trying to find an X99 board (Asus X99-E WS/USB 3.1) but the thing has been in extremely short supply.