Intel's 'Haswell' Desktop Processors Detailed for Spring 2013 Launch

[MacRumors]

VR-Zone shares (via Engadget) what is claimed to be a leaked list of Intel's first wave of "Haswell" desktop processors. The 14 new chips are expected to debut in the spring of 2013 and will build new architecture on top of the 22-nanometer process used in the current Ivy Bridge chips.

Haswell will bring a number of enhancements to Intel's chip lineup, including faster performance and significant integrated graphics improvements delivered by the new Intel HD 4600 graphics package.

The Haswell desktop chips are likely to only make their way into Apple's iMac family, as the Mac mini uses mobile chips while the Mac Pro takes advantage of Xeon-branded server chips. Still, progress on Haswell sets the stage for further improvements to Apple's just-redesigned flagship desktop Mac, and mobile chips that will power most of the rest of Apple's Mac lineup should follow relatively soon after.

Article Link: Intel's 'Haswell' Desktop Processors Detailed for Spring 2013 Launch

[chrmjenkins]

These will be even more competent graphics wise in the mobile line, which is important for the Air as playing games on it won't be so laughable an idea anymore.

edit: I should also point out that Haswell isn't 14nm. It's a tick, so it's still 22nm. Broadwell is the tock, and it's 14nm.

Generally, if the architectures share some part of their name ("Well", "Bridge", "Sky") it's a process change and the architecture is (relatively) constant.

[snacksfarlin]

guess i can wait a few more months for an imac

[Peace]

Wouldn't it be weird if Apple put the top of the line Haswell in a new Mac Pro ?

Anybody know if you can have dual or triple quad cores in Haswell ?

[gpat]

Behold as the new iMac gets the shortest life cycle ever.

[CIA]

Delete Post

[chrmjenkins]

Originally Posted by Peace

Wouldn't it be weird if Apple put the top of the line Haswell in a new Mac Pro ?

Anybody know if you can have dual or triple quad cores in Haswell ?

These are quad-core standard. I'm sure their Xeon line will go hexacore and probably even octocore.

Originally Posted by CIA

What's after Haswell?

Endswell (kidding)

It's broadwell.

[CIA]

Originally Posted by Peace

Wouldn't it be weird if Apple put the top of the line Haswell in a new Mac Pro ?

Anybody know if you can have dual or triple quad cores in Haswell ?

I5 and I7 processors can only be used in Single Proc systems. Xeon's have the ability to have multiple physical procs. QPI is needed

What's after Haswell?

[Pianoblack3]

Originally Posted by snacksfarlin

guess i can wait a few more months for an imac

Something tells me you'll be waiting a lot longer than that!

[xizdun]

Why no Haswell for Macbook Pros?
I'm patiently waiting for Haswell so that I can invest in a rMBP 2nd gen with Haswell in 2013... or is that wishful thinking?

[ikir]

A MacBook Pro 13" inch retina could be much better with a HD 4600. HD 4000 is already "great" for normal usage, but if you want to do little casual gaming with a decent resolution like 1400x900 you need better gfx, much more better.

[0815]

While I am sure, there are power users that need faster and faster processors, I think the majority does not.

If I would have the choice of upgrading a HDD to SSD or getting the latest, greatest, fastes processor, I would get the SSD - as a matter of fact, I upgraded all my machines to SSD and the effect is much better than getting a faster processor. Just wish they drives would get bigger and cheaper faster.

Nevertheless, good to see the processor technology is not standing still, even though it is no longer the big bottleneck in computers these days.

[doomfront]

My pockets are ready!
Hopefully I'll be starting my next build by next summer. Really excited to see the Nvidia 700 series GPUs too.

[Renzatic]

Haswell isn't that big of a deal as far as the iMac goes. It'd be nice if you were dead set on getting the 21" rev with the integrated GPU, I guess But overall, Haswell is only a modest spec bump as far as desktops are concerned.

Like guy said above, it's in laptops like the Air where it truly shines. Much better battery life, an integrated GPU good enough to be considered a decent mid-line contender without chewing up any power. It's all good. Potentially, a Haswell MBA could equal and surpass a current 13" MBP without sacrificing much of anything.

----------

Originally Posted by CIA

What's after Haswell?

Broadwell, which I believe is the rev where Intel will be focusing all their attention on GPU performance.

[iMacFarlane]

Originally Posted by gpat

Behold as the new iMac gets the shortest life cycle ever.

Nah, the shortest-lived iMac was about 81 days old before replacement (PowerPC days).

Hopefully, they'll aim for early summer with the next model. Production problems handled, Haswell available, restore iMac cycle to where it belongs in the year, etc. This is the model I'm shooting for. Passing for now.

[chrmjenkins]

Originally Posted by 0815

While I am sure, there are power users that need faster and faster processors, I think the majority does not.

If I would have the choice of upgrading a HDD to SSD or getting the latest, greatest, fastes processor, I would get the SSD - as a matter of fact, I upgraded all my machines to SSD and the effect is much better than getting a faster processor. Just wish they drives would get bigger and cheaper faster.

Nevertheless, good to see the processor technology is not standing still, even though it is no longer the big bottleneck in computers these days.

The main bottleneck in computers has always been memory size, speed and hierarchy.

Each processor rev is around 10-15% better. What really matters are the ISA extensions and the architectural changes that give huge boosts to things like encryption.

[robinp]

Originally Posted by chrmjenkins

These will be even more competent graphics wise in the mobile line, which is important for the Air as playing games on it won't be so laughable an idea anymore.

edit: I should also point out that Haswell isn't 14nm. It's a tick, so it's still 22nm. Broadwell is the tock, and it's 14nm.

Generally, if the architectures share some part of their name ("Well", "Bridge", "Sky") it's a microarchitecture change and the process is constant.

I think you've got that the wrong way around. Sandy bridge -> ivybridge was a process change not a micro architecture change.

[Battlefield Fan]

Good. Ivy Bride showed the limitations of 22nm. Maybe Haswell will show some innovation from Intel.

[Woodcrest64]

I just ordered a $6,504.00 CDN iMac with the following specs

3.4GHz Quad-core Intel Core i7, Turbo Boost up to 3.9GHz
32GB 1600MHz DDR3 SDRAM - 4x8GB
768GB Flash Storage
NVIDIA GeForce GTX 680MX 2GB GDDR5
Apple Magic Mouse
Promise Pegasus 12TB (6x2TB) R6 RAID System

Will Haswell make much of difference for my needs? I use my computer for facebook, email, twitter and listening to iTunes. I occasionally edit photos in iPhoto from my iphone.

Just kidding

[chrmjenkins]

Originally Posted by robinp

I think you've got that the wrong way around. Sandy bridge -> ivybridge was a process change not a micro architecture change.

Yeah, thanks. I swapped it.

Originally Posted by Battlefield Fan

Ivy Bride showed the limitations of 22nm.

How?

[unobtainium]

I'm hoping Haswell will enable Apple to build a retina MBA.

[Rot'nApple]

Originally Posted by gpat

Behold as the new iMac gets the shortest life cycle ever.

Assuming Apple will immediately or soon after new chips introduced will update iMacs or wait until the usually time frame for iMac product release/

Anyone care to garner what Apple will do? Release updated iMacs with new chips in spring after Intel releases chips or will Apple let the current iMac run its course for a spell and release iMac during normal time frame?

Cuz I could wait a few more months, as long as my current machine doesn't crap out, to get a Hazwell chip machine, but if I have to wait till around Oct... updating now.
/
/

[pgiguere1]

I think a lot of people are waiting for the mobile CPUs more than this.

I'm especially interested in seeing the kind of performance the 10W Haswell CPUs will be able to achieve.

The upcoming 10W Ivy Bridge Y series already gives us an idea:



They went for the same iGPU and same L3 cache as the 17W series which is a good thing.

Compared to 17W CPUs, you're basically getting 88% of the clock speeds for 58% of the power consumption / heat dissipation. Pretty good tradeoff.

[wizard]

First off; the power levels are low enough to go into a Mac Mini if Apple wanted to go that route. The vastly improved graphics are actually needed in the Mini. 35 watts is doable and maybe even 45 watts in a Mini.

Second; Nice updates for the base model iMac too. More performance is always nice or if you choose a bit cooler operation.

The only really bad thing is no six core option. This would be an ideal chip for an XMac type machine.

[mtliveson]

Originally Posted by 0815

While I am sure, there are power users that need faster and faster processors, I think the majority does not.

If I would have the choice of upgrading a HDD to SSD or getting the latest, greatest, fastes processor, I would get the SSD - as a matter of fact, I upgraded all my machines to SSD and the effect is much better than getting a faster processor. Just wish they drives would get bigger and cheaper faster.

Nevertheless, good to see the processor technology is not standing still, even though it is no longer the big bottleneck in computers these days.

It is not so much the speed of the processor, but the other things that are embedded into the chip. The increased cache, better channeling of memory, improved embedded GPU, etc. These are things the standard users do not understand, but creates a much better experience to make sure the OS can live more up to expectations.