Next Intel Desktop CPU 2015

[SeekaX]

According to fudzilla.com Intel is about to slow down in production, by not releasing Broadwell for Desktops and the next big update being Skylake in 2015. There will be a haswell refresh though.
Me personally i am rather glad intel took that route because IB and Haswell were rather disappointing updates. Skylake will be a major update or "tok", so it will finally be worth the money again to upgrade.
opinions?

 

[SieB]

I've been waiting three years to upgrade my 2500k. It simply was not worth going from Sandy to Ivy or Haswell. They better give me reason with Skylake if there is to be no Broadwell.

I'll take that news with a pinch of salt though, Fudzilla isn't the most trustworthy of sources.

 

[barnsley]

Just in time for a cpu upgrade for me xD. I agree with the longer updates rather than the frequent releases, it makes upgrading hard to justify.

 

[SeekaX]

it's weird to see considering that the GPU releases get tighter. i appreciate it though, 2 years is a good time to upgrade.

 

[Raphael]

I think my i7 3770k for gaming will last me at least 5 years. I dont see the point, for gaming at least, in upgrading the cpu that often. Save your money for graphics cards. Even an i5 sandy bridge is plenty enough in my opinion. Intel has not made any real performance improvement worth upgrading, due to lack of competition. I wish amd would release something to destroy intel. Because if they dont, in five years from now the new cpus will only be slightly better than now and still not worth upgrading.

 

[SeekaX]

I think my i7 3770k for gaming will last me at least 5 years. I dont see the point, for gaming at least, in upgrading the cpu that often. Save your money for graphics cards. Even an i5 sandy bridge is plenty enough in my opinion. Intel has not made any real performance improvement worth upgrading, due to lack of competition. I wish amd would release something to destroy intel. Because if they dont, in five years from now the new cpus will only be slightly better than now and still not worth upgrading.

if there is one thing for sure, then it is that hardware doesn't last for 5 years. no matter how much you invest.

 

[Willock]

... Even an i5 sandy bridge is plenty enough in my opinion...

Being perfectly honest though, SB was absolutely bonkers when it came out; the 2500k was benching up there with $1000 980X's so expecting that kind of leap again is pretty unrealistic.

Having said that, I'm quite happy with the way things are going; all it means is that our components are going to be relevant for longer, and by the time the next insane performance leap hits us the power usage is going to be brilliant.

Imho Intel are doing us a favour.

 

[Raphael]

if there is one thing for sure, then it is that hardware doesn't last for 5 years. no matter how much you invest.

Depends on what you expect of it. My previous cpu, a Core 2 Duo E6600 lasted me 6 years and did everything I asked of it. I played every game on max settings on a 1440x900 screen. Now I will be playing on a 1080p screen so as long as I have a decent graphics card my cpu will handle everything fine for 5 years. If you are ever upgrading to higher resolutions or multi screen configs or are a power user doing video editing or 3d rendering than you are right. It wont last 5 years.

 

[Willock]

if there is one thing for sure, then it is that hardware doesn't last for 5 years. no matter how much you invest.

If you'd have said that even 5 years ago you would've been right; however with the shift towards mobile and power consumption, I'm not so sure.

Also it depends on what it's being used for - for gaming, most things will be fine. I am, however, going to be interested to see how relevant SB-E and IB-E remain as 4k resolutions become the norm for content creation and consumption; I think there's going to be a period of catch-up performance wise once that happens, and hey, we might see that leak over to the high end consumer platform.

 

[SeekaX]

Depends on what you expect of it. My previous cpu, a Core 2 Duo E6600 lasted me 6 years and did everything I asked of it. I played every game on max settings on a 1440x900 screen. Now I will be playing on a 1080p screen so as long as I have a decent graphics card my cpu will handle everything fine for 5 years. If you are ever upgrading to higher resolutions or multi screen configs or are a power user doing video editing or 3d rendering than you are right. It wont last 5 years.

my cpu is 2 years old and already bottlenecks everything. well it was never too good to start with either.
anyways, i doubt that that dualcore did you any good, there is playing at max settings and playing at max settings if you get what i mean.

 

[Willock]

my cpu is 2 years old and already bottlenecks everything. well it was never too good to start with either.
anyways, i doubt that that dualcore did you any good, there is playing at max settings and playing at max settings if you get what i mean.

Well we ARE talking about Intel CPUs here... AMD is a different story...

 

[SeekaX]

Well we ARE talking about Intel CPUs here... AMD is a different story...

i had an intel cpu before that, didn't last me much longer either. moore's law, after 5 years you got a low end rig and that only applies when you invested a good sum of money in the first place.

 

[Raphael]

my cpu is 2 years old and already bottlenecks everything. well it was never too good to start with either.
anyways, i doubt that that dualcore did you any good, there is playing at max settings and playing at max settings if you get what i mean.

As I said playing at 1440x900 with that cpu and a HD5770 at max settings on almost every game I played I got playable fps. I still have my HD 5770 waiting for the 9000 series. Tested it with my 3770k and they showed my graphics card was not bottlenecked by the cpu. What I could play with my dual core is pretty much the same I can with my i7. Now I'm bottlenecked by the GPU.

Edit: When I say max settings, it's max settings with antialiasing turned off. I never saw improvements with it on and it dropped the performance.

 

[SeekaX]

As I said playing at 1440x900 with that cpu and a HD5770 at max settings on almost every game I played I got playable fps. I still have my HD 5770 waiting for the 9000 series. Tested it with my 3770k and they showed my graphics card was not bottlenecked by the cpu. What I could play with my dual core is pretty much the same I can with my i7. Now I'm bottlenecked by the GPU.

Edit: When I say max settings, it's max settings with antialiasing turned off. I never saw improvements with it on and it dropped the performance.

anti aliasing offers a huge visual improvement. just look at a cube from an angle without AA, you will see that the lines aren't smooth anymore. when i play a game without AA it immediately catches my eye. but that is entirely up to the GPU, not a cpu problem.
playable is subjective i think, i guess i have stated often enough that i follow the "60fps or gtfo" policy i had a 6870 which is better than a 5770 and it drove me mad with recent games.
it really depends on what you play, in SP games you will get away with an old CPU, but in multiplayer or large scale sandbox games there is no way around upgrading every 2-3 years imo.