Anand Sandy Bridge performance preview is up

[biostud]

So for OC you either need the:

i5-2500K, 4 core no HT @ $205 or
i7-2600K, 4 core HT on @ $562

 

[khon]

So for OC you either need the:

i5-2500K, 4 core no HT @ $205 or
i7-2600K, 4 core HT on @ $562

Those prices are way off.

The i5-2500K with be ~$240, and the i7-2600K will be ~$330.

 

[Kuzi]

Sandy Bridge was a bit over-hyped. The speed boost is quite marginal. The biggest improvements are in power usage and built-in non-gaming GPU.

I disagree. We are talking about the x86 architecture here, even a 10% boost is very good. And the tested sample only has 6MB L3 cache, higher end versions will have 8MB cache, with Turbo Boost the performance increase will be closer to 20%.

GPU performance is pretty good too, at least you get a somewhat playable experience, unlike the last generation IGPs which were a joke (even AMD's IGPs).

 

[IntelUser2000]

So for OC you either need the:

i5-2500K, 4 core no HT @ $205 or
i7-2600K, 4 core HT on @ $562

No, the i7-950 which is the predecessor to the 2600, is getting a price cut soon. It'll be $284, and I expect 2600 to follow, with some premium over that with the K parts.

nVidia offered it, ATi offered it, SiS and VIA tried (and actually didn't do so bad, TBH), but Intel did not.

Actually, SiS and Via both sucked, really bad. Intel parts could at least do acceptable desktop display and 2D even back in the Extreme Graphics era.

One reason I expected Intel to boost their efforts for graphics at least for execution, is because from now, a GPU delay would result in CPU delay. That would not be something that's a small loss.

Yes, waste of silicon.

I hope this video transcode thing is using the CPU rather than the IGP.. would be annoying to have to choose between unlocked memory frequencies and video transcode acceleration.

You will be able to run up to 4 monitors in tandem with the discrete graphics and the integrated graphics, at least for laptops. I don't know about desktops.

 

[yours truly]

Hi, this is a stupid question because I'm a bit thick. If these new processors have integrated graphics, can they be used in tandem with a dedicated graphics card to give that extra oomph in games?

 

[Ben90]

Nope, although it may be possible that AMDs fusion may be able to hybrid with one of their cards. I doubt the gains would be anything worth noting for highend cards, and could possibly even lower performance on things like a x8xx series

 

[evolucion8]

For this round, AMD wins the code naming contest.

Bulldozer vs Sandy Vag vag...vagrant. Yeah! That's the ticket.

Sandy vag vag.....Viagra?

Yes, waste of silicon.

I hope this video transcode thing is using the CPU rather than the IGP.. would be annoying to have to choose between unlocked memory frequencies and video transcode acceleration.

I would choose the unlocked memory frequencies and use a Radeon or GeForce card to transcode video,

No. Intel probably got the message, with AMD integrating decent IGP in the near future, having better IGP in their chipsets now, and their sales of discrete mobile GPUs being good. Intel could have made good IGP a long time ago.

Ever since we moved to DDR and RDRAM, there has been enough bandwidth for at least acceptable IGP. nVidia offered it, ATi offered it, SiS and VIA tried (and actually didn't do so bad, TBH), but Intel did not. They have consistently either put penny-pinching before offering something good, or mismanaged it entirely (usually by way of drivers, which is a problem for gaming right now, or doing anything with GMA500). Now, they are taking its performance seriously.

Intel graphic drivers were horrible, at least now they offer decent performance which puts it almost on par with the lowest end current solution of the likes of AMD and nVidia, but that won't last long, with new low end Fermi/Souther Island derivatives around the corner, they will be far behind again in terms of graphics performance.

 

[bryanW1995]

+1


But ima gonna tell you what is going to suck...if this whole lengthy and expensive process of AMD buying ATI 5 yrs ago just so they could set about to create Fusion ends up being just one lengthy circuitous route to getting to Q1 2011 wherein Intel shows up with their dual-core GPU running at 1350Mhz and it delivers anywhere near comparable performance to Llano.

If the best AMD could do with their vision of Fusion, $5B, and 4+ yrs of development time is be upstaged or even just put into a competitive position with Intel's GMA graphics then that is just gonna be really sad because I doubt the graphics team that designed the gpu on SB was given 4+yrs and $5B to accomplish what Anand previewed today.

didn't intel spend $3 billion on larrabee? certainly they used much of that expertise with sb. and they didn't even get to open up their own can of whoop-ass on jhh while they were at it

 

[cbn]

This chip looks strong considering Turbo was disabled.

I have two questions:

1. How does image quality of this Intel IGP compare to AMD?

2. Will the dual core Sandy Bridge achieve even greater gains over Clarkdale? (For whatever reason IPC appeared a good deal lower on Core i3 compared to Lynnfield)

 

[Eeqmcsq]

Intel has been looking at ATI's patents ever since they were approved by the patent office.

I forgot that patents are supposed to be public domain. Then what was the purpose of "gaining access" to ATI's patents in that settlement? Permission to use ATI's patents?

 

[crazylocha]

I forgot that patents are supposed to be public domain. Then what was the purpose of "gaining access" to ATI's patents in that settlement? Permission to use ATI's patents?

As put forward on several business sites.... Yes and Yes. Cross licensing about the only resolution that made sense for Motherboards and other 3rd parties. Imagine if only one of AMD or Intel got rights to DDR4. Not fair in competition. In several recent settlements on both sides were cross licensing for four or five year periods, couple of generations and newer agreements will be put in place depending on future developments. Standard legal blah blah stuff with hands forced by FTC and other entities.

At their levels (Intel and AMD's) you can try to enforce patents all you want. If all (or most) of the Mobo manufacturers decide they don't want the legal hassles and drop one side, kinda makes you want to rethink sharing? Insane amounts of "licensing proceeds" swap sides at ridiculous rates daily, you just don't normally hear about it. Right now, because a few were settled, thereby fixing dollar amounts to some, many on the sidelines have jumped in too. Paul Allen's group among several others. Been flurries on the legal fronts that have Investor crowds keeping a peeled eye on legal liabilities and expenses to fend off said suits. That's why usually cheaper and less headaches to settle with "hush money" and make some just go away. Other get "cross licensing". Stockholders get kinda cranky if they hear from too many lawyers with lots of digits attached.

 

[Avalon]

Extremely disappointed if this is anywhere close to final silicon speeds.

 

[Ben90]

2. Will the dual core Sandy Bridge achieve even greater gains over Clarkdale? (For whatever reason IPC appeared a good deal lower on Core i3 compared to Lynnfield)

Yes. Clarkdale in my opinion was half assed. While I'm sure they spend countless man hours on it, I believe the priority was making something cheap with a proof of concept IGP on it. Performance came second.

While Nehalem and Gulftown had a streamlined memory controller with direct access to memory, Clarkdale's was a mess. First the IMC was located on the GPU die, all memory access had to go through QPI. Second the memory controller was based off the P45 chipset. The combination of these two made extremely longgggg memory access times.
It is for this reason that Clarkbars do okay at lower clockspeeds, but once you start pushing the overclock hard you lose IPC fast.

As far as I know, all socket 1155 SB processors will be using a similar architecture design with each other so the design should scale up or down nearly linearly core wise.

 

[ilkhan]

Been a while since anything got me interested, nehalem did it, westmere was expected to but basically fell flat to me. Sandy Bidge, however...yum.

Since I love charts, I did some work with the ones from the article. Prices are from yesterday on newegg, like 10 minutes after the article went live. I suspect the i7-950 is supposed to be the i7-930, significantly cheaper and sitting in about the same spot as the rest of that box.

 

[richough3]

It would be more impressive if it was something like 1680 x 1050 Med quality instead of 1024 x 768 Low quailty settings.

 

[ilkhan]

It would be more impressive if it was something like 1680 x 1050 Med quality instead of 1024 x 768 Low quailty settings.

Long as the parts are all tested at the same res, its good enough for me. Its not like the low end discrete market is fast enough to do more either.

Im wondering how the 12 core GPUs are gonna do, if they really are in the mobile chips and this was a 6 core that got tested. If thats the case then the discrete low end mobile market is gonna disappear for nVid/AMD. I wouldn't buy a 5450 mobile chip (for example) at $100 when the H67 is just as fast.

Personally, Im expecting to spend $600 on the core of my next gaming build when these come out. 2500K, cheapie mobo and overclock to 4.0 or so. 4GB of DDR3 and whichever $200 GPU is fastest at the time. Play any game damn well and still be inexpensive when matched with my current case/PSU/monitors/etc.

Also, Im curious as to how "unlocked" the K series will be. AND, do we get to set individual multis for 1/2/4 cores active? 3.3 with 4 active and 4.0 with 2 would satisfy me quite well.

 

[IntelUser2000]

The combination of these two made extremely longgggg memory access times.

I think they could have sacrificed optimizing memory latency for higher bandwidth. It's not at Bloomfield/Lynnfield levels, but the memory bandwidth is surely higher than Core 2. The gain from going on-package is still there. They could have done worse and stuck the low-bandwidth FSB-like connection like on Pinetrail Atom.

Personally, Im curious as to how "unlocked" the K series will be. AND, do we get to set individual multis for 1/2/4 cores active? 3.3 with 4 active and 4.0 with 2 would satisfy me quite well.

Ilkhan is back, yay! I love your neat looking tables.

 

[Idontcare]

Been a while since anything got me interested, nehalem did it, westmere was expected to but basically fell flat to me. Sandy Bidge, however...yum.

Since I love charts, I did some work with the ones from the article. Prices are from yesterday on newegg, like 10 minutes after the article went live. I suspect the i7-950 is supposed to be the i7-930, significantly cheaper and sitting in about the same spot as the rest of that box.

Glad to see you back here! :thumbsup:

 

[borisvodofsky]

No, the i7-950 which is the predecessor to the 2600, is getting a price cut soon. It'll be $284, and I expect 2600 to follow, with some premium over that with the K parts.



Actually, SiS and Via both sucked, really bad. Intel parts could at least do acceptable desktop display and 2D even back in the Extreme Graphics era.

One reason I expected Intel to boost their efforts for graphics at least for execution, is because from now, a GPU delay would result in CPU delay. That would not be something that's a small loss.



You will be able to run up to 4 monitors in tandem with the discrete graphics and the integrated graphics, at least for laptops. I don't know about desktops.

I don't give a FUCK about how much these chips cost if they'll run starcraft 2, finally

HOWEVER,, if they try to anal me with a $400 motherboard.... I WILL kill kittens in anger.

 

[ehume]

What a quandary! I have an p55 mb with a burned out autofan circuit; fans run fast all the time. I was planning to get an 875k to go with a new p55 mb - something to play with. But now: do I wait until 2011 and get a p67 and a 2600k? Such decisions!

 

[lopri]

I hope these do 2560x1600 this time. (and dual-digital)

 

[IntelUser2000]

Earlier on this year, Intel have said there will be an "order of magnitude" improvement over the 65nm, GMA 4500 parts. They are well on track.

HOWEVER,, if they try to anal me with a $400 motherboard.... I WILL kill kittens in anger.

No reason to expect that, unless you opt for those Rampage Extreme XX Version 2 + motherboards.

 

[StinkyPinky]

The 2500k looks like the logical upgrade from my Q6600.

Still only four cores though.

 

[IntelUser2000]

If the so-called "2 core" IGP only replicate the Execution Units, the chances of big performance increase could be slim. They would need a true dual GPU configuration in order for near 2x difference some are expecting.

 

[bryanW1995]

I don't give a FUCK about how much these chips cost if they'll run starcraft 2, finally

HOWEVER,, if they try to anal me with a $400 motherboard.... I WILL kill kittens in anger.

have you tried meditation? gulftown does just fine, in fact it will outperform anything out there until skt 2011 most likely unless amd pulls some sort of rabbit out of the hat with BD. oh, and the best part? it doesn't require a $400 mobo.