I think it's enough that nVIDIA cards could fry themselves via faulty softwareThen the sky is the limit! Set the clocks to 11 GHz and let the auto-throttling algorithms figure it out
What about pricing? Where prices start?
No one claims that Ivy is better than Sandy. 1-3% IPC improvements and a big thermal problem is what Ivy was. 22nm has brought more issues than it fixed.
Haswell has had big expectations since people first heard about it. If it fixes 22nm and offers better performance with the overclocking headroom of Sandy then its a winner.
Especially if IPC improves a decent margin to
Oh, this is going to be fun:No one claims that Ivy is better than Sandy.
AnandTech said:While it's not enough to tempt existing Sandy Bridge owners, if you missed the upgrade last year then Ivy Bridge is solid ground to walk on. It's still the best performing client x86 architecture on the planet and a little to a lot better than its predecessor depending on how much you use the on-die GPU.
Bit-tech said:However, for new-builds and for those who skipped the Sandy Bridge last year it’s a simple choice: the i7-3770K is far, far quicker than an Intel Core i7-920 or any other preceding quad-core chip.
Guru3D said:Faster per core performance is what we have been stating matters the most. Seriously, I'll take faster per core performance anytime when I'd have to choose in-between faster performing per core 4 or say 6-core processors. Exactly here is where Ivy Bridge hits a sweet spot.
Techspot said:For consumers the arrival of Ivy Bridge chips can only be seen as good news. For those already invested in the LGA1155 platform it's great, as it's possible to take advantage of these new 22nm processors on existing motherboards. For newcomers, the Ivy Bridge architecture brings about an updated platform that provides more performance, better efficiency, and a few new features at a similar price point to that of Sandy Bridge.
The thermal problems are due to the TIM, not the manufacturing process.Fx1 said:1-3% IPC improvements and a big thermal problem is what Ivy was. 22nm has brought more issues than it fixed.
But the average consumer also spends no more than 400$ on such a device. I'm not convinced that Haswell and Broadwell are the correct choice to enter - and at some point dominate - this market.Let's face it: most of us are fans of the desktop here, but for the average consumer that does facebook and media consumption on their computing device, a desktop may be overkill. That's why intel has to create products for shifting market demands.
But the average consumer also spends no more than 400$ on such a device. I'm not convinced that Haswell and Broadwell are the correct choice to enter - and at some point dominate - this market.
Oh, this is going to be fun:
The thermal problems are due to the TIM, not the manufacturing process.
And the noise, house/room heat etc.
In short, nobody would make a 1000W CPU if power was free and you could cool it for the consumer space.
Ivybridge wont hit 5ghz very often on air and Sandy will. The 1-3% IPC benefit wont cover a 500mhz clock speed difference.
Ivy is only really better in the mobile space where neither of these things matter.
Ivybridge wont hit 5ghz very often on air and Sandy will. The 1-3% IPC benefit wont cover a 500mhz clock speed difference.
Ivy is only really better in the mobile space where neither of these things matter.
For a desktop chip its not any better than Sandy.
Or for the 99% of desktop users who aren't extreme overclockers
That Sandy is more likely to hit 5GHz than Ivy is relevant to about 0.1% of the population.
For everyone else, Ivy IS better.
Or for the 99% of desktop users who aren't extreme overclockers
That Sandy is more likely to hit 5GHz than Ivy is relevant to about 0.1% of the population.
For everyone else, Ivy IS better.
- Delid processor
- Set multiplier to 50x
- ????
- Profit
I sold an old 2600k that could do 5ghz, and am using a 3770k at 4.6. The 3770k still does better in benchmarks despite the lower clockspeed.
I sold an old 2600k that could do 5ghz, and am using a 3770k at 4.6. The 3770k still does better in benchmarks despite the lower clockspeed.
I own both SB and IB and the 2600K is sitting on a shelf (literally) right now because I enjoy the 3770K far better. Performance is there, power usage is nice, etc. What's not to like?
SB on 32nm is like a tank, no question. It takes a licken and keeps on ticken. 4.6-4.7 is the sweet spot for both processors, and when you are in the sweet-spot your performance with IB is better, and your power usage (a cooling noise concern for me personally) is lower.
You drink from the Intel koolaid when basically they sold you a smaller version of what you already had. Normally this would get you better overclocks and this time it didnt.
At least Haswell will be a new CPU and not a die shrink
You drink from the Intel koolaid when basically they sold you a smaller version of what you already had. Normally this would get you better overclocks and this time it didnt.
At least Haswell will be a new CPU and not a die shrink
You don't have to denigrate my character like that just to have a conversation with me :\
Instead of being snide about this you could have just asked me why I bought the 3770k (or my FX8350 for that matter) despite already owning the 2600k.
Effect of Temperature on Power-Consumption with the i7-2600K
Lapped my i7-3770K and there was zero improvement in operating temperatures!?
Delidded my i7-3770K, loaded temperatures drop by 20°C at 4.7GHz
i7-3770K vs. i7-2600K: Temperature, Voltage, GHz and Power-Consumption Analysis
Bare-die testing: A delidded 3770k, an H100, and 9 different TIMs
Observations with an FX-8350
I buy these chips because I am interested in them. I publish my findings here in these forums because I assume there are others out there who are interested in them the same as I am.
I'm not an unreasonable person, I would have gladly explained my situation to you had you only asked.
I bet you couldn't tell me what's changed.This forum is full of people who are blinded by the truth though and the truth is that a 2600k vs a 3770k wont make the slightest difference in pretty much anything. Its 99% the same CPU just on a smaller process.
It is clearly better. Ivy Bridge's numbers are at better than Sandy Bridge's numbers. I don't know why you're trying to dispute that.There is one thread on here where someone tells people an i7 920 isnt good enough to play Skyrim and Bf3 without bottlenecks which is total rubbish. Another guy saying the 3770k is clearly better than a 2600k which in many respects is no different for reasons explained above.
You buy into the intel marketing was my point just phrased differently.
If you want the new chip because its the new chip then thats great. i actually misread what you wrote when you said you "enjoy" the 3770k more. i thought you meant that it was better than the 2600k. My apologies .
This forum is full of people who are blinded by the truth though and the truth is that a 2600k vs a 3770k wont make the slightest difference in pretty much anything. Its 99% the same CPU just on a smaller process.
There is one thread on here where someone tells people an i7 920 isnt good enough to play Skyrim and Bf3 without bottlenecks which is total rubbish. Another guy saying the 3770k is clearly better than a 2600k which in many respects is no different for reasons explained above.
I think there is a common theme where unless you dont have the latest CPU then your PC is no longer good enough to do the things its always done.
In some tasks the 8350 will beat an 1100T by 50%+ in performance, therefore perf. per Watt and perf. per $ (if you still find a new 1100T, that is).EDIT:
For AMD LoLZ - name the metrics a FX 8350 beats a Phenom 2 1100T in.
And then see the score SB\IB vs Phenom2\Bulldozer.
In some tasks the 8350 will beat an 1100T by 50%+ in performance, therefore perf. per Watt and perf. per $ (if you still find a new 1100T, that is).
IB is performing the same or better in every metric, that is true, but 3% here and 2% there doesn't make for a wow effect. In comparison, the Jump from Nehalem/Westmere to Sandybridge did wow. A lot more performance and cheaper at the same time.
I don't grasp why one would defend the 3770 over a 2600 so fiercely in the first place, both will probably age better than Core 2 Quads and Nehalems. And both will be outdated at the same time because of new technology or new software. A Performance difference of 5% will not save you from upgrading.