Nice work! We've caught a troll or using his words...a damn fool! So sad when a sig line is make believe!
Nice work! We've caught a troll or using his words...a damn fool! So sad when a sig line is make believe!
The reason that Gulftown came first was that it wasn't as fundamentally radically different in the uncore as compared to Lynnfield relative to Nehalem.
Right now SNB-E's uncore is a totally different animal from SNB/IVB's. I'm sure HSW-E will have a lot of goodies in the uncore that will explain the extra time.
I'm waiting patiently for Skymont-E
The same thing happened with successive Itanium iterations, and I doubt there were any nefarious reasons why that happened.
Skymont wtf, that is 2015 right ? Haswell is 2014. 2013 is the year of the E chip. gl
The delay with successive Itanium iterations were because it was Itanium. It became very apparent early in the Itanium program that it would never grow up to to be the x86 replacement, and Intel did the bare minimum with Itanium from then on. You cannot seriously compare this with x86-64.
IVB-E will share much with small socket IVB, just like SB-E did with its smaller sibling. It is not as if they are developing an all-new arch. Somehow Intel were able to get small socket IVB ready in time, but putting a few more cores, more cache, removing the iGPU and other such *relatively* minor modifications on an already proven design will take nearly two years.
If you buy into this BS I have a bridge to sell you.
Refresh my memory as to what the Ivy-E is expected to offer (cores, etc)...
my guess,2 cores ,higher temps,lower power consumption and a vary distant release date.
No one knows for sure. More cores is a possibility, but it's more likely it's just going to be a straight shrink along with some errata fixes (such as the PCIe controller), similar to the CPU changes for SNB->IVB.Refresh my memory as to what the Ivy-E is expected to offer (cores, etc)...
PCIe 3.0 basically doesn't work correctly. There are too many bugs in SNB-E's implementation. Which is why IVB is PCIe 3.0 certified but SNB-E is only PCIe 2.0 certified.What PCI-E problem would that be?
Intel has never come clean on what exactly is wrong, but it's apparently some kind of manufacturing defect. Whether it works or not is almost entirely variable on a chip-by-chip basis; some people can make it work, some can't.:|Guess I'm lucky with my 7970s. PCI-E 3.0 is working correctly.
No one knows for sure. More cores is a possibility, but it's more likely it's just going to be a straight shrink along with some errata fixes (such as the PCIe controller), similar to the CPU changes for SNB->IVB.
No one knows for sure. More cores is a possibility, but it's more likely it's just going to be a straight shrink along with some errata fixes (such as the PCIe controller), similar to the CPU changes for SNB->IVB.
SNB-E is already 8 cores. Intel does have a 10 core Gulftown processor, but it's not clear if they intend to replace it. As for SNB-E prices, this is Intel. Intel won't cut prices they'll just discontinue SNB-E processors.I see - Seems like I read somewhere recently about 8 or perhaps 10 cores. Speculation, most likely.
It will be interesting to see what that will do to the current CPU lineup (cost wise) for the X79 platform in a year or so. So if someone were going with an X79 now with a 3820, and held out if they wanted either a better deal on say the 3930K or a mega-core Ivy-E monster.
Didn't the Sandy Bridges drop a little after the Ivy was released?
I'm talking about IVB-E as compared to SNB-E.I'm guessing you mean "more cores" in the context of SB-E and not IB? It would be odd to stick with 4 cores.
Though with the talk of the die shrink, I'm pretty sure you mean in the context of SB-E. Ditto on the PCIe comment too.
If this is clear, forgive me. I'm ill and medicated, so my comprehension may be off.
PCIe 3.0 basically doesn't work correctly. There are too many bugs in SNB-E's implementation. Which is why IVB is PCIe 3.0 certified but SNB-E is only PCIe 2.0 certified.
Intel thought they could implement BIOS/microcode work-arounds so that it could be made to unofficially work, but they've even backed off on that. You won't find any modern literature claiming any kind of PCIe 3.0 support from Intel, though motherboard manufacturers are free to unofficially enable it on if they want to (which is what lead to NVIDIA disabling it in their drivers for Kepler parts).
LOL@Adam.
I had people laughing at me as well when i dumped my e6750 back in 2007 for a q6600 and all i heard was that well quads are useless you wasted $300 LOL but the main game i played being UT3 at the time made tremendous use of the extra cores.
i remember the e8400 being the big rival and about a million e8400 vs q6600 threads popped across every forum on the web,well it took about 3 years but nearly every game makes use of quads and the q6600 with a oc is still a rather good processor.
Going by the experience of my old q6600 and how it aged well,i could see myself building a "foreverbox" with a 3930k build just as a pc i won't upgrade or touch it for the next 4-5 years.
SNB-E is already 8 cores. Intel does have a 10 core Gulftown processor, but it's not clear if they intend to replace it.
Yeah, Intel is screwing with us. For what, just to make profits! Seriously though, x79 would make a bit more sense if Intel fixed and updated the chipset. Instead the boards get expensive once mainboard companies add in all the extras.
His sig is not make believe.