Sandy Bridge E vs Ivy Bridge

[NitromanseR]

Hello everyone,

I am hearing a lot of rumors about the upcoming Intel cpus.. I heard that Ivy Bridge will be like more a mainstream cpu and SB-E will be for high-end users. As far as is know till now, is that true? Because IB will be based on 22nms..

Thnx in advance

 

[BonzaiDuck]

Hello everyone,

I am hearing a lot of rumors about the upcoming Intel cpus.. I heard that Ivy Bridge will be like more a mainstream cpu and SB-E will be for high-end users. As far as is know till now, is that true? Because IB will be based on 22nms..

Thnx in advance

Other rumors -- or "intel" -- abound. Supposedly, there will be a string -- one or more -- of the IVY Brigders that are made for socket 1155. But maybe that's what you mean by SB-E.

As for 22nm, think of the regime extant when Conroe and Kentsfield first appeared: Intel and nVidia made chipsets for the Intel processors. Intel craw-fished on nVidia, or nvidia didn't anticipate the requirements of the next-gen Wofldale/Yorkfield cores. This was a step up ("down") from the 65nm Conroe chips, when the 45nm Penryn line was released (Wolfie/Yorkie). The 45nm Woflies worked with the nVidia chipsets, but those chipsets were left behind in the dust as Intel released the Yorkfield.

 

[AdamK47]

Other rumors -- or "intel" -- abound. Supposedly, there will be a string -- one or more -- of the IVY Brigders that are made for socket 1155. But maybe that's what you mean by SB-E.

As for 22nm, think of the regime extant when Conroe and Kentsfield first appeared: Intel and nVidia made chipsets for the Intel processors. Intel craw-fished on nVidia, or nvidia didn't anticipate the requirements of the next-gen Wofldale/Yorkfield cores. This was a step up ("down") from the 65nm Conroe chips, when the 45nm Penryn line was released (Wolfie/Yorkie). The 45nm Woflies worked with the nVidia chipsets, but those chipsets were left behind in the dust as Intel released the Yorkfield.

Huh?

 

[NitromanseR]

Thanks for replying. I hope I understood everything you told me (You see I am a little noobish)

The thing I am actually asking is... When Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge E will be out in the market, will they be kind of the same or for example Ivy Bridge will be for more mainstream uses and SB-E will be the very high end stuff?

PS: I hope I haven't confused anything in my mind ^^

 

[PreferLinux]

You're right, but there will eventually be a high end version of Ivy Bridge too.

 

[NitromanseR]

Ok great, thank everyone for replying

 

[gramboh]

SB-E = 32nm process, Socket 2011 (new socket), quad and 6 core CPUs, new X79 chipset supporting 8 DIMMs and quad-channel memory configurations, PCI-e 3.0 (I think? Always forget, maybe still 2.1) and maybe USB3 natively. Released Q4-2011, 3 SKUs probably $500, 700ish and $1000 for top of the line.

Ivy Bridge = 22nm process, Socket 1155, dual and quad core, New Z77 Panther Point chipset, dual channel DDR3-1600 or 1833, PCI-e 3.0, native USB3, possible LightPeak support. Target release Q1-2012. Not sure on SKUs, will likely be $350ish at high end (2600k replacement) and down from there.

 

[gramboh]

Double post, why isn't delete enabled on AT?

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

mmmm, get me some light peeking!

 

[tweakboy]

Whats after 22nm , then 11nm then 1nm. .. then thats it , weve reached peak.. no or notch.. gg..

 

[Gloomy]

Whats after 22nm , then 11nm then 1nm. .. then thats it , weve reached peak.. no or notch.. gg..

It's 15nm after 22nm I think.

 

[pantsaregood]

SB-E uses the current 32nm Sandy Bridge core. It supports more PCI-E lanes than current LGA 1155 SBs, has a quad-channel memory controller, and may have more L3 cache. Six-core models of SB-E will be released, which makes for a far more significant performance improvement than any of the other factors mentioned.

Ivy Bridge is a die-shrink of Sandy Bridge. Clock-for-clock, it should perform identically (or absurdly near-identically) to Sandy Bridge. It will, however, use significantly less power, and may also have improved overclocking headroom.

IB-E is undoubtedly in Intel's pipeline somewhere. Given the choice between a four-core SB-E and four-core IB, I'd take the IB for the increased overclocking headroom.

 

[bridito]

Clock-for-clock, it should perform identically (or absurdly near-identically) to Sandy Bridge.

My dear friend, I honestly don't know why you continue to make those statements when various other far more erudite and knowledgeable forum participants than I have repeatedly told you are in error. IB will not perform identically to SB clock for clock. There is no point repeating all the reasons from scratch why every time you make that erroneous statement. It's sounding like a broken record. If you want to belittle IB or any other CPU it would make sense to do so with evidence, not repeating a statement which is wrong over and over again in hope that it will stick to the wall.

 

[Rifter]

My dear friend, I honestly don't know why you continue to make those statements when various other far more erudite and knowledgeable forum participants than I have repeatedly told you are in error. IB will not perform identically to SB clock for clock. There is no point repeating all the reasons from scratch why every time you make that erroneous statement. It's sounding like a broken record. If you want to belittle IB or any other CPU it would make sense to do so with evidence, not repeating a statement which is wrong over and over again in hope that it will stick to the wall.

I 100% agree, while it is a a die shrink its not a straight up die shrink, there are things being added which should make it faster clock for clock even if not by alot.

 

[AtenRa]

Ivy Bridge is a die-shrink of Sandy Bridge. Clock-for-clock, it should perform identically (or absurdly near-identically) to Sandy Bridge. It will, however, use significantly less power, and may also have improved overclocking headroom.

I will have to agree,

Ivy Bridge will have minor improvements in the CPU micro architecture over Sandy Bridge (AVX extensions and uArch optimizations) and clock for clock will have almost the same performance.

It is in the iGPU department that we will see the biggest differences with up to 16 EUs (12 for SB), PCI-e Gen3.0, DX-11 support and more.

Because of the 22nm process along with better power gating in iGPU and in Memory, power usage will be much lower both in idle and load than SB.

 

[yours truly]

What I don't understand is, if Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge will have similar performance and are released reasonably close to each other, won't IB end up undermining the sales for SB-E?

And sorry for my foolishness, but if Ivy Bridge draws less power, it's not going to overheat as much and in turn, overclock better?

So who would want to jump on SB-E if it ends up costing 3-4 times more?



ps: again sorry for the silly questions

 

[Stoneburner]

What I don't understand is, if Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge will have similar performance and are released reasonably close to each other, won't IB end up undermining the sales for SB-E?

And sorry for my foolishness, but if Ivy Bridge draws less power, it's not going to overheat as much and in turn, overclock better?

So who would want to jump on SB-E if it ends up costing 3-4 times more?



ps: again sorry for the silly questions

Wouldn't be the first time intel's done it

 

[pantsaregood]

I would like to point out that I did use a "near identically" qualifier, though I did undermine it. Penryn was an improvement over Conroe in much the same way as Ivy Bridge will be an improvement over Sandy Bridge. Yes, some tweaks will be made. The GPU will be significantly improved, though bandwidth limitations can and will come into play.

SB to IB will not be the jump Nehalem to SB was. Ivy Bridge is not a nail in AMD's coffin, by any means. It is, more than anything else, a die-shrink, and it should be treated as such.

 

[AtenRa]

What I don't understand is, if Sandy Bridge-E and Ivy Bridge will have similar performance and are released reasonably close to each other, won't IB end up undermining the sales for SB-E?

And sorry for my foolishness, but if Ivy Bridge draws less power, it's not going to overheat as much and in turn, overclock better?

So who would want to jump on SB-E if it ends up costing 3-4 times more?



ps: again sorry for the silly questions

1: SB-E socket 2011 and SB/IB at Socket 1155 are targeting different user groups,
Socket 2011 is targeting Desktop Enthusiasts, Workstation and Server market and Socket 1155 targets Middle and lower end Desktop systems.

2: SB-E for socket 2011 will be released 3 to 6 months prior of IB.

3: SB-E will have 6-core CPUs when SB and IB in Socket 1155 will top up to quad (4) core CPUs.

4: After 3 to 6 months of IB 1155 introduction, Intel will release IB-E for Socket 2011 (4-6 and perhaps even 8 Core).

It will be the same that happened with Core i7 920/30 at Socket 1366 and Socket 1156 Core i7 8xx.

 

[bridito]

OK, so let's see what everyone thinks (and nobody knows squat so it's all guesswork):

Overall averaged benchmarks on 2600 Quad @ 3.4GHz = IB 1155 Quad @ 3.4GHz + what percentage?

 

[podspi]

OK, so let's see what everyone thinks (and nobody knows squat so it's all guesswork):

Overall averaged benchmarks on 2600 Quad @ 3.4GHz = IB 1155 Quad @ 3.4GHz + what percentage?

No more than 5%, I'd say. And that is a high estimate. Take a look at some comparisons of Nehalem and Sandy Bridge at identical clock speeds and no turbo.


I would like to point out that nobody has said IB being a die-shrink is a bad thing. SB is an excellent arch, 22nm will bring already impressive power-use down and make the chip even smaller than it already is. This alone will increase performance/watt.

 

[Lonbjerg]

I would like to point out that I did use a "near identically" qualifier, though I did undermine it. Penryn was an improvement over Conroe in much the same way as Ivy Bridge will be an improvement over Sandy Bridge. Yes, some tweaks will be made. The GPU will be significantly improved, though bandwidth limitations can and will come into play.

SB to IB will not be the jump Nehalem to SB was. Ivy Bridge is not a nail in AMD's coffin, by any means. It is, more than anything else, a die-shrink, and it should be treated as such.

Not it's not, even Intel is describing it as a "die-skrink+"...

 

[ydnas7]

same clock
IB, no HT is +5% of SB (no HT)
IB, HT on is +15% of SB (HT on)

with differing clocks, IB's IGP is 2x HD3000 performance

 

[GammaLaser]

Whoever said that IVB wasn't going to come without any architecture changes is wrong:

Ivy Bridge is Intel’s next generation of processors, and by normal standards it should do nothing more than make the current 32nm Sandy Bridge processor a 22nm processor. But Intel is calling Ivy Bridge ‘Tick Plus’ because they’re making some changes to the architecture alongside the die shrink that will make it another significant upgrade.

Source

 

[StrangerGuy]

1: SB-E socket 2011 and SB/IB at Socket 1155 are targeting different user groups,
Socket 2011 is targeting Desktop Enthusiasts, Workstation and Server market and Socket 1155 targets Middle and lower end Desktop systems.

2: SB-E for socket 2011 will be released 3 to 6 months prior of IB.

3: SB-E will have 6-core CPUs when SB and IB in Socket 1155 will top up to quad (4) core CPUs.

4: After 3 to 6 months of IB 1155 introduction, Intel will release IB-E for Socket 2011 (4-6 and perhaps even 8 Core).

It will be the same that happened with Core i7 920/30 at Socket 1366 and Socket 1156 Core i7 8xx.

Don't count on IB working with existing S1155 mobos even if it shares the same socket. History of S775 shall repeat itself again.