Sandy Bridge Reviews Released!

Oh the sweet sweet tears of realizing your resale value just got stomped all over.
 
Filter said:
Sorry but SB 2600k at 500mhz o/c more isnt faster then my 980x in F@H


All i said is it isnt 50% faster then you claimed. then you bring up overclocking. your keep changing your story.
Click to expand...

You're the one changing things... I said single-threaded performance (F@H is *NOT* single-threaded performance). You're talking multithreaded ;).
 
Sweet can't wait. When is the 2600k gonna be in stock and do you guys think the price will be in line with that $317 quote from intel more or less?
 
GoldenTiger said:
50%+ single-threaded performance without factoring in increased overclockability isn't worth it to you? That's a subjective opinion... mine is that 50% constitutes a trouncing and is a worthy upgrade. Let alone the 30%+ gains in multi-threading...
Click to expand...

here is what you said you said greater then 50% in single thread apps without the increased over clockabiltiy. For shits and gigles lest take 4.2ghz o/c on both chips show me where its more then 50% gain, you said without the increased overclockabilty.

then you said 30% gains on multthread apps? all i said is 2600k at 4.9ghz can not beat a 980x at 4.4ghz on a big adv in F@H
 
Has anyone seen any overclocking results with the P8P67-M PRO or other matx boards? For my setup I need two card crossfire support with two pci-e slots within the the first four expansion slots from the CPU socket. Because of this, matx is attractive simply because they HAVE to place the two pci-e slots within that space while we typically don't see them that close on anything but the top end quad sli p67 boards. However, I'm also open to going full atx provided I have two pci-e slots within the matx footprint.

Recommendations are welcome :)
 
This is a lot of information to take in.

So basically the i5 and i7 I bought are obsolete now?
 
Megalith said:
This is a lot of information to take in.

So basically the i5 and i7 I bought are obsolete now?
Click to expand...

They don't make any sense for new builds, but they are far from obsolete and still trounce anything from AMD. Its tough to keep your sense of perspective sometimes with all the [H]ardness around here.:p
 
Megalith said:
This is a lot of information to take in.

So basically the i5 and i7 I bought are obsolete now?
Click to expand...

i7 1136 by enthusiasts standards wont be obsolete until Q4 2011, when the LGA 2011 Sandy Bridge CPUs arrive (or Ivy Bridge shrink in 2012).

i5 by enthusiast standards is obsolete when these 1155 CPUs are released.

For non-enthusiasts (read: 99% of people), your i5/i7 are good for another 4 years unless you're already craving for more power.

I'm going to take a guess you're in the 99%, because anyone who is an enthusiast keeps track of CPU architecture and release dates 6+ months ahead.
 
Last edited:
Megalith said:
This is a lot of information to take in.

So basically the i5 and i7 I bought are obsolete now?
Click to expand...

once you buy something in the computer world technically becomes obsolete within a few months.


Your i7 and i5 should/will handle anything you throw at them for years to come.
 
Filter said:
Sorry but SB 2600k at 500mhz o/c more isnt faster then my 980x in F@H


All i said is it isnt 50% faster then you claimed. then you bring up overclocking. your keep changing your story.


Clock per Clock SB isnt 50% faster then i7
Click to expand...

It is faster than every i7 except for 980x. Any Joe Schmo could buy a $200 i2500k and OC to 4.5 or higher and beat your 4.4 980x in everything but the most thread intensive programs. It could beat it 90% of the time, probably close to 100% in games. Seems like a waist of $800 to me.
 
Is the i7 2600S still slated to be released at the same time as the K and normal versions?

I'm re-building my mATX system, and was looking to use the i7 2600S in the system rebuild, so I'm hoping it's still being released with the rest of the lineup.
 
Skakruk said:
Are there any gaming benchmarks comparing 2600 with HT turned on and off? I never bought an i7, but I remember people saying that it was better to disable HT for games.
Click to expand...

I haven't seen any, but most reviews put the 2500 and 2600 pretty much neck and neck, so I would say it doesn't make too much difference.
 
Skakruk said:
Are there any gaming benchmarks comparing 2600 with HT turned on and off? I never bought an i7, but I remember people saying that it was better to disable HT for games.
Click to expand...

Hyper-threading requires a little more Vcore, meaning you can squeeze a little more overclock with Hyper-threading disabled. That's how it is now. I have no idea if Sandy Bridge will be the same because all the overclocks are pretty tight. Hyper-threading is useful for encoding and media applications, where 8 threads are utilized. Probably not so much in computer games.
 
Skakruk said:
but I remember people saying that it was better to disable HT for games.
Click to expand...
For low resolution benchmarking, maybe or maybe not. VR-Zone did a couple of tests and this is the source of that advice: http://vr-zone.com/articles/does-core-i7-hyper-threading-helps-/6160.html?doc=6160

The question you should be asking is whether you need a CPU with HT. There's a $100 difference between the 2500K and 2600K. Gamers don't need HT. With an unlocked CPU, the $100 saved on a 2500K instead of a 2600K is better spent on a better video card if you want higher peformance or better IQ in games.

Personally, I leave it on and would leave it on if I had a SB.
 
So for those of us who want to actually buy a motherboard and processor...where can they be found? Newegg doesn't have a single socket 1155.
 
pxc said:
The question you should be asking is whether you need a CPU with HT. There's a $100 difference between the 2500K and 2600K. Gamers don't need HT. With an unlocked CPU, the $100 saved on a 2500K instead of a 2600K is better spent on a better video card if you want higher peformance or better IQ in games.

Personally, I leave it on and would leave it on if I had a SB.
Click to expand...

Technically that's the biggest difference, especially for gamers. There's also the 2MB extra of L3 cache--which again is probably mostly useful for people who would make use of Hyper-threading. e.g. CAD, encoding, video editing, etc. I use my PC for my day job, which includes much encoding, photo and video editing.. 2600K for me. :D
 
Ryan45 said:
It is faster than every i7 except for 980x. Any Joe Schmo could buy a $200 i2500k and OC to 4.5 or higher and beat your 4.4 980x in everything but the most thread intensive programs. It could beat it 90% of the time, probably close to 100% in games. Seems like a waist of $800 to me.
Click to expand...

i didnt buy my 980x to play games on.


thats the reason you buy a 6 core is for Thread intensive programs.
 
HT causes some of the CPU resources to be statically split, lowering peak per-thread performance for some operations. I run with HT off, since I don't run highly-threaded-but-often-blocked-by-IO databases or web servers.
 
Zarkon said:
So for those of us who want to actually buy a motherboard and processor...where can they be found? Newegg doesn't have a single socket 1155.
Click to expand...

The NDA has apparently been lifted, with the reviews flowing in--you can probably expect retailers such as Newegg to sell their stock starting tomorrow or Wednesday (or the latest--the 9th which was rumored).
 
Zarkon said:
So for those of us who want to actually buy a motherboard and processor...where can they be found? Newegg doesn't have a single socket 1155.
Click to expand...

Extremely good question! With dozens of computer websites (except [H]ardOCP) reviewing these cpu's why aren't they available for purchase by the general public? What's the heck is going on here? It's all just a big p.r. circus so far.
 
Zarkon said:
So for those of us who want to actually buy a motherboard and processor...where can they be found? Newegg doesn't have a single socket 1155.
Click to expand...

Motherboards are available at a few places, including Amazon. Processors, not yet.
 
Filter said:
most those benmark programs they used are limited to 4-8 threads so you cant say that the 980x is 50% more cpu. since its not using all 12 threads.
Click to expand...

That's the problem with so many cores on the desktop, too many apps are thread limited.

I find most the apps I use can only make use of 2-3 cores, so 12 cores doesn't help me.

On the otherhand, the more cores the better when I'm putting togather a server. I'd rather buy a server with dual 2.4Ghz Xeons, than a single 2.8Ghz for the same price.
 
nutzo said:
That's the problem with so many cores on the desktop, too many apps are thread limited.

I find most the apps I use can only make use of 2-3 cores, so 12 cores doesn't help me.

On the otherhand, the more cores the better when I'm putting togather a server. I'd rather buy a server with dual 2.4Ghz Xeons, than a single 2.8Ghz for the same price.
Click to expand...

This is true. If i was to build a gaming rig it would have a 2600k in it over the 980x.
But i bought the 980x with the intention it being a 24/7 big adv folder.

I am ordering a 2600k as another big adv folder.
 
Just called my local MC - they're saying the 9th. Which is the same thing they told me a couple days ago...dunno why I expected it to change :p
 
Sunday is an odd day for a retail release. Looks like I'll have to place an order from the airport so I have one waiting for me when I get home from Jamaica
 
Mav451 said:
Just called my local MC - they're saying the 9th. Which is the same thing they told me a couple days ago...dunno why I expected it to change :p
Click to expand...

Because, like the rest of us, you're drooling over a new CPU? :D

It's gonna be depressing to stare at all the other parts for a week and wait for SB to hit shelves.
 
These CPUs look great. Not sure why all of the comparisons to the 980x, that CPU is 10 months old and while the 2600 is a much better buy and faster CPU per core, the 2600 is no where near 50% faster than the 980x even for gaming and with high-res multi-GPU, multi-monitor setups I doubt the 2600 would be even 10% faster clock for clock.

I've got 6 GB of RAM and an i7-920 laying around that l will build into another rig, just need a motherboard and I still plan on doing that as it's cheaper than both a new CPU and motherboard. I might pick up the 2600 next month however and retire a Q6600 based server.
 
I went to local MC and they wouldn't sell any SB chips or boards. Frys on the other hand had a few boards out on the shelves.
 
Filter said:
This is true. If i was to build a gaming rig it would have a 2600k in it over the 980x.
But i bought the 980x with the intention it being a 24/7 big adv folder.

I am ordering a 2600k as another big adv folder.
Click to expand...

You're just having buyer's remorse that the 980x is barely faster at folding, and much slower at single-threaded performance & matched in the vast majority (90-95% plus) of multi-threaded desktop apps... (check folding subforum for proof on the first statement). It's OK, but spreading FUD is not cool. http://techreport.com/articles.x/20188/18 Check this page ;), note the single-threaded (shaded bar) performance.

http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/foru...2500k-core-i7-2600k-processors-review-13.html
 
Last edited:
enough of the 980x bashing! There's no doubt the 980x is bad ass. Yes the new cpu's are performing better than it in some benchmarks. I'd still JIMP and so would you if you get get your hands on one for daily use.
 
seanmcd said:
enough of the 980x bashing! There's no doubt the 980x is bad ass. Yes the new cpu's are performing better than it in some benchmarks. I'd still JIMP and so would you if you get get your hands on one for daily use.
Click to expand...

Yeah, for ~$300 I'd take one no problem. But I'm not dropping $1000 on one.

And yes no doubt it's a badass processor... unfortunately I don't think anyone can justify the price of one after SB release.
 
Database said:
Yeah, for ~$300 I'd take one no problem. But I'm not dropping $1000 on one.

And yes no doubt it's a badass processor... unfortunately I don't think anyone can justify the price of one after SB release.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't be surprised to see a price drop on the 980x announced soon as well.
 
Underwhelming on the low-end ($100) price range. The lack of overclocking in the i3 kills that line for me.

Plus, if you want to overclock, you have to currently buy the P67 chipset, which means no built in video support. For non-gamers, the built in video is fine.

Even if the pricing for the Z68 chip is reasonable, it doesn't help with the i3 chips, I would have to go with an i5 at a higher price.

Basically Intel has killed the ability to buy the bottom-end CPU and overclock to mid-end performance :(

At least buying mid-end CPU and overclocking to high-end is still available.
 
nutzo said:
Underwhelming on the low-end ($100) price range. The lack of overclocking in the i3 kills that line for me.

Plus, if you want to overclock, you have to currently buy the P67 chipset, which means no built in video support. For non-gamers, the built in video is fine.

Even if the pricing for the Z68 chip is reasonable, it doesn't help with the i3 chips, I would have to go with an i5 at a higher price.

Basically Intel has killed the ability to buy the bottom-end CPU and overclock to mid-end performance :(

At least buying mid-end CPU and overclocking to high-end is still available.
Click to expand...

You can overclock all the locked processors to 4 multipliers over max turbo. This would take an i3 2100 to 3.7ghz and potentially higher with some baseclock fiddling. At that speed it will absolutely destroy any of the clarksdale duals.

The only thing that sucks is not being able to do that overclock in an H67 board. However, since the H67 supports turbo I wonder if the extra 4 bin speeds could be enabled through a hacked bios.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top