Prices of Ivy Bridge Desktop CPUs

Please, oh please, give me back the days when processor model names were decipherable without a decoder ring. Here's what I mean:
Code: 
prefix                CPU Name
        i5-3450  i5-3470  i5-3550  i5-3570  i7-3770
(none)   fast              fast              faster
K                                   fast    fastest
S        slow              slow              fast
T                cores/2            slow     slow
Are they *trying* to make it hard to figure it out?
 
Mohonri said:
Please, oh please, give me back the days when processor model names were decipherable without a decoder ring. Here's what I mean:
Code: 
prefix                CPU Name
        i5-3450  i5-3470  i5-3550  i5-3570  i7-3770
(none)   fast              fast              faster
K                                   fast    fastest
S        slow              slow              fast
T                cores/2            slow     slow
Are they *trying* to make it hard to figure it out?
Click to expand...

i admit , i had to do a dbl take to figure out each cpu
 
The alphabet soup is daunting at first, but with this cheat sheet showing what the Sandy Bridge equivalents are, all we really need to know is that the 3570K is the new gamer's CPU, the 3770K is the SLI/Crossfire gamer's CPU, and the 3450 is the I'm-so-poor-I-save-$41-where-it-makes-no-sense CPU.
 
and lack of more cores
Click to expand...

Maybe in haswell we will have a 6 core 12 threaded processor for the mainstream line. However without any competition, Intel may wait till the 14nm process.
 
If IB has a 35W TDP 4-core part, that will be huge for the mobile market. Intel hasn't officially announced any such cpu yet. The desktop lineup looks like a nice upgrade with lower TDP and will probably overclock just as well as SB. For a 'tick' its what was expected.
 
It looks like a slight uptick from $317 for the 2600k to $332 for the new top Ivy. The 2700k is just a mid-cycle clock jump and if bulldozer had not been such a comparative flop the 2700k would have simply replaced the 2600k at the same price point which happened when the 930 replaced the 920.
 
As a reminder, hardware accelerated virtualization will most likely be stripped out of the ivy K parts. If you need virtualization Intel is going to force you into Sandy-E and Ivy-E.
 
As a reminder, hardware accelerated virtualization will most likely be stripped out of the ivy K parts. If you need virtualization Intel is going to force you into Sandy-E and Ivy-E.
Click to expand...

Won't that be the same as SB? The only thing that is missing is VT-d and that is only needed in servers (where you want to allocate a raid card to a guest) or setups where you have a dedicated graphics card for a guest. Neither of these are common desktop uses. You still get hardware accelerated virtulization VT-x.
 
So sad Intel can just tweak old 4 core 8 thread craptastic, when they should have been pushed to 6 core 12 thread goodness. Thanks AMD. Now the douch-bag masses will buy 4 core current gen and think they are eating cake and brag about it.
Anyways it is about to strangle the mainstream 4 core market without a doubt.
Save us AMD, I don't like to bend over, even if some fanboi's do!
 
when they should have been pushed to 6 core 12 thread goodness.
Click to expand...

They have had 6 core, 12 threaded processors for some time now. I am typing on one that I paid ~$352.06 shipped for new a few months ago when I gave up on BD. The difference is 6 cores and 12 threads is not considered by Intel as a mainstream desktop part (yet) but an enthusiast part. Without real competition by AMD, Intel can leave 6 core / 12 threaded processors in this category.
 
funkydmunky said:
..... Thanks AMD. Now the douch-bag masses will buy 4 core current gen and think they are eating cake and ..........!
Click to expand...

This horse has been beaten to death, but unlike AMD trying to push their "More Cores = Better" BS agenda, Intel knows what people care about and will buy accordingly... So if you do Pro Video work, render all day long, or rip DVD's/Blue Rays and somehow make money off of it, you'll have a reason and funds to buy appropriate CPU, that somehow will make it worth the extra cost because of what you do with it...

PS
I'm not trying to say that Intel has always known what "people want and need"... Been around the block long enough to know better, but you do have to admit, ever since Core arch came out (or got reborn;)) they've been on top of it, and have provided a product people want at great prices....
 
Last edited:
Wooosh!
Yep that's the sound of you two boys missing the point, then reiterating the point. Brilliant!:rolleyes:

The enthusiast market would have been very different than it sits now if AMD had pushed. It didn't. Hence last years re-dux. Duh! :(
 
I think Intel would have gone with pretty much the same lineup even if the 8 core bullodzer was a little faster than Intel's top end 4 core / 8 threaded i7 processor. The prices may have been a little lower on the enthusiast lineup but I do not see that getting a 6 core on lga 1155.
 
No real clock speed improvements.

My overclcoked i860 @ 3.5/3.9 Ghz on air is starting to show age, as the stock speeds have caught up to my max overclock speed.

However, I still don't see much of a reason to upgrade unless the new chips have alot more overclock headroom than the 2700K. A 20%-30% improvement just isn't enough enough to justify a new CPU/motherboard.
 
Another thing. Intel doesn't have to raise prices too much. You forget the premium at which the x79 Intel chipset comes to us now. Have you seen the prices. $450 - $500 for the top end / high end x79 boards now.

I think it's insane.

The more I think about it, my 4.9Ghz just can't be too much slower than what's coming out.
 
Teenyman45 said:
As a reminder, hardware accelerated virtualization will most likely be stripped out of the ivy K parts. If you need virtualization Intel is going to force you into Sandy-E and Ivy-E.
Click to expand...

I'm using VT-d on daily basis, on an i5-2500 (non-K) CPU. So I'm not forced to "E".

drescherjm said:
Won't that be the same as SB? The only thing that is missing is VT-d and that is only needed in servers (where you want to allocate a raid card to a guest) or setups where you have a dedicated graphics card for a guest. Neither of these are common desktop uses. You still get hardware accelerated virtulization VT-x.
Click to expand...

I'm doing the 2nd part, dedicated GPU + USB + sound. Sound seems to be the most troublesome.
 
funkydmunky said:
Wooosh!
Yep that's the sound of you two boys missing the point, then reiterating the point. Brilliant!:rolleyes:

The enthusiast market would have been very different than it sits now if AMD had pushed. It didn't. Hence last years re-dux. Duh! :(
Click to expand...



What Intel has now and coming soon was planned long time ago, as in years. It had nothing to do with Bulldozer. If Bulldozer had been a good product it would have changed very little in the regular or enthusiast market. Only if it was great would it have prodded Intel to lower their prices somewhat.
 
Mohonri said:
Please, oh please, give me back the days when processor model names were decipherable without a decoder ring. Here's what I mean:
Code: 
prefix                CPU Name
        i5-3450  i5-3470  i5-3550  i5-3570  i7-3770
(none)   fast              fast              faster
K                                   fast    fastest
S        slow              slow              fast
T                cores/2            slow     slow
Are they *trying* to make it hard to figure it out?
Click to expand...

Are you old enough to remember when you could compare one company's chip with another's just from the name and numbers? Those were the days.
 
So basically my 2500K @ 4.7GHz is still kicks the crap out of 90% of everything out there?

Let's be real - I love performance, but I also love bang per buck. Unless I'm bench marking or running VERY specific software that takes advantage of 8 cores. I'm sure IB will be a step forward in terms of performance per watt but I see absolutely no reason to drop another 200 dollars for a difference I will never see.

Now if IB-K series chips have some insane overclocking potential (i'm talking 5.5 to 6GHz) then and only then would I consider them a worthwhile upgrade.

I'm happy to know I can drop an IB chip in my mobo and just roll -- but I don't see this happening for at least a year for me my sandy bridge 2500K 4.7Ghz on air will continue to destroy in BF3 :)
 
I still want to know why mobile Ivy Bridge chips are 35W when this Trigate business was supposed to reduce power consumption. Otellini said the center point for mobile would be 10-15W but Ivy Bridge is still 17W/35W/45W exactly like Sandy Bridge, zero improvement.
 
The biggest thing... the only thing i care is, will it boost my fps at same speed a little or not. If it does, sell the 2500k and get this one.. my z68 mb takes ib CPU so
 
needmorecarnitine said:
What Intel has now and coming soon was planned long time ago, as in years. It had nothing to do with Bulldozer. If Bulldozer had been a good product it would have changed very little in the regular or enthusiast market. Only if it was great would it have prodded Intel to lower their prices somewhat.
Click to expand...

The architecture was planned years ago, but the final product features aren't set in stone until production ramps up a few months or weeks before release. AMD having a competitive product would have definitely had an impact on what features Intel included in their new processors and at what price they would sell at next quarter.
 
My current commute keeps me off my desktop a lot these days so I've held off upgrading my OC'ed Q9550. I'll probably upgrade with Ivy, but maybe just run with it a year or so, then use it to upgrade my htpc/virtual server box and upgrade my desktop again. My challenge will be picking the right Ivy to serve for awhile as a gaming/ripping/programming/virtualization desktop cpu then will still be good as an htpc-no video card/virtualization/ripping cpu.
 
I'm kind of disappointed that there won't be anything larger then a quad core. I'll probably just stick with the 2700k I'll be receiving shortly.
 
The other fun thing for those who jump on the LGA1155 platform for Ivy will have no future upgrade path on the same motherboard because Haswell will use a different socket. Not like my (probable) switch to Ivy-E would put me in any better of a situation.
 
Is there going to b e much of a improvement from sb to ib? I am thinking other then the lower power consumtion there isnt much. Is it worth it to wait for ivy or just buy a 2700K now and be happy?

Thanks..
 
Aus10 said:
Is there going to b e much of a improvement from sb to ib? I am thinking other then the lower power consumtion there isnt much. Is it worth it to wait for ivy or just buy a 2700K now and be happy?

Thanks..
Click to expand...

I'd expect 5~10% performance improvement over SB just from core tweaks, and you do get a better IGP (if you need that)
What I'm mostly interested in is the much lower TDP, with high probability of 5+ GHz overclocks with as much ease as today's SB's reaching 4+GHz.....
 
mzs_biteme said:
I'd expect 5~10% performance improvement over SB just from core tweaks, and you do get a better IGP (if you need that)
What I'm mostly interested in is the much lower TDP, with high probability of 5+ GHz overclocks with as much ease as today's SB's reaching 4+GHz.....
Click to expand...

Ohh that sounds nice.... Ill wait lol
 
Teenyman45 said:
As a reminder, hardware accelerated virtualization will most likely be stripped out of the ivy K parts. If you need virtualization Intel is going to force you into Sandy-E and Ivy-E.
Click to expand...

<CITATION NEEDED>

I just dont see it happening. Even the cheapest AMDs have virtualization, it would be handing AMD a TON of sales.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top