Intel Core i7-3960X - Sandy Bridge E Processor Review @ [H]

FrgMstr

FrgMstr

Just Plain Mean
Staff member
Joined
May 18, 1997
Messages
55,598
Intel Core i7-3960X - Sandy Bridge E Processor Review - Intel debuts its $1000+ Extreme Edition 3960X processor parroting how great it is for the gamer and enthusiast. With 6 cores and 12 threads, a new motherboard and chipset platform, and quad channel DDR3, Intel as done the impossible, given us everything we don't want, and nothing we do want.
 
Nice, thanks for the review! I'll probably be picking up a 3930K and ASUS Rampage IV Extreme tomorrow :D
 
But let me say this, while Intel has been beating the drum about this being the "Ultimate Desktop Processor for Gamers," I think that is a lot of horse shit.
Click to expand...

You got that right. Looks like I'm going to have to wait for IB/IB-E for dramatic improvements.
 
Wow, check out that power consumption, 210w more under load at the same 4.8Ghz clock as the 2600k system. 3960X makes Bulldozer look pretty good in that department at least.
 
Not much faster than the i7 2600K but still nice, but the power consumption is off the chart, at least its not underperforming like Bulldozer.
 
Looks like a 2600K is the most any non-[H] (and most [H]'ers) would need at this point without spending a whole lot of cash.
 
Really, about as expected. It wasn't supposed to be any faster in IPC/thread. In the tasks that can use the extra threads, it looks like it scales absolutely perfectly.

Power consumption is definitely pretty outrageous... but then again, this isn't aimed at anything mainstream whatsoever.

For the cost though, it makes one wonder why you wouldn't look into a dual Xeon system instead.
 
Thanks, makes me much happier with my purchase of i7-2600k this week! Great stuff
 
Cool Vibrations said:
You got that right. Looks like I'm going to have to wait for IB/IB-E for dramatic improvements.
Click to expand...

Yeah, in the same boat here. I am not spending that kind of money on a new build for just better performance in a handful of multi-threaded applications (none of which would kill me to wait a few extra moments).

I will just put together another SB system and pickup the better IB next year.
 
hmm want to see multi-GPU first before i wright it off
two and 3 way sli/cfx
power it's not that much over my i7 930


ps how is the R4E and when is the review :D
 
How could you not want to throw 4x 580 1ghz 3gb cards into that and run somebenchies?
 
While the CPU is nothing to write home about, the neutering that has gone on with the X79 chipset from inception to launch is what really sours the whole deal.
 
Performance in well multi-threaded apps is double that of 2500k, so I don't see power consumption being that outrageous.

As for gaming performance. That's pretty much up to game developers, and offloading GPU work to CPU.
Next Nvidia GPU is said to dynamically balance the work between CPU and GPU, and load/offload to maximize performance.

I am again baffled by again demonstrated lower Bulldozer single thread performance than that of 1100T.
WTF have you been doing AMD
 
Thanks for the review !

Someone seems grumpy lol !:D

Single threaded scores are about right speed for speed. As for the massive memory bandwidth hasn't that always been great for gaming benchmarks ?
As for power consumption I wouldn't of expected an extra 2 cores to be the same as four cores when it comes to TDP.:eek:
And for my self I'm on a 920 @ 4.00 Ghz and would be better off power wise at idle and load and gain 2 extra cores and 800Mhz overclock all other things being equal.

I'm also puzzled you think none of your readers would be intrested in a 3960X as more and more people seem to be geting into multi GPU multi screen w/c overclocked PC's:confused:
 
Get your noses back on the grindstone and give us stellar IPC gains or even better, 5GHz stock clocks.
Click to expand...

PERFECT summary, couldn't agree more. I think this is what gamers want most out of these CPUs at this point. Not a lot of games can truly take advantage of multiple cores. It is mostly about that IPC and clock speed, for gaming.
 
Based on the reviews which have popped up, I'm pretty glad I grabbed my 2500K and ASUS board at launch (even with the Cougar Point fiasco). Can't say I'm too impressed with numbers from SB-E. Then again, I wasn't expecting a whole world of change.

Makes me happy I'll get to rub it in someone's face, though.
 
Well put Kyle. I do video and even though I'll put it to use I can't justify spending a grand on this.
 
nearly 4 years later and overclocked i7 920 users still do not have anything worthwhile to upgrade to.
 
As a freelance editor, I can definitely see the benefits that a processor like this would net me. But I think this particular one would be purchased by post-production houses that could afford it, or want the tax write-off for the end of the year. :rolleyes:

However, I for one am definitely interested in the K variant. Anything that can get my client's product out the door faster is a win, and is much closer to my price range. Also, I need more write-offs for the end of the year. :D
 
DoomDoomDoom said:
Based on the reviews which have popped up, I'm pretty glad I grabbed my 2500K and ASUS board at launch (even with the Cougar Point fiasco). Can't say I'm too impressed with numbers from SB-E. Then again, I wasn't expecting a whole world of change.

Makes me happy I'll get to rub it in someone's face, though.
Click to expand...

How the hell would you rub it, if it needs only half the time your 2500k needs in well written software, i.e. most (video) encoding apps :confused:
 
Just skimmed through the review and read the conclusion to decide if I want to go pick a 3930k up when Microcenter opens.

I came away feeling completely differently than you seem to have, Kyle. It looked to me like the 3960 @ stock speeds was mostly faster than the 2600k @ 4.8GHz in the multithreaded benchmarks. It's certainly not a good value proposition, but if you've got the money to spend I see no compelling argument to not spend it.

The power consumption doesn't concern me; It's nothing that can't be dealt with with a decent cooling system. And as far as cost goes, the 3960 is pushing it but it looks like the 3930k plus a board is going to run about $600 more (give or take) than a 2600k and a comparable mobo, and its performance shouldn't be far off the 3960's. Still not a small amount of money, but if you keep the system for even two or three years the amortized cost is really trivial.

I dunno. I'll probably end up waiting for the Xeons to hit the market. The EVGA SR-3 looks like one hell of a board.
 
Last edited:
goddamn

tough crowd

Thanks for working through the weekend for us Kyle.
 
Nice review, and I have to agree that I don't understand the point of having one, other than saying " I have one ".
 
Like AMD Bulldozer I'll be completely honest about Intel's latest offering, I just don't see this being much of a successor to the i7-900s since they truly blew away everything at the time. In reality they were better for a good few years until Intel bought out Sandy Bridge, with the 3900s they seem to only really take advantage when the 2 extra cores are used and then you've got the fact that Ivy Bridge is just around the corner, it seems a rather big waste to spend out on a 3900s setup.
 
I'm really the first to (re)point out that Intel didnt get native USB 3.0 into this platform?
 
i7 9xx quads etc had the luxury of not having the Lynnfield midrange processors out then, which offered nearly identical performance clock for clock, at a much cheaper total system price and lower power consumption too. Even Gulftown had a dieshrink to 32nm against the Nehalem quads.

The 3960X doesn't have any of the good fortune of those socket 1366 chips. Released after the midrange, no die shrink after midrange launch, and like Bulldozer we can live without those extra server parts that bloat up the CPU die size resulting in more heat and power (and despite fusing off two cores).

I think most enthusiasts are going to abandon the high end market altogether. AMD better not miss out on this one by making multiplier-unlocked A series CPUs without the GPU on die.
 
Last edited:
Happily waiting for the boards to come out, good review like always.
 
I look at conclusion in this article about gaming, then I look at Bulldozer gaming articles and what i feel is one huge WTF ?
 
Welp. I guess my I7 950 @ 4.6ghz will keep me going until maybe Ivy Bridge. Good to see my old investment is still going strong!

Nothing wrong with triple channel memory.
 
At those prices, with that kind of TDP, these are useless to me... Glad I didn't wait, despite only having built a 2600k rig 2 days ago :D
 
"How could you not want to throw 4x 580 1ghz 3gb cards into that and run somebenchies?"

Easy answer. 1: 32nm is basically meh to most at his point. 2500k / 2600k are hitting 4.8Ghz all day long for most. This new CPU just doesn't make sense to most. It's basically common sense and dollar sense. It's pointless to buy this CPU, period. Even for content creation we are only talking tiny tiny gains over a 2600k @ 4.8ghz even with just dual channel memory.

2: 6970's and 580's are on their way out of the main spot-light within the next 90 days. I can't imagine anyone with half a brain ever considering buying one of these now over what they currently own. I know I wouldn't. Why? ATI's and Nvidias new cards are right around the corner.

I'm sure he will do some benchmarks but I think the point he was making is, that there is no point. See reasons 1 and 2.

Even the $599 i7-3930k seems way over priced for what it will give you. 22nm, sure, now that would be something totally different.

Buying the i7-39xx 32nm IB CPU's and or 6970 / 580 video cards right now is just a really dumb move, period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top