• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Is Sandy Bridge worth the wait ?

I

isma

Weaksauce
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
100
I want to sell my current rig (see signature) and want to build a low energy system, since I don't play games anymore.

I'm looking for a i3 530 and a H55 mobo but Sandy Bridge is coming at the end of the year.

I'm wondering if I should spend a couple houndred bucks now or wait for Sandy Bridge ?
 
im kinda in the same boat, i think our e8400 are still cutting the mustard though :) and we can afford to wait another 9 months before nabbing an affordable 6 core intel cpu next spring/summer
we can throw 500 away and get a quad core now on a dead socket or we can hold out for less than a year and maybe have something that will last us 2x longer
 
Sandy Bridge should be a very good choice for low power consumption should have a little more information in Q4.
 
I would wait it out to see what Sany Bridge has to offer performance wise and power consumption. Waiting less than a year isn't very long, at least to me.
 
Yeah it's the first new architecture from Intel in 2 years, might as well see what they've come up with. But of course, by then, AMD's fusion might be just around the corner, and who knows, maybe it'll be good too. I suppose you can play the waiting game indefinitely.
 
The i3 is fantastic but I would wait considering an e8400 is plentiful for average daily tasks.
 
rive22 said:
The i3 is fantastic but I would wait considering an e8400 is plentiful for average daily tasks.
Click to expand...

Indeed ! I may keep my E8400 and just swap-in an HD 5450 GPU in my current rig as an option.
 
I would wait. The way the Core 2's performed, and then the way the Nehalem's performed... Im sure Sandy Bridge will be a similar jump in performance.

So waiting less than 1 year is worth it.
 
I'd hold out. Since you don't play games anymore your rig would be satisfactory enough for whatever else you might be doing. I do understand your energy issue though. My electric bill is a bit higher than I want it atm.
 
regardless of if its worth it or not, when they come out the price of current technology will drop (hopefully) so if you get a sandy bridge, or buy a coreI5/7, you will get more for your money if you wait.

there was an article on the front page the other day about how intel structured the sandy bridge chip components in a way that almost totally inhibits overclocking (linking SATA, USB, etc peripheral clock speeds all to one master clock). but no chips have been released yet so take it with a grain of salt.
 
DeathPrincess said:
It was supposed to be on the core2 and i7/5/3 too
Click to expand...

And that bus-tying has already been done in the motherboard core-logic chipsets for as long as the history of PCs. Remember the 440BX chipset that runs its PCI and ISA buses out of the official Intel spec when the FSB speeds are set to anything other than 66 or 100 MHz?
 
thats why i said- its all speculation until someone gets product in hand and can test these theories out.
 
isma said:
I want to sell my current rig (see signature) and want to build a low energy system, since I don't play games anymore.
Click to expand...


The E8400 is already fairly efficient. What speed and voltage are you using?

I would definitely wait for Sandy Bridge (or even later) if your main criteria is just a low power computer. Sell your current card and replace w a 5450. Have you taken any power measurements yet?
 
MrXROK said:
Supposedly overclocking on the sandy bridge will be the pits.

http://hardforum.com/showthread.php?p=1035978568
Click to expand...


so far its only going to be on the low end socket(cant remember what they are calling it) there hasnt been any news on the LGA-2011 socket/chipset yet which im sure they will allow overclocking so they can get the extra money out of people that were planning to get the low end socket sandy bridge and overclock like people have done with the i3/i5/i7 lga-1156.. so unless you plan to drop a big chunk of change for the LGA-2011 socket the low end sandy bridge looks like it will be a waste of money if you like/want to overclock..
 
needmorecarnitine said:
The E8400 is already fairly efficient. What speed and voltage are you using?

I would definitely wait for Sandy Bridge (or even later) if your main criteria is just a low power computer. Sell your current card and replace w a 5450. Have you taken any power measurements yet?
Click to expand...

I'm running stock voltage and speed with C1E and EIST on in the bios. I'm also running Gigabyte DES program.
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
so far its only going to be on the low end socket(cant remember what they are calling it) there hasnt been any news on the LGA-2011 socket/chipset yet which im sure they will allow overclocking so they can get the extra money out of people that were planning to get the low end socket sandy bridge and overclock like people have done with the i3/i5/i7 lga-1156.. so unless you plan to drop a big chunk of change for the LGA-2011 socket the low end sandy bridge looks like it will be a waste of money if you like/want to overclock..
Click to expand...

As stated by a few people in that thread, this type of thing happens with each new architecture. Now if AMD didn't exist, I can totally see it happening. While AMD might not be able to compete much when Intel lets us enthusiasts roam free and overclock, they would become very competitive if Intel chips were locked and AMD's weren't and I just don't see Intel opening a door that wide for AMD to regain market share like they did during the P4 vs A64 days.
 
RamonGTP said:
As stated by a few people in that thread, this type of thing happens with each new architecture. Now if AMD didn't exist, I can totally see it happening. While AMD might not be able to compete much when Intel lets us enthusiasts roam free and overclock, they would become very competitive if Intel chips were locked and AMD's weren't and I just don't see Intel opening a door that wide for AMD to regain market share like they did during the P4 vs A64 days.
Click to expand...

Never underestimate arrogance. You also have to remember that us computer enthusiasts are 2% of the entire market or less. I would bet that 98% of computer users don't overclock or care to overclock their processors. Intel is not going to get hit even if 50% of the 2% decide to flock to AMD overnight.

Intel also plans on offering unlocked chips(the K-line) and there is no doubt they will continue offering extreme edition chips. The problem now is that they will likely charge you a premium for a chip that is "unlocked."

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/sandy-bridge-cougar-point-patsburg,10882.html

Here is a better article on this story from those guys as they explain things pretty well.
 
RamonGTP said:
As stated by a few people in that thread, this type of thing happens with each new architecture. Now if AMD didn't exist, I can totally see it happening. While AMD might not be able to compete much when Intel lets us enthusiasts roam free and overclock, they would become very competitive if Intel chips were locked and AMD's weren't and I just don't see Intel opening a door that wide for AMD to regain market share like they did during the P4 vs A64 days.
Click to expand...


i wouldnt say its opening a door.. id say its more of a sign that intels getting greedy with their performance advantage over AMD right now.. which isnt a new thing for intel.. they have had a pretty hefty premium on their processors since the C2D's were released and kicking AMD's ass.. i mean hell even after AMD matched the C2Q performance with the phenom II's intels prices still havent dropped all that much on the C2Q's..
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
i wouldnt say its opening a door.. id say its more of a sign that intels getting greedy with their performance advantage over AMD right now.. which isnt a new thing for intel.. they have had a pretty hefty premium on their processors since the C2D's were released and kicking AMD's ass.. i mean hell even after AMD matched the C2Q performance with the phenom II's intels prices still havent dropped all that much on the C2Q's..
Click to expand...

I would... But it doesn't matter, because highly doubt it's going to happen. Higher prices for a faster product is nothing new, not just for Intel but for just about every company. What would be new is for Intel to limit overclocking in such a manner. Heck, all the real evidence points to the exact opposite with Intel offering unlocked multipliers on processors other than the Extreme Editions.

And while enthusiests make up a small portion, we also make recomendations to thousands of friends and family members. I gaurantee you it wasn't the 98% who knew nothing but "intel inside" a decade ago that helped put AMD on the map.
 
amdgamer said:
Never underestimate arrogance. You also have to remember that us computer enthusiasts are 2% of the entire market or less. I would bet that 98% of computer users don't overclock or care to overclock their processors. Intel is not going to get hit even if 50% of the 2% decide to flock to AMD overnight.
Click to expand...

Don't discount that 2% so easily. The margins on these products are MUCH higher. Take a product like the i7-980x. All Intel has to do is sell a few hundred thousand of these out of the hundreds of millions of CPUs that they sell overall and make hundreds of millions, pretty much all gravy and they can only do this if they overclock well. No enthusiast is going to buy a $1k CPU that doesn't overclock like a banshee at the very least.
 
RamonGTP said:
I would... But it doesn't matter, because highly doubt it's going to happen. Higher prices for a faster product is nothing new, not just for Intel but for just about every company. What would be new is for Intel to limit overclocking in such a manner. Heck, all the real evidence points to the exact opposite with Intel offering unlocked multipliers on processors other than the Extreme Editions.

And while enthusiests make up a small portion, we also make recomendations to thousands of friends and family members. I gaurantee you it wasn't the 98% who knew nothing but "intel inside" a decade ago that helped put AMD on the map.
Click to expand...


well the whole unlocked processors was started by AMD.. AMD come out with the black editions.. they sold like hot cakes because of the unlocked multiplier.. so intel tried to jump in as well with the unlocked lga-1156 series chips.. but its a little late in the game for that.. so it wouldnt surprise me for them to start at the very beginning with K series to gain a few extra dollars.. up until the recently released K series chips.. intel hasnt sold an unlocked processor(not counting the insanely over priced extreme series) in well.. ever.. the difference between AMD and intel when it come to unlocked processors is that AMD doesnt put a premium on the fact that its a black edition processor.. hell other then the athlon 64 x2 6400+ they have never sold a black edition and non black edition version of the same processor on the retail market..

dont get me wrong though.. the sandy bridge is going to be a nice processor when it comes out.. i just cant stand the way intel does their pricing schemes..
 
heatlesssun said:
Don't discount that 2% so easily. The margins on these products are MUCH higher. Take a product like the i7-980x. All Intel has to do is sell a few hundred thousand of these out of the hundreds of millions of CPUs that they sell overall and make hundreds of millions, pretty much all gravy and they can only do this if they overclock well. No enthusiast is going to buy a $1k CPU that doesn't overclock like a banshee at the very least.
Click to expand...

Yes, but I think the issue here is that most users will not be overclocking or have any desire to overclock. As a result they will not care that you cannot overclock a standard Intel processor. From what we know so far, Intel does not plan on stopping the release of extreme edtion or K series processors that both come unlocked.

Those $1000 extreme editions will continue to be unlocked along with the K series. But since you will no longer be able to overclock the regular processors, this will mean that Intel gets to charge you a premium for the ability to overclock. The 98% of the market that are casual are likely not going to be buying K series of extreme editions to begin with, so Intel only gains money. For those who are already buying K series or EE's, you will continue to be able to overclock K series and EE versions of Sandy Bridges.
 
RamonGTP said:
What would be new is for Intel to limit overclocking in such a manner. Heck, all the real evidence points to the exact opposite with Intel offering unlocked multipliers on processors other than the Extreme Editions.
Click to expand...

I don't see the correlation in your statement. If this news about sandy bridge is true then Intel is trying to limit overclocking via "fsb" increases which does two things for them. It gives more incentive for buyers to pay the premium they are charging for their k-series chips (they are priced higher over similar spec non k-series chips). It also locks out OEMs from ocing (which I believe some are doing now), since they could simply not sell k-series chips to OEMs.

For instance here the i5 650 and 655k is selling at a $50 difference. I can't imagine much of that $50 is due to the increased costs associated with offering the k-series. So even if the OCing market is small, that is quite a large amount of profit per cpu sold.
 
It does three things for them, two that you mentioned and one is losing some of it's customers to AMD. Intel's current business plan is working out just fine for them, I don't think they're going to jeopardize it. They can still sell the K series at slight premium even if their other CPU's remain overclock able via "fsb" for the simple fact that they have an unlocked multi. I don't think they need to limit the mainstream processors in order to sell the K and EE series.
 
RamonGTP said:
It does three things for them, two that you mentioned and one is losing some of it's customers to AMD. Intel's current business plan is working out just fine for them, I don't think they're going to jeopardize it..
Click to expand...

^^This. What's in it for Intel to change what they are doing when they're basically printing money these days.
 
Has their been official word on this change from Intel? Or are we still speculating off of one of their super-early release chips (which are usually locked down)? :p
 
Nothing official atm, but Intel's current offerings are so spectacular who really needs more?
 
A possible silver lining though, if they do offer more k-series units and price them with less of a premium (due to the higher volume being sold), it might not increase costs overall much (if at all) for OCers, since you'd be able to save hypothetically on your motherboard and ram (and additionally cooling for those components) due to being able to overclock via multiplier.

Though if AMD could offer a comparable per core performance alternative when OCed at a better price, that would work to.
 
limitedaccess said:
A possible silver lining though, if they do offer more k-series units and price them with less of a premium (due to the higher volume being sold), it might not increase costs overall much (if at all) for OCers, since you'd be able to save hypothetically on your motherboard and ram (and additionally cooling for those components) due to being able to overclock via multiplier.
Click to expand...

Nah, the prices would increase to make up for any possible savings that you "should" otherwise get. I remember when people were saying that motherboards would be less expensive with processors using an IMC because that was one less thing that mobo manufacturers needed to include on the boards. We know that theory didn't pan out
 
limitedaccess said:
A possible silver lining though, if they do offer more k-series units and price them with less of a premium (due to the higher volume being sold), it might not increase costs overall much (if at all) for OCers, since you'd be able to save hypothetically on your motherboard and ram (and additionally cooling for those components) due to being able to overclock via multiplier.

Though if AMD could offer a comparable per core performance alternative when OCed at a better price, that would work to.
Click to expand...


agree.. but i highly doubt intel would take the premium away on the chips.. its all about making more money and if they can make more money selling a processor with a 50-60 dollar premium on it, then they will do that.. i mean hell look at the extreme series chips.. still insanely over priced and no ones going to buy them.. if intel cared they would of dropped the price a long time ago to see if they could get people to buy them.. intel made sure that didnt happen with the gulftowns though.. they released the extreme series chip first.. waited what 2 months before even releasing the 970? and even then its only a 100 dollar difference between the 980 and 970.. so why buy the 970 and not spend the 100 dollars and get the 980.. which is exactly what they want people thinking thus they end up spending the 100 dollars and getting the unlocked processor..

me personally.. this is just my opinion.. i think what intel did with the gulftowns is a sign of what we will see coming with the sandy bridge and the way they will release the processors and pricing scheme they plan to use.. they will probably release all the K series chips first.. 2-3 months later they will release the locked processors that will end up being 50-60 dollars cheaper then the K series.. so then people see that 50 dollar difference between the processors and end up just paying the 60 bucks for the K series since they end up being overhyped by reviewers.. while most of these people spending 60 bucks extra arent even going to overclock the processor to begin with.. its happened with the 980.. i see a bunch of people running them and they havent even bothered to overclock the processor.. thats the specific reason its an extreme series chip.. its suppose to be overclocked.. otherwise ya might as well just saved the 100 bucks and gotten the 970 clocked it to the 980..
 
sirmonkey1985 said:
while most of these people spending 60 bucks extra arent even going to overclock the processor to begin with.. its happened with the 980.. i see a bunch of people running them and they havent even bothered to overclock the processor.. thats the specific reason its an extreme series chip.. its suppose to be overclocked.. otherwise ya might as well just saved the 100 bucks and gotten the 970 clocked it to the 980..
Click to expand...

You see a lot of people who have 980xs that haven't overclocked them? Where? Not in a gaming rig. Perhaps a workstation type of machine where high stability is important but no gamer buys a $1k CPU and doesn't overclock it. Even retail gaming systems are usually overclocked with these kinds of chips in them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top