Ivy Bridge TDP of 95W instead of the promised 77W ...

MeanBruce said:
I enjoyed this thread very reasonable information. Hasn’t changed my mind about the 3770K, upgrading a C2D, so it’s a sure win.

Is the NDA lifted on the 23rd or 29th?
Click to expand...

From my understanding, NDA is lifted on the 23rd with OEM availability also available that day and retail to follow on the 29th.
 
Has it been confirmed the 3770 is 3.4Ghz and the 3770K 3.5Ghz? Weird speed difference. Maybe compensation for the fact they have the same HD4000 GPU now....?
And the non-K Ivy's, are they still able to be turbo-overclocked (by 400Mhz)?

I am going to upgrade soon, but to what? I'm looking at the 2500, 2600, 3550, 3570 and 3770. Both K and non-K models are options.

Is turbo-overclocking (on non-K's) harder on a hyperthreading CPU or not? I'm not much of an overclocker, but I would like a small speedbump (to reach the magic 4Ghz number ), without melting my CPU.
And is turbo-overclocking possible on a B/Z75 motherboard? Looks like those boards are cheaper than Z77 and I will never use SLI or SSD-caching. Or am I missing some important feature here that only Z77 has?

I can't decide....
 
Last edited:
3dfx_zombie said:
Has it been confirmed the 3770 is 3.4Ghz and the 3770K 3.5Ghz? Weird speed difference. Maybe compensation for the fact they have the same HD4000 GPU now....?
And the non-K Ivy's, are they still able to be turbo-overclocked (by 400Mhz)?

I am going to upgrade soon, but to what? I'm looking at the 2500, 2600, 3550, 3570 and 3770. Both K and non-K models are options.

Is turbo-overclocking (on non-K's) harder on a hyperthreading CPU or not? I'm not much of an overclocker, but I would like a small speedbump (to reach the magic 4Ghz number ), without melting my CPU.
And is turbo-overclocking possible on a B/Z75 motherboard? Looks like those boards are cheaper than Z77 and I will never use SLI or SSD-caching. Or am I missing some important feature here that only Z77 has?

I can't decide....
Click to expand...

Yeah its harder because the multi is not unlocked like the K variant, but you can still do some modest overclocking.
 
it looks as if ivy b is the Prescott vs northwood 8 years later again , exactly in every term , hotter on new process , but if cooling available , can be faster . . . um ill keep my "northwood" aka sandy bridge this time , i don't make the same mistake twice
 
the_real_7 said:
it looks as if ivy b is the Prescott vs northwood 8 years later again , exactly in every term , hotter on new process , but if cooling available , can be faster . . . um ill keep my "northwood" aka sandy bridge this time , i don't make the same mistake twice
Click to expand...
And for those that got a great deal on a i7 2600k last week at microcenter for $199 I too can skip IB. though I am going for a z77 board in some fashion soon... just need to decide on which one offers the best combo of features...
 
the_real_7 said:
it looks as if ivy b is the Prescott vs northwood 8 years later again , exactly in every term , hotter on new process , but if cooling available , can be faster . . . um ill keep my "northwood" aka sandy bridge this time , i don't make the same mistake twice
Click to expand...


That is a good comparison, true on some levels. But different on alot of others.
 
the_real_7 said:
it looks as if ivy b is the Prescott vs northwood 8 years later again , exactly in every term , hotter on new process , but if cooling available , can be faster . . . um ill keep my "northwood" aka sandy bridge this time , i don't make the same mistake twice
Click to expand...

Your memory needs refreshimg. It's runs hotter. That's the only thing they have in common

IB is faster clock for clock than SB, Prescott was slower than Northwood
IB consumes less power than SB, Prescott consumed more
 
RamonGTP said:
Your memory needs refreshimg. It's runs hotter. That's the only thing they have in common

IB is faster clock for clock than SB, Prescott was slower than Northwood
IB consumes less power than SB, Prescott consumed more
Click to expand...
you are correct on all points but heat
yes northwood was faster your right , but heat does limit your overclocking correct , so lets just say if you have a decent overclock on a 2600k let s say 5.0 but cooling is your wall , wouldt you just hit 4.8 or 4.7 on a ivy , which still yes has a clock for clock advantage , but even so with lower clock yuo be in same shoes as you where on your higher clocking sandy . . . lets keep the gpu part out cause most of us here don't use . . i mean go hit extreme forums number are up and only time a ivy beat since ive seen is at 4.5 clocks against a sandy 4.5 . . . point is if you have a sandy not worth the upgrade i7 users hell yea
 
the_real_7 said:
you are correct on all points but heat
yes northwood was faster your right , but heat does limit your overclocking correct , so lets just say if you have a decent overclock on a 2600k let s say 5.0 but cooling is your wall , wouldt you just hit 4.8 or 4.7 on a ivy , which still yes has a clock for clock advantage , but even so with lower clock yuo be in same shoes as you where on your higher clocking sandy . . . lets keep the gpu part out cause most of us here don't use . . i mean go hit extreme forums number are up and only time a ivy beat since ive seen is at 4.5 clocks against a sandy 4.5 . . . point is if you have a sandy not worth the upgrade i7 users hell yea
Click to expand...

I'm not disputing what you're saying in this post but to say its the same as Prescott has more inaccuracies than accuracies.

I never said amything anout the GPU but since you brought it up... IGP is also important for many. Like almost everyone with an Intel laptop just to name a few million.
 
RamonGTP said:
I'm not disputing what you're saying in this post but to say its the same as Prescott has more inaccuracies than accuracies.

I never said amything anout the GPU but since you brought it up... IGP is also important for many. Like almost everyone with an Intel laptop just to name a few million.
Click to expand...

you right no arguing . . . was just trying to show a close example , you never said gpu sorry but i hear alot of people saying that the advantage . . i would like to try a onbord cpu becuse last time i did wow was long time ago . . . cheers
 
RamonGTP said:
I never said amything anout the GPU but since you brought it up... IGP is also important for many. Like almost everyone with an Intel laptop just to name a few million.
Click to expand...

I would say Desktops as well if Lucid Virtu MVP works like it should.
 
Rizyn said:
I would say Desktops as well if Lucid Virtu MVP works like it should.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure Lucid Virtu MVP does anything at all. It's almost worthless...

In fact, this is the test scenario Lucidlogix prefers, reminding us that games that run slower than 60 FPS won't see any benefit from Virtual Vsync.
Click to expand...

In most cases it actually decreases frames per second when below 60FPS! Which begs the question of why the hell anybody in their right mind would enable it in the first place? Does it really matter if you jump from 80-90FPS? The decrease of 5-6 FPS under 50 is far more noticeable than any jump over 60, particularly if it's entire point revolves around vsync.

Yet, Virtu also enables Intel Quick Sync on our GeForce GTX 580-equipped platform, so we’re expecting a big boost in transcode applications written to exploit Intel's Media SDK.
Click to expand...

That makes far more sense, though.

image012.png


It's only on a couple applications, though.

4651_22_lucid_virtu_mvp_hyperformance_tested_with_asrock_z77_and_intel_ivy_bridge.png


Let's cover the issues we have with the technology in this early stage of Virtu MVP's life. The first is that when we really need the extra FPS in certain areas, not only do we not see it, but we're seeing a negative impact in performance in some cases. As always we aim for that 60 FPS mark and under Mafia II for example, we see our 74 FPS average move to 101 FPS at 1680 x 1050. This is great, but I'd say we're already at a playable level with a strong 14 FPS over that 60 FPS average being seen. At 2560 x 1600, though, we move from 47 FPS, a number we consider unplayable, to 37 FPS, not only still an unplayable number, but a lower number! It's not just Mafia II either; in our small sample pool here you can see that when we need the extra FPS in important areas, we don't get it.
Click to expand...

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4..._asrock_z77_and_intel_ivy_bridge/index11.html

Graphics corruption, reboots and lower frame rates when you need higher frame rates.

The only positive here is this, and it's explained very well on Xbit

The first feature is called Virtual Vsync and it helps you get the benefits of both enabling and disabling Vsync in games. The point is that the image is delivered from the integrated graphics core’s buffer to the monitor in sync with the latter’s refresh rate. However, the discrete graphics card renders frames as fast as it can, as if Vsync is turned off. On one hand, this helps get rid of the Vsync-off artifacts like image tearing. And on the other hand, the frame rate is not limited from above, which helps minimize the game’s reaction lag which can be observed in some shooters when Vsync is turned on.
Click to expand...

http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/mainboards/display/intel-z77_4.html

Which is great, but I've never needed more than 60 FPS on any title on LCDs so why should I bother turning Vsync off and Lucid's on? If I'm going to be getting lower frames per second at challenging resolutions and worthless frames per second over 60 FPS then what the hell's the point?

When we first had a chance to look at the technology we were shown the Street Fighter IV benchmark. Not only is it a little old, but it's not very taxing on your system. I remember walking out and turning to Cameron saying, "that's great, but what about a game which actually needs the extra FPS". When moving from 250 FPS to 350 FPS, while sounding impressive, is ultimately useless and a waste of time, as to begin with, the game was already perfectly playable.
Click to expand...

And in exchange for that extra 100 worthless FPS you're decreasing in FPS at under 60, which is when you need it most. Unless you have a 120mhz refresh monitor and play your games in 3D, this thing is a pass.
 
With Intel’s NDA lifted, can we expect reviews up by midnight? Is that Eastern Standard, Greenwich Mean, or Santa Clara time?
 
Last edited:
Well, it's 16.00 in Europe and there are still no reviews. OBR-hardware has pulled the counter when the NDA will be lifted.

But I have found something else. On Intels site http://www.intc.com/events.cfm it' says 9 o clock in the morning Pacific time is the official launch time. That's 18.00 for all the hardware junkies in old Europe. So with a little luck only 1,5 hours to go...
 
So, 12 Eastern then. Well, I guess we'll found out soon enough.
 
Tech spot review says 4.9 but they don't say what cooling or the temps. There was reports of 90c+ temps at much lower voltages on forums at lower clocks such as 4.6 at 1.25-1.30v. Something fishy here.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top