![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Ivy Bridge tested at Anandtech.com
- Thread starter trick0502
- Start date
Haswell should be interesting. Some new instructions although it might take quite a while before they are widely made good use of. If the integrated VR controller rumour is true then that could mean IVB will be the last Intel CPU to be able to use extreme vcore for OC'ing not that many people would want to do that anyway.
Someone asked about IVB on air at 5GHz, I forgot who but here's a link.
AFAIK the IVB 7GHz run was on dry ice not LN2, with 8 threads enabled using a BCLK of ~112MHz and 63x multi. I suspect that the 63x multi might be a physical limit with IVB and not a frequency wall.
Someone asked about IVB on air at 5GHz, I forgot who but here's a link.
AFAIK the IVB 7GHz run was on dry ice not LN2, with 8 threads enabled using a BCLK of ~112MHz and 63x multi. I suspect that the 63x multi might be a physical limit with IVB and not a frequency wall.
Last edited:
what bclk does sandy bridge do subzero? does this imply ivy bridge bclk overclocks better?
SixFootDuo
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2004
- Messages
- 5,825
Personally, I've always looked to common sense and logic to guide me when attempting to make the best decision for myself, and others ( friends and family ) when building a new pc or upgrading / side-upgrading a pc.
I will admit, I think it's rather sexy, those 6 cores / 12 threads on the 3930k. Not to mention the memory bandwidth of the quad channel ddr3. It's pretty massive.
As far as Ivy Bridge goes, again, the thought of 22nm, the increased efficiency of the architecture, etc seems alluring.
Time is going fast. We are already into March 2012. Haswell is around the corner and with it, I am assuming 8 core CPU's. At the absolute VERY least, I don't see myself or others who own a 2600k needing to upgrade until Haswell. Of course it's none of my business what others do other than it could be argued, and I think most would agree, there is not much benefit, if any really in side-upgrading to SB-E or IB from the 2500/2600k.
Either I've gotten a bit older and wiser and not as hungry as far as being a PC enthusiast and having to have the current cream of the crop in PC hardware, or, the 2600k is such a monster in performance, it just doesn't make sense giving or options.
I will admit, I think it's rather sexy, those 6 cores / 12 threads on the 3930k. Not to mention the memory bandwidth of the quad channel ddr3. It's pretty massive.
As far as Ivy Bridge goes, again, the thought of 22nm, the increased efficiency of the architecture, etc seems alluring.
Time is going fast. We are already into March 2012. Haswell is around the corner and with it, I am assuming 8 core CPU's. At the absolute VERY least, I don't see myself or others who own a 2600k needing to upgrade until Haswell. Of course it's none of my business what others do other than it could be argued, and I think most would agree, there is not much benefit, if any really in side-upgrading to SB-E or IB from the 2500/2600k.
Either I've gotten a bit older and wiser and not as hungry as far as being a PC enthusiast and having to have the current cream of the crop in PC hardware, or, the 2600k is such a monster in performance, it just doesn't make sense giving or options.
matrix2000x2
Limp Gawd
- Joined
- Dec 22, 2011
- Messages
- 182
takemymoney.jpg
Do you think that Intel will push the release of Haswell back a little bit? I know intel has the tick tock release cycle and has stuck relatively close to it. However, I wonder if intel would really release Haswell less than twelve months after Ivy Bridge's initital release. There would probably be stock piles of IVB chips.
I'm currently debating on what to do. I'm sure I'm going to go IVB for my HTPC since I'm just going to use the integrated graphics and the lower power consumption will be nice. However, I also want to build a desktop and I'm wondering if I might be able to find a 2500k for a good price after rebate (I don't live close enough to a Microcenter) when IVB is released and then just wait on Haswell since I'm not going to use the integrated graphics for my desktop and the decrease in power consumption there isn't as important to me. So many decisions. I guess I'm just going to have to wait until I see what some of IVB's price points will be.
wabbitseason
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,511
I distinctly recall reading somewhere that Haswell will be sticking to 4 cores. Something about "applications not making use of the power" or some such nonsense. You can bet Intel would be throwing that 8-core marketing slogan around if bulldozer wasn't a pile of shite.
Someone please tell me I'm wrong.
defaultluser
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2006
- Messages
- 14,398
I think people are probably referring to 8-core on the "enthusiasts" platform (whatever will replace LGA 2011). It makes no sense to continue to limit that platform to 6 cores.
We MIGHT see 6 cores on the mainstream platform with Haswell, but I'm not holding my breath.
wabbitseason
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jun 16, 2010
- Messages
- 1,511
Enh, if a $1000 "Extreme" processor is the only way to get 8 (or even 6) cores with Haswell, that'll be just as bad.
MrGuvernment
Fully [H]
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2004
- Messages
- 21,812
Do people still thinking computers are ONLY for gaming 
Kids these days, just dont have a clue!
Kids these days, just dont have a clue!
Would make sense since I remember browsing through Wikipedia out of curiosity and stumbled upon Haswell's BLCK appearing to be 266Mhz, although unconfirmed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell_(microarchitecture)
Tsumi
[H]F Junkie
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2010
- Messages
- 13,757
Haswell has nothing to do with Ivy Bridge.
Sandy Bridge has a BCLK of 100 mhz. That clock is also used on the PCI-E bus. Before, it has always been separate. Sandy Bridge-E also has the same PCI-E clock tied to it. PCI-E does not tolerate changes to its clock very well, which is why they can only be adjusted at best up to 108 mhz or so.
I don't see a reason for Intel to add another clock generator for the PCI-E bus, and it would probably require some moderate unnecessary changes to the architecture. If they did, then the BCLK could be adjusted to anything, but as it stands, I can only see a BCLK of 100 mhz for Ivy Bridge. It may be possible they added a strap option like in SB-E processors, but it is extremely unlikely.
The SB prices question has been asked many times. At best it will drop $10, maybe 20, but more likely IB prices will be inflated. SB prices will be kept where they are until the stock sells out.
Sandy Bridge has a BCLK of 100 mhz. That clock is also used on the PCI-E bus. Before, it has always been separate. Sandy Bridge-E also has the same PCI-E clock tied to it. PCI-E does not tolerate changes to its clock very well, which is why they can only be adjusted at best up to 108 mhz or so.
I don't see a reason for Intel to add another clock generator for the PCI-E bus, and it would probably require some moderate unnecessary changes to the architecture. If they did, then the BCLK could be adjusted to anything, but as it stands, I can only see a BCLK of 100 mhz for Ivy Bridge. It may be possible they added a strap option like in SB-E processors, but it is extremely unlikely.
The SB prices question has been asked many times. At best it will drop $10, maybe 20, but more likely IB prices will be inflated. SB prices will be kept where they are until the stock sells out.
EuphoricRage470
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Apr 15, 2011
- Messages
- 1,105
Nope.
ShuttleLuv
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2003
- Messages
- 7,295
firas
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 2,458
if it had 10% better IPC then IB@4600 = SB@5060 and I guess 4.6 will be easier with IB than 5.0+ with SB
EpsilonZer0
Weaksauce
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2011
- Messages
- 106
Over at Vr-Zone they got their i7-3770K (ES) clocked to a stable 4.7Ghz and did a shootout comparing the i7-2600K and the i7-3960X at the same clock speed.
Its my assumption that 4.7ghz on the 3770k was all that they could manage on the beta bios because the other two can clock higher than that.
Performance wise the 3770k just edges out the 2600k whereas the 3960x still leads the pack by a large margin.
The only area where the 3770k handily beats the 2600k is in game performance using Intel HD graphics.
And the only area that the 3770k outshines the 3960x is in USB 3.0 performance due to a native on die controller.
Overall I'm left dissapointed really. The 3770k seems to be only offering a 5-10% improvement over the 2600k.
Things may change as the bios are refined, but those that were wanting a new beast on the cheap compared to the lga 2011 offerings should just stick to their 2600k.
http://vr-zone.com/articles/ivy-bridge-vs-sandy-bridge-vs-sandy-bridge-e--4.7ghz-preview/15202.html
Its my assumption that 4.7ghz on the 3770k was all that they could manage on the beta bios because the other two can clock higher than that.
Performance wise the 3770k just edges out the 2600k whereas the 3960x still leads the pack by a large margin.
The only area where the 3770k handily beats the 2600k is in game performance using Intel HD graphics.
And the only area that the 3770k outshines the 3960x is in USB 3.0 performance due to a native on die controller.
Overall I'm left dissapointed really. The 3770k seems to be only offering a 5-10% improvement over the 2600k.
Things may change as the bios are refined, but those that were wanting a new beast on the cheap compared to the lga 2011 offerings should just stick to their 2600k.
http://vr-zone.com/articles/ivy-bridge-vs-sandy-bridge-vs-sandy-bridge-e--4.7ghz-preview/15202.html