• 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.

Sandy Bridge-E Model Numbers, Clock Speeds Surface

Ouch, the cheapest CPU is multiplier locked, lots of people who were planning on jumping on SB-E are going to be pissed. The Extreme part will be $999+, the cheaper 6-core will be $700ish and the locked Quad will likely be $350-500ish?

Also the naming of the SKUs is going to be confusing, looks like Xeon part names.
 
Starting with a 3 makes no sense to me. Doesn't the 2 in SB CPUs suggest 2nd generation? I wouldn't have expected a 3 prefix until Haswell.
 
That's what they implied, but maybe they are going to make it family instead? So IB will be 4xxx?
 
grambo said:
Ouch, the cheapest CPU is multiplier locked, lots of people who were planning on jumping on SB-E are going to be pissed. The Extreme part will be $999+, the cheaper 6-core will be $700ish and the locked Quad will likely be $350-500ish?

Also the naming of the SKUs is going to be confusing, looks like Xeon part names.
Click to expand...

Got to pay to play I suppose. Remember, this is enthusiast. 1155 is more than enough, especially overclocked, for 95% of people. The rest of the 5% pay heavily for those few extra fps and 3dmarks.
 
Ryan711 said:
Got to pay to play I suppose. Remember, this is enthusiast. 1155 is more than enough, especially overclocked, for 95% of people. The rest of the 5% pay heavily for those few extra fps and 3dmarks.
Click to expand...

Yeah, people were expecting the same "mistake" Intel made by releasing the i7 920. There won't be a cheap, overclock-friendly chip on X79, and because of this a LOT of people are going to be bitching. But be happy folks: if the 2600k is not enough to entice you, then you already have a super-fast system! You probably would have not jumped on SB-E anyway, even with a cheap overclocker.

Just sit on your X58 system and wait for Haswell :D
 
Last edited:
and my Q6600 will keep chuggin along a bit longer it seems
 
Has it been confirmed that these CPUs only allow overclocking via multiplier?
 
Source is DonanimHaber. <cost of newspaper> + value of source information can buy one newspaper.

Interesting that Intel is changing the family number (i7-3xxx) in the model to what's expected for Haswell (3rd gen Core). :rolleyes:
 
GreenGoose said:
I'm a gamer and I guaran-damn-tee you I will have one. :D
Click to expand...

Why?

Z68 is almost a perfect chipset for high-end gamers, with 20 FULL lanes of PCIe 2.0 bandwidth available (4 extra for peripherals). That's plenty for tri-card setups, and overkill for dual-card. They fixed the problems with P55 and bandwidth.

No game in existence requires 6 cores. But no hardcore gamer would dare buy a locked 4-core, so you're obviously in the market. This will cost you several hundred dollars more than Z68 + 2600k.

Of course, you could do somehting more than game with your system, but then you might have mentioned it in the post above.
 
Last edited:
NIVO said:
and my Q6600 will keep chuggin along a bit longer it seems
Click to expand...

I am with you, my q9550 will be just fine until Haswell. None of this stuff (SB or IB) seems like a worthwhile upgrade for the price. Granted, my pc is mainly only used for gaming.
 
Gamers don't need these chips. Are there any games out there limited by a 2600K at 4ghz (or 4.5ghz)? I highly doubt it.

xBanzai89 said:
Has it been confirmed that these CPUs only allow overclocking via multiplier?
Click to expand...

That's my question. It's possible that low end, multiplier locked chip that sells for $350 or $500 will be the new i7 920 if we can still crank it to the sky via bus overclocking.
 
jebo_4jc said:
Gamers don't need these chips. Are there any games out there limited by a 2600K at 4ghz (or 4.5ghz)? I highly doubt it.



That's my question. It's possible that low end, multiplier locked chip that sells for $350 or $500 will be the new i7 920 if we can still crank it to the sky via bus overclocking.
Click to expand...

If the clockgen is on-die, like Snadybridge, it'll be no-dice for a BClock OC. Even tho it's a point ot point bus architecture(QPI), don't call it a 'BUS' or poeple's heads will pop off. :p
 
Even tho it's a point ot point bus architecture(QPI), don't call it a 'BUS' or poeple's heads will pop off. .
Click to expand...

A bus is usually not point to point but shared among multiple devices. Also you were calling it 133 MHz (quad pumped or whatever) when it really was 3.2GHz.
 
xIronCrossx said:
This isn't really for gamers...
Click to expand...

Going by that logic neither was X58. :rolleyes:

defaultluser said:
Why?

Z68 is almost a perfect chipset for high-end gamers, with 20 FULL lanes of PCIe 2.0 bandwidth available (4 extra for peripherals). That's plenty for tri-card setups, and overkill for dual-card. They fixed the problems with P55 and bandwidth.

No game in existence requires 6 cores. But no hardcore gamer would dare buy a locked 4-core, so you're obviously in the market. This will cost you several hundred dollars more than Z68 + 2600k.

Of course, you could do somehting more than game with your system, but then you might have mentioned it in the post above.
Click to expand...
the 1155 platform has its limits. There will be a bottleneck in memory performance and PCI-Express. I dont see P67, or Z68 handling 3x GTX590s or HD 6990s without a performance hit. Socket 2011 will have PCI-E v3.0 which will benefit more than PCI-E slots.

Nothing out there requires 6 cores, There are alot of apps and games out there that will benefit from 6 cores however.

Do you expect everyone who has a X58 system to side/down grade to socket 1155?
 
German Muscle said:
Going by that logic neither was X58. :rolleyes:


the 1155 platform has its limits. There will be a bottleneck in memory performance and PCI-Express. I dont see P67, or Z68 handling 3x GTX590s or HD 6990s without a performance hit. Socket 2011 will have PCI-E v3.0 which will benefit more than PCI-E slots.

Nothing out there requires 6 cores, There are alot of apps and games out there that will benefit from 6 cores however.

Do you expect everyone who has a X58 system to side/down grade to socket 1155?
Click to expand...

1155 has PCI-E 3.0 also. Asrock Z68 Fatal1ty has it once you put an 1155 Ivy Bridge into the socket.

also Frostbite Engine 2 has support for 2-8 threads how much support for the upper end 6-8 threads we will have to wait and see in october when people get to bench BF3 with 6 core intels/PhenomII's and 8 core bulldozers and also see what kind of gpu's you might need to realll take advantage of all that extra power moving from a 4core or 4core/8thread cpu to real 6 core and 8 core cpu's
 
Wildace said:
1155 has PCI-E 3.0 also. Asrock Z68 Fatal1ty has it once you put an 1155 Ivy Bridge into the socket.

also Frostbite Engine 2 has support for 2-8 threads how much support for the upper end 6-8 threads we will have to wait and see in october when people get to bench BF3 with 6 core intels/PhenomII's and 8 core bulldozers and also see what kind of gpu's you might need to realll take advantage of all that extra power moving from a 4core or 4core/8thread cpu to real 6 core and 8 core cpu's
Click to expand...
Full PCI-E v3.0 or just the slots?
 
German Muscle said:
how many lanes?
Click to expand...
Just the ones coming off the CPU (x16). The PCH (P67/H67/Z68/etc) on the 6 series chipset is still only PCIe 2.0 to the 8 x1 lanes connected to it (mobo slots, usually x1 or x4, plus integrated devices like sound and networking), and the DMI link between the CPU and PCH also only uses PCIe 2.0 speeds.

See dis: http://www.itcode.org/wp-content/plugins/RSSPoster_PRO/cache/087c7_p67_block_diagram.png

I'm going to wait for the LGA 1155 7 series chipsets and buy IB at the same time.
 
same as a usuall z68 board 16x for single card or 8x8 with dual cards, the asrock tho also has a 2.0 4x slot that can support running a 3rd gpu at 4x 2.0 speed for trifire

http://www.asrock.com/mb/overview.asp?Model=Fatal1ty Z68 Professional Gen3

so basicly 3.0 gives the z68 the same amount of bandwidth as X58 for dual gpu setups

LGA 2011 will still benefit from 16x16 slots but only when gpus start to actually need it.
 
German Muscle said:
the 1155 platform has its limits. There will be a bottleneck in memory performance and PCI-Express.
Click to expand...

Okay, I'm about to prove to you that P67 can keep itself fed. Ready?

Stock at DDR3 1333, the 2600K drives around 20GB/s memory bandwidth. As you can see from that chart, with DDR3 2133 you can push 31GB/s!

Now, what does that mean? Well, look at the GTA 4 tests here. The last major performance bump comes from 1066 to 1333, so we know Sandy is well-fed at DDR3 1333, right?

So, what about a demanding load of video cards on all three PCIe slots? Let's say you have 3x GTX 580s demanding max bandwidth. Well, PCIe is bidirectional, but because video cards are (mostly) read-only devices, the bandwidth is only unidirectional. So the target bandwidth for 20 channels of PCIe 2.0 is 10GB/s

So, even with that load you could keep THREE GTX 580s good and fed with fast DDR3 1866 or 2133. In fact, since it's been shown you can feed two cards just fine on 4x4, the real memory bandwidth estimate need would be closer to 6GB/s, which shows P67/Z68 has room to grow (say, if you upgraded to IB on a motherboard with PCIe 3.0 support).


I dont see P67, or Z68 handling 3x GTX590s or HD 6990s without a performance hit/
Click to expand...

Try again buddy, neither Nvidia nor AMD support more than 4 GPUs in CFX/SLI. You can't even try it with hacks because both the GTX 590 and the HD 6990 have only a single CFX/SLI connector.


Stop dreaming-up outrageous setups that don't exist :D

games out there that will benefit from 6 cores however
Click to expand...

SHOW ME ONE. Just one that yields an impressive improvement OVER a 4-core 2600K

I'll beat you to the punch by showing that BF:BC2 doesn't need more than three to yield an average framerate over 60fps (very smooth):

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/07/05/how-many-cpu-cores-do-games-need/5

Do you expect everyone who has a X58 system to side/down grade to socket 1155?
Click to expand...

No, as you can see from my first post, I said to sit on your X58 and wait for Haswell :D
 
Last edited:
defaultluser said:
Okay, I'm about to prove to you that P67 can keep itself fed. Ready?

Stock at DDR3 1333, the 2600K drives around 20GB/s memory bandwidth. As you can see from that chart, with DDR3 2133 you can push 31GB/s!

Now, what does that mean? Well, look at the GTA 4 tests here. The last major performance bump comes from 1066 to 1333, so we know Sandy is well-fed at DDR3 1333, right?

So, what about a demanding load of video cards on all three PCIe slots? Let's say you have 3x GTX 580s demanding max bandwidth. Well, PCIe is bidirectional, but because video cards are (mostly) read-only devices, the bandwidth is only unidirectional. So the target bandwidth for 20 channels of PCIe 2.0 is 10GB/s

So, even with that load you could keep THREE GTX 580s good and fed with fast DDR3 1866 or 2133.




Try again buddy, neither Nvidia nor AMD support more than 4 GPUs in CFX/SLI. You can't even try it with hacks because both the GTX 590 and the HD 6990 have only a single CFX/SLI connector.


Stop dreaming-up outrageous setups that don't exist :D



SHOW ME ONE. Just one that yields an impressive improvement OVER a 4-core 2600K

I'll beat you to the punch by showing that BF:BC2 doesn't need more than three to yield an average framerate over 60fps (very smooth):

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2010/07/05/how-many-cpu-cores-do-games-need/5



No, as you can see from my first post, I said to sit on your X58 and wait for Haswell :D
Click to expand...

loco.gif
 
OC-Chronic said:
See? told ya...people's heads explode if you call it a bus...even tho, by the very definition, IT IS!!
Click to expand...

He was talking about the clock generator, which isn't on-die as you claimed, but provided by the motherboard, not about QPI. QPI is a bus, the base clock is not; QPI is what replaced the FSB that's stuck in your head, and it also just happens to be able to move over five times the amount of data per second.
 
Last edited:
Price / Flop is horrible on extreme editions. If not for gamers, then who's going to buy this instead of a dual xeon workstation? You can get last generation xeon chips for $400-$500 a pop and with two of them, they'll run circles around these chips.

And why multiplier lock an Extreme Edition chip to begin with?
 
aphexcoil said:
Price / Flop is horrible on extreme editions. If not for gamers, then who's going to buy this instead of a dual xeon workstation? You can get last generation xeon chips for $400-$500 a pop and with two of them, they'll run circles around these chips.

And why multiplier lock an Extreme Edition chip to begin with?
Click to expand...

who said the multiplier was locked?
 
defaultluser said:
Why?

Z68 is almost a perfect chipset for high-end gamers, with 20 FULL lanes of PCIe 2.0 bandwidth available (4 extra for peripherals). That's plenty for tri-card setups, and overkill for dual-card. They fixed the problems with P55 and bandwidth.

No game in existence requires 6 cores. But no hardcore gamer would dare buy a locked 4-core, so you're obviously in the market. This will cost you several hundred dollars more than Z68 + 2600k.

Of course, you could do somehting more than game with your system, but then you might have mentioned it in the post above.
Click to expand...

For the same reason nearly everyone on here that primarily play games bought X58 setups instead of P55 - so they could say they have it and brag about all the features constantly.

Would be nice to see a new stepping of current SB chips however.
 
aphexcoil said:
Price / Flop is horrible on extreme editions. If not for gamers, then who's going to buy this instead of a dual xeon workstation? You can get last generation xeon chips for $400-$500 a pop and with two of them, they'll run circles around these chips.

And why multiplier lock an Extreme Edition chip to begin with?
Click to expand...

Quad channel memory? PCI 3.0?
 
xIronCrossx said:
Quad channel memory? PCI 3.0?
Click to expand...

Do you seriously run ERP on your gaming system? Of course not. That's pretty much the ONLY real workload that needs more than dual channel memory, and nobody sane would run critical business software on X79 - they'd want dual processors at least.

Even triple channel is overkill for a desktop or workstation.
 
aphexcoil said:
Price / Flop is horrible on extreme editions. If not for gamers, then who's going to buy this instead of a dual xeon workstation?
Click to expand...
My expericence is that unless you are overclocking once you move far enough the range of xeons to get performance comparable to single socket extreme editions and you take account of the much higher motherboard cost you end up with prices comparable to single socket extreme editions.
 
iconiK said:
Do you seriously run ERP on your gaming system? Of course not. That's pretty much the ONLY real workload that needs more than dual channel memory, and nobody sane would run critical business software on X79 - they'd want dual processors at least.

Even triple channel is overkill for a desktop or workstation.
Click to expand...

Not to mention the benefits of ECC RAM for a proper workstation built around dual-core Xeons. I just fail to see the benefit of an Extreme Edition processor. Why would someone purchase a chip that costs 5 times more than a i2500k and provides maybe 50% higher benchmarks? It just doesn't make sense to me. You could purchase an entire new system build around a i2500k for $500 and have a very nice setup. Set it up as a workstation / server than you SSH into and let it process your video encodings / etc. while you use your other i2500k for web browsing / gaming etc.

I just never understood the benefits of these $1,000 chips that only provide 25-50% speed increases. I could build two mATX systems with an i2500k with 16 gigs of ram each for that price.
 
aphexcoil said:
Why would someone purchase a chip that costs 5 times more than a i2500k and provides maybe 50% higher benchmarks? It just doesn't make sense to me. You could purchase an entire new system build around a i2500k for $500 and have a very nice setup.
Click to expand...

Because some of us can. Buying a $1000 processor for me is like buying a meal deal at McDonald's for most. I agree that i2500 is more than enough for most, but if you could have either processor/platform at the same cost, which would you take?
 
GreenGoose said:
Because some of us can. Buying a $1000 processor for me is like buying a meal deal at McDonald's for most. I agree that i2500 is more than enough for most, but if you could have either processor/platform at the same cost, which would you take?
Click to expand...
can I borrow $1000?
 
GreenGoose said:
Because some of us can. Buying a $1000 processor for me is like buying a meal deal at McDonald's for most. I agree that i2500 is more than enough for most, but if you could have either processor/platform at the same cost, which would you take?
Click to expand...

It's not the same cost - no matter what the cost is relative to your income. You are certainly entitled to spend your money your way, but it still doesn't change the value prospects of the EE chips - and any way you slice it, they are a bad value.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top