• 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 Performance Preview

fishrule said:
Well I hope Intel doesn't take to long to rollout Lightpeak and PCI-E 3.0 with Sandy Bridge, because once those come out I am absolutely upgrading.
Click to expand...

What does PCIe 3.0 matter if we're barely using one-quarter the bandwidth of 2.0? And that's if you CrossFire/SLI, which none of your system specs seem to include.

Only triple card configurations really make use of PCIe 2.0, and that's a fraction of a percent of the gaming public.

I'm looking forward to Sandy Bridge, because they'll finally have 32nm quads, and they'll finally revamp the desktop lineup to have dual cores with TDPs below 75w. I'm sure if Intel omits USB 3 from the chipset, the motherboard makers will include it.
 
defaultluser said:
What does PCIe 3.0 matter if we're barely using one-quarter the bandwidth of 2.0? And that's if you CrossFire/SLI, which none of your system specs seem to include.

Only triple card configurations really make use of PCIe 2.0, and that's a fraction of a percent of the gaming public.

I'm looking forward to Sandy Bridge, because they'll finally have 32nm quads, and they'll finally revamp the desktop lineup to have dual cores with TDPs below 75w.
Click to expand...

In addition, the desktop i5 will now be standardized instead of being two different CPUs like it is currently with Lynnfield and Clarkdale. This means that only the i3 will have only two physical cores. All desktop Sandy Bridge i5s will be quad-core with HyperThreading disabled internally during manufacture. The desktop i3 will remain the same configuration as it has been as a Clarkdale: Dual-core with HyperThreading enabled but with TurboBoost disabled; the only difference is that Sandy Bridge will now have both the IMC and the IGP integrated on-die instead of off-die but on-package like it is currently with Clarkdale.
 
Last edited:
I find the lack of USB 3.0 intergration into Sandy Bridge puzzling to say the least. I'm not dumb, and I know Intel wants to kill USB with Lightpeak, but I don't see it happening. They will most likely coexist, since Intel will most likely deny AMD the use of Lightpeak on their chips. I guess I was hoping for faster USB 3 rollout so I wouldn't have to deal with SLOW USB 2.0 thumbdrives anymore ;)
 
It will happen.
Any other company would be at mercy of other companies to support such new solution but not Intel.
Intel is in position to create it's own userbase of Lightpeak ready mobos and then they have SSDs which can capitalize on it without looking at others.

IMHO external G3 or G4 Intel SSD using lightpeak interface is only a matter of time. And with bandwidth offered by it other ssd makers will probably follow.
 
I don't think Intel will be able to deny lightpeak licencing to AMD, at least not for any extended period of time if it becomes a widespread standard. That screams of antitrust and they'd get sued very quick
 
lol the semiconductor industry - mostly the relationship intel and amd have is an interesting one: can you think of another company that has to give handouts to it's closest competitor just to stay in the game? AMD could shed engineers and still stay afloat by licensing tech from intel and producing cheap chips.

@lightpeak SSDs: those would be wicked nice!
 
It works second way too - some of tech in Intel cpus is property of AMD (i think Hyper Threading is in fact from amd, and 64bit extensions are amd for sure)
 
defaultluser said:
What does PCIe 3.0 matter if we're barely using one-quarter the bandwidth of 2.0? And that's if you CrossFire/SLI, which none of your system specs seem to include.

Only triple card configurations really make use of PCIe 2.0, and that's a fraction of a percent of the gaming public.

I'm looking forward to Sandy Bridge, because they'll finally have 32nm quads, and they'll finally revamp the desktop lineup to have dual cores with TDPs below 75w. I'm sure if Intel omits USB 3 from the chipset, the motherboard makers will include it.
Click to expand...

I know that, but my systems normally last me four years or more. I bought this system in early 2007 when the Q6600 was brand new. Who knows what add in cards could come later on down the line that utilize the bandwidth of PCI-E 3.0? Getting native USB 3 support would also be nice for the amount of data I move around with my photography.
 
well, i know i wont be buying anymore intel chips if they insist on locking them down unless you pay hundreds more. screw them. i have never ran an amd system, but next time im ready to upgrade i will buy theirs.
 
The K series chips aren't THAT much more expensive than multiplier locked ones. We should wait till Sandy Bridge comes out before we pass judgment on Intel. Who knows what the performance difference will be between Sandy Bridge and Bulldozer anyways, a stock speed Sandy Bridge could very well be faster than an "enthusiast" overclocked AMD.
 
Sandy Bridge is pretty meh. So 6GB/s SATA is ok, but not USB3? WTF logic is that. Even if the 2011 parts are 25-50% better than the Core i71366 parts, it still wouldn't be a worth while upgrade without both SATA 6GB/s and USB3 on the SB.

Better off just getting a used 6 core i7 1366 when the 2011 parts launch.
 
If the six core ever goes down in price... even Core 2 Quads are still fairly expensive for whatever reason.
 
fishrule said:
The K series chips aren't THAT much more expensive than multiplier locked ones. We should wait till Sandy Bridge comes out before we pass judgment on Intel.
Click to expand...

In fact, given Intel's pricing history with the non-Extreme boxed unlocked CPUs, the price difference between the two (after accounting for the estimated price of the stock HSF on the non-K version) is about as much as the cost of a good aftermarket tower CPU cooler with one 120mm fan.
 
its the principle. intel is giving the big FU to its enthusiast fan base. stupid move on their part, i dont spend money with companies that do that. i have been an intel man since i built my first computer. no more after this crap. i dont care if its double the performance of the i7 with stock clocks.
 
viper650 said:
its the principle. intel is giving the big FU to its enthusiast fan base. stupid move on their part, i dont spend money with companies that do that. i have been an intel man since i built my first computer. no more after this crap. i dont care if its double the performance of the i7 with stock clocks.
Click to expand...

um why not? if double perf -- which it wont be but it will be faster but let's just say for argument sake that it was double the perf at stock -- then that's like they are doing the OC for you in that it's faster (just like OC'd is vs stock) and you can go on your merry way...

if you follow your logic you should be overclocking prescott's just for overclocking's sake
 
viper650 said:
its the principle. intel is giving the big FU to its enthusiast fan base. stupid move on their part, i dont spend money with companies that do that. i have been an intel man since i built my first computer. no more after this crap. i dont care if its double the performance of the i7 with stock clocks.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I'll take a locked "fsb" and unlocked multi over an unlocked "fsb" and a locked multi any day. Having both unlocked would be nice, but oh well.

If you feel that strongly about it you can go buy AMD with 2/3 the IPC. Those that realize this is not a big deal at all will stick with Intel and enjoy easy overclocking via multiplier, get better performance and probably higher clock speeds as well... But hey, you'll get to adjust the "fsb"
 
Explain why system bus overclocking is worse? Higher QPI and memory bandwidth is somehow a bad thing?
 
RickyJ said:
Explain why system bus overclocking is worse? Higher QPI and memory bandwidth is somehow a bad thing?
Click to expand...

I didn't say it's worse, but i'll answer your question anyway. Higher QPI is virtually useless and higher system memory bandwidth than triple channel DDR3 is pretty close to virtually useless as well. Unless of course your primary use of a computer is to run memory bandwidth benchmarks. If that's what you want to do, then by all means, nerd rage all you want.

Multiplier overclocking is a lot easier, bump up the multi and cpu voltage if necessary, done. No need to worry about pushing your ram out of spec or if the chipset is going to be stable at your chosen bus speed, this is especially true of systems that have all the DIMM slots filled. No need for me to choose between 6GB of ram and good overclocking potential or 12GB of ram and more limited overclocking potential.

LGA775 systems actually had some tangible benefits to FSB overclocking since they actually have a FSB, not so much with i3/i5/i7.

Like I said, if you don't agree, go buy AMD and overclock your hypertransport bus all you want... Lets see how it compares with SB using multiplier overclocking.
 
Last edited:
Native support for USB 3 is the gating item for a major CPU upgrade? I hope you are joking.
 
I hope that we can buy LGA1566 in january.
I can't wait to buy a new PC but I want the new i7 with AVX.
 
Is there a reason only AT got the chips and not other websites at the same time?
 
RamonGTP said:
I didn't say it's worse, but i'll answer your question anyway. Higher QPI is virtually useless and higher system memory bandwidth than triple channel DDR3 is pretty close to virtually useless as well. Unless of course your primary use of a computer is to run memory bandwidth benchmarks. If that's what you want to do, then by all means, nerd rage all you want.
Click to expand...

For many number crunching situations, memory bandwidth is important. For the simulations I run, its equally as important as CPU clock. That's not "benchmarks", that's actual sims I need to run day to day for my University project.
 
Dosobye said:
Is there a reason only AT got the chips and not other websites at the same time?
Click to expand...
supposedly it was a leak rather than an official preview. Chip didn't come from Intel. It wouldn't surprise me if they do have one from Intel, but that one is under NDA.
sblantipodi said:
I hope that we can buy LGA1566 in january.
I can't wait to buy a new PC but I want the new i7 with AVX.
Click to expand...
1566? I'm guessing you mean 1366, which isn't getting replaced until at least Q3 of 2011 (with s2011). And chips will be available after that, as xeons if not branded i7s.
Tudz said:
For many number crunching situations, memory bandwidth is important. For the simulations I run, its equally as important as CPU clock. That's not "benchmarks", that's actual sims I need to run day to day for my University project.
Click to expand...
So you need s1366 and triple channel, why are you talking about multi-only OC on a socket you [should/will] never use? We don't know if s2011 (I suspect so, but it'll have quad channel memory as well) will be the same and with P67 you'll be able to adjust the memory multi independently of overclocking *anyway*.
 
Last edited:
GLSauron said:
So you need s1366 and triple channel, why are you bitching about multi-only OC on a socket you [should/will] never use? We don't know if s2011 (I suspect so, but it'll have quad channel memory as well) will be the same and with P67 you'll be able to adjust the memory multi independently of overclocking *anyway*.
Click to expand...

Settle kettle, I'm not bitching, I was simply responding to the statement "Higher QPI is virtually useless and higher system memory bandwidth than triple channel DDR3 is pretty close to virtually useless as well." I really dont have any position regarding Sandy Bridge, I doubt I'll be buying it anytime soon, lol.
 
Tudz said:
For many number crunching situations, memory bandwidth is important. For the simulations I run, its equally as important as CPU clock. That's not "benchmarks", that's actual sims I need to run day to day for my University project.
Click to expand...

Which is why I said pretty close to virtually useless. Let's face it, the VAST majority of the time you will run into a bottleneck WELL before you saturate the memory bandwidth.
 
GLSauron said:
supposedly it was a leak rather than an official preview. Chip didn't come from Intel. It wouldn't surprise me if they do have one from Intel, but that one is under NDA.

1566? I'm guessing you mean 1366, which isn't getting replaced until at least Q3 of 2011 (with s2011). And chips will be available after that, as xeons if not branded i7s.

So you need s1366 and triple channel, why are you talking about multi-only OC on a socket you [should/will] never use? We don't know if s2011 (I suspect so, but it'll have quad channel memory as well) will be the same and with P67 you'll be able to adjust the memory multi independently of overclocking *anyway*.
Click to expand...

I would mean 1155
 
Come Q1, 2011, if you don't need more than one video card, is there any reason to buy the Bloomfield I7 950 over the Sandy Bridge I7 2600?

I am guessing they will be pretty close in price, with the I7 2600 being slightly more expensive.
 
Last edited:
TeeJayHoward said:
So... Are the "K" chips going to cost twice the price of the non-"K" chips like they do now? That's what I want to know.
Click to expand...

wut? (ncix canada price)

Intel Core i7-870 2.93 8MB 95W $369
Intel Core i7-875K 2.93 8MB 95W $386

hardly twice :)
 
Difference in sockets between LGA-1155 and LGA-2011 is that the latter adds support for four DDR3 memory channels and the first 6+ core Sandy Bridge processors? Both are a "don't care", so if that's it I'm not waiting.
 
These chips are monsters. Back to intel! I went from an i7 920 to a x6 1055t, I hadn't done AMD since the 64 x2s so I figured I'd see how their new chips were stacking up. Man it felt like I had took a step back 3 generations, this thing feels slower than my Q6600 in every game. Encoding isn't bad though.
 
Let's face it, the VAST majority of the time you will run into a bottleneck WELL before you saturate the memory bandwidth.
Click to expand...

I so agree , look at the 775 vs the i7 in gaming completely equal and the bandwith is almost doubled on I7
 
So is this going to be akin to Kentsfield to Yorkfield? It doesn't look to be very economical to upgrade from Nehalem to SB for the average user.
 
kaptnkain said:
So is this going to be akin to Kentsfield to Yorkfield? It doesn't look to be very economical to upgrade from Nehalem to SB for the average user.
Click to expand...

Perhaps not, but for those like myself who are still on LGA 775, SB is the way to go IMO.
 
I doubt current Nehalem users will want SB, but for 775 users like me Sandy Bridge seems like the more logical upgrade to wait for at this point.
 
RamonGTP said:
Perhaps not, but for those like myself who are still on LGA 775, SB is the way to go IMO.
Click to expand...

Really? I'm on a E8400 (Dual core @ 3.8GhzOC) and I'm seriously thinking about going straight to the 950. I'll get tripple channel memory and as much clock speed as my cooling solution will allow. And I can buy it now instead of 6 months from now. Comparing these to a 930 or a 950 based chip and I'm only seeing a ~10% improvement clock per clock. Is that worth waiting 6 months for? I'm not sure I'm sold on that.
 
fishrule said:
I doubt current Nehalem users will want SB, but for 775 users like me Sandy Bridge seems like the more logical upgrade to wait for at this point.
Click to expand...

I want it, socket 2011 or go home :)
 
fishrule said:
I doubt current Nehalem users will want SB, but for 775 users like me Sandy Bridge seems like the more logical upgrade to wait for at this point.
Click to expand...

Only if you're a quad 775. Duocores upgrading to Nehalem right now probably won't care about 1155 based Sandybridge.
 
vengence said:
Really? I'm on a E8400 (Dual core @ 3.8GhzOC) and I'm seriously thinking about going straight to the 950. I'll get tripple channel memory and as much clock speed as my cooling solution will allow. And I can buy it now instead of 6 months from now. Comparing these to a 930 or a 950 based chip and I'm only seeing a ~10% improvement clock per clock. Is that worth waiting 6 months for? I'm not sure I'm sold on that.
Click to expand...

To each their own. When I decide to upgrade my 775 I'll be going to a new platform. 10% more performance + and upgrade path is enough to sell me. I don't need more power now, so a 6 month wait is cake, in fact it's preferred because I want my upgrade to coincide with the new 6k series video cards and cheaper SSDs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top