Sandy E benches - disappointing?

[Digital Viper-X-]

IF you want to think about the future, think about how last year the x79 chipset is in terms of features .

What I want is an AMD 990fx board that can handle a 2600k :<

as to the OP
not dissapointed, a little underwhelmed so far.

 

[djsb]

I still feel like the achilles heel of the platform is the lack of a truly unlocked quad-core part.

I disagree slightly on this. I think the platform's missing SKU is a 2500K equivalent, i.e. a six core, K series chip with no hyperthreading for $100 to $150 less.

 

[SonDa5]

I expected lower power usage per core. So far it looks like the die shrink didn't help lower power usage per core.

Looking for more reviews. So far I do find the performance disappointing.

 

[NathanP2007]

So for a gaming rig, someone who wants the equivalent of the next big gaming CPU (Q6600, Q9550, i7 930, i7 2600K) will Ivy Bridge be the one? I am wanting to build a new rig with a new generation of CPU's but from what im reading, SB-E is not the one to go with.

 

[Digital Viper-X-]

I expected lower power usage per core. So far it looks like the die shrink didn't help lower power usage per core.

Looking for more reviews. So far I do find the performance disappointing.

what are you talking about? There is no die shrink.

SB is 32nm already, and Gulftown was already 32nm. SB-E is a 6 core SB with a quad channel memory controller and more pci-e lanes.

 

[buttons]

What I want is an AMD 990fx board that can handle a 2600k :<

Just curious but what about the 990fx boards do you like over the intel variety?

 

[SonDa5]

what are you talking about? There is no die shrink.

SB is 32nm already, and Gulftown was already 32nm. SB-E is a 6 core SB with a quad channel memory controller and more pci-e lanes.

Excuse my confusion.

IB, SB-E and the 22nm die shrink factor is confusing. I thought the SB-E die was going to be 22nm.

If it is 32nm then the high power outputs makes sense.

 

[Tsumi]

SB-E is 32nm. The rumored IB-E will be 22nm.

 

[WldWzl]

Having skipped SB I think I like the looks of the i7-3930K as an enthusiast build. I jumped early on the 920 and never regretted it.

 

[larkin]

SB-E is 32nm. The rumored IB-E will be 22nm.

IB-E has never been mentioned by Intel, IB will be 22nm.

I was casually interested in SB-E but bought something economical in the mean time so I didn't have to force my hand prematurely even if the platform had lukewarm performance. I think I'll stay with my interim system at least until new steppings (Q1?) which should reduce the wattage and increase stock clocks.

 

[Beriphent]

So for a gaming rig, someone who wants the equivalent of the next big gaming CPU (Q6600, Q9550, i7 930, i7 2600K) will Ivy Bridge be the one? I am wanting to build a new rig with a new generation of CPU's but from what im reading, SB-E is not the one to go with.

Ivy Bridge, which is scheduled for release in 2012, looks to be more touted by Intel for its lower power/heat and better GPU than increase in core performance over current Sandy Bridge processors. Latest guesstimates from anand speculate about a 10% overall improvement. According to leaked Intel slides, the Ivy Bridge i7/i5 37xx/35xx CPUs will feature a max TDP of only 77w; this is 18w lower rating than the current Sandy Bridge i7/i5 2600/2500 series' 95w max TDP. IB will bring PCI-E 3.0 to the table, but I don't think it will make much of a difference for GPUs in 2012, which will be IB's year. But 2012 IB CPU SKUs will be popular and great for gaming by default, because they will be replacing 2011 SB CPU SKUs at essentially the same price points. Potentially, a ~$200 priced Ivy Bridge "i5 3500K" will take the crown for best bang for buck gaming processor for 2012 and some may add that one to your list, though it likely won't be able to distant itself too far from the 2500K when it comes to gaming.

Haswell, which is currently on pace for release in 2013, will require a new socket for its Desktop processors, called "LGA 1150" (which is assumed to replace the current mainstream Desktop LGA 1155 socket). While not a whole lot is known about Haswell right now, we will get even better improvement to power saving features, supposedly better overclocking (straight from Intel's mouth), and adoption of "DDR3L" memory (lower voltage/potentially better performing version of DDR3). IMHO, the next "big gaming CPU" that is "worth" adding to the list will likely be a third generation i7 Haswell CPU assuming price/performance remains on track.

 

[larkin]

third generation i7 haswell?

 

[wabbitseason]

Congratulations on being the %1.

So your posts are crap and you want to "occupy america". Congratulations..?

 

[needmorecarnitine]

third generation i7 haswell?

Third generation of the "Core" series.

Intel calls this one (sandy bridge) the second generation.

 

[tangoseal]

Im weating my 3 fucking days on paypal to transfer cash to my checking account so I can buy the son of a bitch.

Man I had a chance to buy a Rampage IV today but NOOOOO I was like ill just wait on the paypal instead of using my personal non computer designated money. Noooo now they are f'ing sold out everywhere for weeks probably.

 

[heatlesssun]

Didn't really want to upgrade until Windows 8, I'll probably hold onto this old 980x for another year.

 

[cmanser]

Two thing come to mind easily.

Native USB 3.0 ports - all the intel chipsets up including X79 have to have 3rd party solutions still.

990fx also has 6 SATA 600 ports also - Intel is still stuck on 2 native ports any additional ports are again provided by a third party chip.

X79 seems like it is missing some key features it should have by now.

Just curious but what about the 990fx boards do you like over the intel variety?

 

[woodscomp]

Two thing come to mind easily.

Native USB 3.0 ports - all the intel chipsets up including X79 have to have 3rd party solutions still.

990fx also has 6 SATA 600 ports also - Intel is still stuck on 2 native ports any additional ports are again provided by a third party chip.

X79 seems like it is missing some key features it should have by now.

I don't think I would ever consider USB ports as a deciding factor of which platform I was going to use. I mean I can't remember the last time I said to myself, "I sure wish my board had native USB 3.0 ports on it, I think I'll change all my gear to a AMD so I can have slightly speedier transfers". The current Sandy Bridge (even that last gen I7's - I5's) ripped apart anything AMD has/had to offer and that's where it's at. I do hope that AMD gets there act together because this lack of competition is costing me money.

However I do think the OEM's are ripping people off on the cost of these new X79 boards especially seeing them with Realtek audio chips etc...

 

[UnrealCpu]

So for a gaming rig, someone who wants the equivalent of the next big gaming CPU (Q6600, Q9550, i7 930, i7 2600K) will Ivy Bridge be the one? I am wanting to build a new rig with a new generation of CPU's but from what im reading, SB-E is not the one to go with.

yeah wait for IVY
i am

i have the same cpu as you but with a GTX 570.. We arent really missing anything special with the I7 at 4 gigahertz. Just think about it.. I play everything at 60 FPS.. 1920x1200. The only games that give me issues is Skyrim and Metro 2033, i have like 400 games on steam. I just cant turn on the FSAA in those games i mentioned above. Battlefield 3 would probably give me issues but it would be playable on high setting with no FSA. I think its a vid card drivers that need to mature.. I get 60FPS 4xfsaa on Battlefield Bad Company no dips. Another difference for example i notice is that in Resident evil 5 i got 60fps on the benchmark default test, not the 150-180 that a 4.5+ gigahertz core i7 gets. But that game is programed for multiple CPU hypertheads etc.

Just wait because until the new video cards come out anything you upgrade too will be obsolete in a year. kyrim is practically making a core i7 at 4.8 gigahertz cpu limited.

So by the time IVY is released hopefully nvdia or ati will have the next gen video cards out, then i recommend go SLI and then get the best IVY that overclocks.. You should be good for a long time depending if you upgrade your monitors res past 1920x1200.

If you just want to upgrade now and keep it under 600 get the core i5 and a good mobo, lots of ram and go SLI, good heatsink. Then upgrade when Haswell comes out in 2013.. Just make sure you go SLI now with good cards i.e. GTX 570 or ATI 6990. You will see the best bang for your buck with the IVY . So wait if you are not concerned running 8-16x FSAA in these new games that are being released. Its only 5 months away.. APR-MAY.

 

[Tsumi]

Two thing come to mind easily.

Native USB 3.0 ports - all the intel chipsets up including X79 have to have 3rd party solutions still.

990fx also has 6 SATA 600 ports also - Intel is still stuck on 2 native ports any additional ports are again provided by a third party chip.

X79 seems like it is missing some key features it should have by now.

No current chipsets offer native USB 3.0. 990FX still has USB 3.0 supplied by 3rd party controllers.

 

[Beriphent]

third generation i7 haswell?

You're right. I forgot Intel has decided to treat Ivy Bridge as more than just a die shrink, and will give it special treatment in name by referring to it as Third Generation Core instead of grouping it with Sandy Bridge Second Generation Core. If they continue to use the Core i7 monicker, then maybe Haswell could be called Fourth Generation Core.

 

[Michaelius]

So for a gaming rig, someone who wants the equivalent of the next big gaming CPU (Q6600, Q9550, i7 930, i7 2600K) will Ivy Bridge be the one? I am wanting to build a new rig with a new generation of CPU's but from what im reading, SB-E is not the one to go with.

OT- big gaming CPU for previous gen was i5 750/760 and for this gen it is 2500K, for next one unlocked Ivy Bridge quad.

 

[NathanP2007]

OT- big gaming CPU for previous gen was i5 750/760 and for this gen it is 2500K, for next one unlocked Ivy Bridge quad.

Oh ok, that does make sense. So what is this Ivy vs Haswell? I know for almost certain i will not be waiting until 2013 to build my new PC..i want to build it in 2012 and then keep it for years and years. Im also considering parting out my rig once i build the new one, considering all my components are highly rated and sought after in the 775 socket world. I think i can get $500 for my mobo/cpu/ram/psu, and another $500 for both my reference xfx 6950 2Gb GPU's.

 

[Tsumi]

Ivy Bridge is the next new architecture set to be released, and it will be on a new manufacturing tech. Ivy Bridge will be very similar to Sandy Bridge in terms of architecture, due to Intel's tick-tock strategy. While it will be similar performance-wise to Sandy Bridge, it will feature lower power consumption and most likely higher overclocks due to the manufacturing tech. Also, Intel is saying that the GPU on Ivy Bridge will be much more powerful.

Haswell will most likely be a new architecture, succeeding Ivy Bridge, with significant differences from Ivy Bridge, but most likely be on the same manufacturing tech, once again due to the tick-tock strategy. However, anything beyond the 2012 April Ivy Bridge release is mostly speculation.

 

[wtourist]

From a position of ignorance : Intel found either through marketing or science that Sandy Bridge was closer to their performance envelope than they might wish. SB-E is very good, maybe not great, certainly not like some previous swings.
The future now belongs to Ivy Bridge, it may be another leap like SB or it may be a side step like Bulldozer.
It is amazing to live so close to Tech developement, is!!

 

[Weeth]

IMHO the reason for SB-E's meh performance is simple: There's no competition. If BD had shredded 2600K to bits we'd be seeing a hopped-up 3960X without the two cores fused off as the EE. But now Intel can just play the game of: "You take what I give ya and be damn thankful you're gettin' it." Thanks, AMD for screwing up the high end market for everybody.

 

[Michaelius]

From a position of ignorance : Intel found either through marketing or science that Sandy Bridge was closer to their performance envelope than they might wish. SB-E is very good, maybe not great, certainly not like some previous swings.
The future now belongs to Ivy Bridge, it may be another leap like SB or it may be a side step like Bulldozer.
It is amazing to live so close to Tech developement, is!!

Ivy Bridge is die shrink. IPC improvement will be very small. Most of speed increases will come from clockspeed increase. Like 65nm core 2 to 45nm core 2.

IMHO the reason for SB-E's meh performance is simple: There's no competition. If BD had shredded 2600K to bits we'd be seeing a hopped-up 3960X without the two cores fused off as the EE. But now Intel can just play the game of: "You take what I give ya and be damn thankful you're gettin' it." Thanks, AMD for screwing up the high end market for everybody.

And then it would have 180W TDP as they would need high speed to not suffer in single threaded benchmarks.
In server you can get away with 8 core 2 Ghz chip - on desktop it would make Bulldozer look like fast cpu

 

[woodscomp]

I don't think this is AMD's fault by any means at all. It's not like Intel just added water and poof released this product. It's been in development for sometime, and when BD released they didn't change plans and start cutting off two cores to save money, these things would have been in testing months ago in the same form that they are today.

SB-E performance is sub par because it is a mis-marketed product, does not really belong in the enthusiast market, the X79 chipset is not geared towards us either. And it is exorbitantly over priced for the segment that it is targeted for. That last part in itself excludes itself from 90% of it's target market, and the other 10% are going to be more reluctant to spend that kind of cash on a setup that provides menial returns for three times the price of what is out there. The good folks at Intel have missed the mark with this launch and missed a great opportunity.

I always pay attention to the NDA and with this just like BD there was no early lift of it, no leaked reports, just some pictures here and there. When a manufacture has a great product about to release there are "leaked" reports and buzz about it several weeks prior to the actual release. They want there fan base to get on board and start telling there friends about what's coming up. We heard about SB months before it came out last year. The same has been true of most all of the tide changing tech products.

Intel needs to add one more category to there tick tock diagram for these half way attempts to garner our dollars.

 

[Michaelius]

It has same audience as Gulftown had - small workstations. That's even more shown here by quad channel support (completly useless for gamer) or initially planned SAS support - again useless for gaming.

 

[stewartjm]

It appears that socket 2011 can pay off if you want gobs(32gb) of RAM cheap. I want to build a system with ECC, so that's what the pricing below is, though non-ECC 8gb has a similar price premium.

3930K(~$600) + Asus P9X79 WS(~$400) + 8 x 4GB Kingston ECC(~$300) =
$1300

e3-1245(~$280) + Asus P8B WS(~$230) + 4 x 8GB Kingston ECC(~$500) =
$1010

So $290 more gets you 50% more cores at roughly the same speed, higher memory bandwidth, and additional PCIe lanes. I'd say it's worth it, if you want/need more than 16 gigs of RAM.

But if 16 gigs is enough, then:

~$600+~$400+~$155 = $1155 vs
~$280+~$230+~$155 = $665
a $500 difference, which is harder to justify

Now I just need to decide if I can live with 16 gigs of ram for now.

But, then I go look here:
http://ark.intel.com/products/63697/Intel-Core-i7-3930K-Processor-(12M-Cache-3_20-GHz)
And I see, ECC Memory Supported: No

So, it's likely the P9X79 WS, is only going to support ECC with 2011 Xeons, which we may not see for 3-5 more months. The P8B WS is looking more inviting by the minute.

 

[Weeth]

I respectfully suggest that there were people in Intel who knew more about BD (and earlier) than some AMD execs. They have known for a very long time exactly how BD would shake out and they've fitted their strategy to suit. The Intel monopoly of the high end has officially begun. If anyone thinks that Intel found out about BD benchies when we did has to believe in the tooth fairy too.

 

[tangoseal]

I respectfully suggest that there were people in Intel who knew more about BD (and earlier) than some AMD execs. They have known for a very long time exactly how BD would shake out and they've fitted their strategy to suit. The Intel monopoly of the high end has officially begun. If anyone thinks that Intel found out about BD benchies when we did has to believe in the tooth fairy too.

I have to say I agree 1000% with you. Even though im adopting SDB-E I am still upset at AMD and INTEL both for what has become of the CPU industry.

 

[German Muscle]

I respectfully suggest that there were people in Intel who knew more about BD (and earlier) than some AMD execs. They have known for a very long time exactly how BD would shake out and they've fitted their strategy to suit. The Intel monopoly of the high end has officially begun. If anyone thinks that Intel found out about BD benchies when we did has to believe in the tooth fairy too.

Now there is a conspiracy. Id have to say no...to all of it.

 

[GotNoRice]

The Intel monopoly of the high end has officially begun.

So "Intel Monopoly" = being able to buy a chip for ~$200 that is competitive with their top-end offering in games?

If they have a monopoly, it's because they've figured out how to be the best solution not just in terms of performance but increasingly also in terms of value.

 

[Forceman]

I have to say I agree 1000% with you. Even though im adopting SDB-E I am still upset at AMD and INTEL both for what has become of the CPU industry.

You're upset that the i5-2500K, which is a complete monster of a CPU that can pretty much shred any game made, is under $200? Hardly seems like a terrible state of affairs in the CPU industry. Or are you upset that what is basically a server part (Bulldozer and SB-E) isn't impressive in games?

 

[stewartjm]

I've made my decision, add me to the disappointed column. I just ordered a socket 1155 system consisting of an Asus P8B WS plus a Xeon E3-1220. Newegg had $50 off the combo of the 2, for a total $380. For now I'll live with 16 gigs of ECC RAM(Total cost ~$140). If the combo hadn't of been available, I'd probably have gone with the 1235 or 1245, for on-cpu video and the larger L3 cache.

It gives me a decent upgrade(especially RAM) over my current x38+Q9450 for now, and likely immediate access to an Ivy Bridge Xeon upgrade in a few months. If that upgrade proves worthwhile, I'll move the e3-1220 into a compute/file server.

I'll re-evaluate LGA 2011 when the Xeon platform(s) come(s) out next year.

 

[NathanP2007]

You're upset that the i5-2500K, which is a complete monster of a CPU that can pretty much shred any game made, is under $200? Hardly seems like a terrible state of affairs in the CPU industry. Or are you upset that what is basically a server part (Bulldozer and SB-E) isn't impressive in games?

Very true, doesnt matter if you have a thousand cores if games are created and optimized for 2 or 4 cores max. Having 6 isnt really going to improve much i would imagine. I have always said before they move on ditching dual cores and keep shoving more and more cores into CPU's they should stick to dual and perfect them. Make them as fast, low energy using and efficient as possible. (Now it applies to quads cause games are now using quads but manufacturers are moving on to 6 and 8 cores) but thats just how it is, they make processors for servers and we just get those tweaked for consumers. So why would they spend the time and money perfecting a cpu to be the best for gaming.

 

[tangoseal]

You're upset that the i5-2500K, which is a complete monster of a CPU that can pretty much shred any game made, is under $200? Hardly seems like a terrible state of affairs in the CPU industry. Or are you upset that what is basically a server part (Bulldozer and SB-E) isn't impressive in games?

First off every generation of CPU has a complete monster. A few years ago the AMD FX series was the Monster, and then Intel came out with their Monster, etc... etc... and so forth however its all Intel now and no other choices to be honest for equal line performance.

It has nothing to do with the fact that the 2500K is X factor to Y and Sandy Bridge E is xyz.... what matters is that I have a 2500K and I have a 3930K now and I know that my 2500K is going to perform exemplary against the 3930K in games however my 3930K will absolutely crush and destroy my 2500K in professional grade apps I run with multithread support so I am willing to accept both situations. Im glad I own both. I will post a comparison of both in benches at stock clocks each with 2 sticks of ram for dual channel mode using the same ram sticks and we can see the difference from a NON PRO bench marker. I am very happy that I have the new 6 core monster on the block and I damn sure took Kyles advice and steered well clear of the 60X waste of money.

and .....

Very true, doesnt matter if you have a thousand cores if games are created and optimized for 2 or 4 cores max. Having 6 isnt really going to improve much i would imagine. I have always said before they move on ditching dual cores and keep shoving more and more cores into CPU's they should stick to dual and perfect them. Make them as fast, low energy using and efficient as possible. (Now it applies to quads cause games are now using quads but manufacturers are moving on to 6 and 8 cores) but thats just how it is, they make processors for servers and we just get those tweaked for consumers. So why would they spend the time and money perfecting a cpu to be the best for gaming.

We have almost reached the apex of current silicon process technology. Sure there are little things that Intel is doing to further squeeze every ounce out of silicon i.e. Tri-gate, etc.... but as the process shrinks, currently 22nm Intel had to come up with a way to make the electricity actually flow and gate on and off by adding more surface area basically to the already super tiny transistors.

The industry does NOT need to move from multicore processors, we need more and more cores, because that is where the power savings really are. Software companies need to get off the fucking play station and Xbox and start making apps that support true multicored capable hardware.The problem is not hardware, its already blazing damn fast, the problem is software.

Prime example: AMD Bulldozer, bad ass chip in every respect, problem was the software out now has no clue how to effectively use that new architecture. All I am saying is stop wishing for more power from a single core and start wishing for more power usage from software that actually uses your hardware.

Take all these shit ass console ported games. They suck and use like 1 or 2 core max and hell D3D9, 10 if were lucky. Now look at BF3 made form the ground up to fully use hardware we have now. 4 core support, uses the best of DX11, maxes out my 6990. Bad ass game and it makes my computer feel like I paid for something that is worth it. Then I go and play some shit like Duke Nukem forever... WTF, ill leave it there.

Hardware is in style now but almost all software is still in the '90s.

 

[xorbe]

I think those of us that were paying attention to SB-E details weren't disappointed, because we pretty much knew how it was going to be. That's why I went 1155 before SB-E was released. Then there's the crowd that just assumed SB-E was going to be some kind of a game changer. And with that much silicon real estate, yeah it's not going to OC as well, statistically, not to mention more heat from more cores, more cache. The thing that gets me is that with the cheesy firearm logos on the boards, clearly they were expecting these to be snapped up primarily by fps gamers.

 

[Forceman]

First off every generation of CPU has a complete monster. A few years ago the AMD FX series was the Monster, and then Intel came out with their Monster, etc... etc... and so forth however its all Intel now and no other choices to be honest for equal line performance.

It has nothing to do with the fact that the 2500K is X factor to Y and Sandy Bridge E is xyz.... what matters is that I have a 2500K and I have a 3930K now and I know that my 2500K is going to perform exemplary against the 3930K in games however my 3930K will absolutely crush and destroy my 2500K in professional grade apps I run with multithread support so I am willing to accept both situations. Im glad I own both. I will post a comparison of both in benches at stock clocks each with 2 sticks of ram for dual channel mode using the same ram sticks and we can see the difference from a NON PRO bench marker. I am very happy that I have the new 6 core monster on the block and I damn sure took Kyles advice and steered well clear of the 60X waste of money.

and .....



We have almost reached the apex of current silicon process technology. Sure there are little things that Intel is doing to further squeeze every ounce out of silicon i.e. Tri-gate, etc.... but as the process shrinks, currently 22nm Intel had to come up with a way to make the electricity actually flow and gate on and off by adding more surface area basically to the already super tiny transistors.

The industry does NOT need to move from multicore processors, we need more and more cores, because that is where the power savings really are. Software companies need to get off the fucking play station and Xbox and start making apps that support true multicored capable hardware.The problem is not hardware, its already blazing damn fast, the problem is software.

Prime example: AMD Bulldozer, bad ass chip in every respect, problem was the software out now has no clue how to effectively use that new architecture. All I am saying is stop wishing for more power from a single core and start wishing for more power usage from software that actually uses your hardware.

Take all these shit ass console ported games. They suck and use like 1 or 2 core max and hell D3D9, 10 if were lucky. Now look at BF3 made form the ground up to fully use hardware we have now. 4 core support, uses the best of DX11, maxes out my 6990. Bad ass game and it makes my computer feel like I paid for something that is worth it. Then I go and play some shit like Duke Nukem forever... WTF, ill leave it there.

Hardware is in style now but almost all software is still in the '90s.

I don't get it, then. What are you upset about AMD and Intel having done to the state of the CPU industry? Sounds like your beef is with the software development side.