Hardware All About Ivy Bridge

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by arcticstoat, 10 Oct 2011.

  1. arcticstoat

    arcticstoat New Member

    Joined:
    19 May 2004
    Posts:
    916
    Likes Received:
    13
  2. McDuff32

    McDuff32 New Member

    Joined:
    5 Aug 2011
    Posts:
    103
    Likes Received:
    3
    All sounds rather positive :)
     
  3. Farting Bob

    Farting Bob New Member

    Joined:
    21 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    469
    Likes Received:
    13
    Im looking forward to power savings of being on the lower process and 3D transistors. In theory it should offer much lower consumption, especially at the lower end of the scale.
     
  4. improprietary

    improprietary FT03 is a bitch to watercool

    Joined:
    13 May 2011
    Posts:
    305
    Likes Received:
    9
    perhaps when ivy bridge comes to the market bit-tech will revisit their article on homemade nas boxes ;)
     
  5. towelie

    towelie How do I Internet!!

    Joined:
    1 Sep 2011
    Posts:
    399
    Likes Received:
    10
    Well most of that went right over my head, but interesting stuff none the less specially the security parts.
    Nice article
     
  6. Goty

    Goty New Member

    Joined:
    13 Dec 2005
    Posts:
    411
    Likes Received:
    4
    Why would anybody need something like Ivy Bridge for a NAS box?
     
  7. The Bodger

    The Bodger New Member

    Joined:
    26 Dec 2003
    Posts:
    421
    Likes Received:
    4
    I think the point being made was that with the potentially substantial power savings that tri - gate may provide, you could have a NAS box which was both extremely frugal on power while doing nothing and extremely fast when called upon to upload a video (or many small files for that matter) over your gigabit ethernet cabling. Sure the Ivy Bridge parts coming out soon probably aren't the best choice for a NAS box, but the lower power mobile parts might be pretty well suited to such a role.
     
  8. BrightCandle

    BrightCandle New Member

    Joined:
    30 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    73
    Likes Received:
    5
    The low end of Ivy Bridge presumably like the low end of Sandy bridge on MITX makes for a great NAS box. The extra reduction in power consumption at idle and the performance when pushing bytes will make it cheap to run a box capable of maxing out 1 gbit/s.

    The NAS boxes I see reviewed rarely max out ethernet, the low end of them barely hit 15MB/s instead of the 120 MB/s the hard drives and the cable is capable of. A Sandy Bridge CPU on MITX will hit peak performance at a mere 20% CPU usage with software raid 5. Its overkill but there is nothing in between the two to deliver the top performance. Ivy Bridge will allow further reductions in power which is always welcome for the low end.
     
  9. Claave

    Claave You Rebel scum

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2008
    Posts:
    691
    Likes Received:
    12
    If you're building a NAS box, why not use an AMD E-350 M-ITX board? It's plenty fast and will be much cheaper.

    Anyway, NAS boxes are a bit off topic for this thread, anyone excited by the new maximum CPU multiplier that's gone from 57x to 63x? Did anyone even hit the 57x limit of Sandy Bridge?
     
  10. Hustler

    Hustler Member

    Joined:
    8 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    921
    Likes Received:
    12
    Lol....2 days before Bulldozers public humiliation, more details about Ivy Bridge...

    Nice one Bit Tech.
     
  11. ven

    ven New Member

    Joined:
    10 Oct 2011
    Posts:
    3
    Likes Received:
    0
    Does ivy bridge processor is compatible with 6 series chipset.(same socket LGA 1155)?... or will i have to buy a new Mobo?
     
  12. Arghnews

    Arghnews New Member

    Joined:
    6 Jul 2011
    Posts:
    129
    Likes Received:
    4
    Holy "poo" this looks good.
     
  13. rogerrabbits

    rogerrabbits New Member

    Joined:
    24 May 2011
    Posts:
    577
    Likes Received:
    11
    Interesting article, especially how the cs2.00 is 25% indipitive finfet 1a.0 of the ITX ATC / 3 x to the power of gobbldygook.
     
  14. McDuff32

    McDuff32 New Member

    Joined:
    5 Aug 2011
    Posts:
    103
    Likes Received:
    3
    Info is coming out by the end of the week? Good stuff!
     
  15. Christopher N. Lew

    Christopher N. Lew Folding in memory of my father

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    44
    Any hint of Ivy Bridge CPUs with more than 4 cores?
     
  16. edzieba

    edzieba Virtual Realist

    Joined:
    14 Jan 2009
    Posts:
    2,008
    Likes Received:
    48
    It's a shame Intel are still focusing on making Quick-sync faster, rather than improving the encoring quality. It's currently about the same perceptual quality as x.264's "superfast" preset, and largely the same speed (check appendix 1). However, with quicksync fast-but-rubbish-mode is all you have, whereas at least you can vary the encoding quality of x.264 all the way up to lossless depending on how long you want to wait.
     
  17. PingCrosby

    PingCrosby New Member

    Joined:
    16 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    392
    Likes Received:
    7
    Personally I can't wait for the Albert Tatlock bridge
     
  18. Star*Dagger

    Star*Dagger New Member

    Joined:
    30 Nov 2007
    Posts:
    882
    Likes Received:
    11
    Dx11 is the new minimum standard for real Gamers!!
     
  19. Anfield

    Anfield Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    15 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    2,715
    Likes Received:
    48
    Considering there will be a mobile quadcore version of Ivy Bridge with a TDP of 35W they could easily make a 12 core version with a TDP no higher than that of a 6 Core SB-E.

    But of course they won't do that, why?

    Ivy Bridge is the low end - mid range cpu for 2012 from Intel, it is not supposed to be faster than the highend SB-E due soon or IB-E due later in 2012.

    There is a big but though, that being the Xeon branded IB chips.
     
  20. damien c

    damien c Mad FPS Gamer

    Joined:
    31 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,595
    Likes Received:
    67
    To bad the game dev's are not interested in using it simply because of the consoles.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page