Some more details on ivy. http://www.legitreviews.com/news/12310/ Look support for memory at 2800 MHz woooo
Depends on cost, If its the same price as a 2600k now then 10% performance for free is nothing to be sniffed at
But its 22nm. So would hopefully run quite a bit cooler with less power consumption? Sent from my GT-I9100 using Tapatalk
Hexus have a review of the 3820 aswell, wasn't that much of an improvement over a SB cpu, don't really see the point of it.
The only thing they have in common is that the part numbers start with a 3. No idea why SB-E start with a 3 instead of 2, when they are basically enhanced SB SKUs.
The only thing it's competing with is intels own cpus. Hence why I don't see the point. In the end I'm not really paying attention, since I've no intention of buying.
Horrible name for it though, Intel is not making it easy for us to remember which cpu goes with which board. It should just be something like this: 2xxx chips and 4xxx chips go with 1155 and 3xxx and 5xxx with 2011 skt boards.
Hopefully it will bring a bit more to the table when it releases. Although it's in line with the figures intel claimed it would be in.
@ GeorgeStorm, it's not competing with Intel - it's something new, and even though the performance might not have improved by a great margin, there are notable benefits: faster memory, PCI-E 3.0, future upgrades etc. All things considered, SB doesn't really offer a great deal over the original Core i5/i7 P55/X58 architecture by way of raw performance, but it still succeeded and continues to grow in popularity. I have no doubts that the same will happen with IB.
Remember guys at stock these are going to be hardly any better than a sandy bridge CPU of similar naming, but for one thing intel don't want to make these faster than SB-E chips, also the performance will come with a lower tdp and better overclocks, remember 22nm and 3d transistors, 5.5Ghz+ anyone?
No it isn't Never. Mine is faster. Always. Really. Plus, mine has a prettier font on the IHS. Yeah. Beat that
The same could be said of a lot of processor upgrades. 10% performance boost may not seem all that good to some users, but combined with reduced power consumption and potential overclocking headroom it seems quite reasonable to me.
For workstation applications that can use 6 cores then yes of course you are faster. If a program cant utilise all 6 cores however then a 10% speed increase from a 2600k for example will make these chips faster than SB-E chips to people like me.
If you had quoted all of what I had said debs rather than just a little bit you would see I agree with you
