1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Intel i7 Ivy Bridge-E tested, 10% faster than Sandy Bridge-E

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Meanmotion, 25 Apr 2013.

  1. Meanmotion

    Meanmotion bleh Moderator

    Joined:
    16 Nov 2003
    Posts:
    1,650
    Likes Received:
    12
  2. Hustler

    Hustler Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    8 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    1,012
    Likes Received:
    32
    Welcome to Intel's world of zero Competition and only giving the public the bare minimum performance boost.

    ..Thanks AMD, thanks for the Bulldozer fiasco and giving Intel a free ride.
     
  3. maverik-sg1

    maverik-sg1 Member

    Joined:
    18 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    357
    Likes Received:
    1
    Maybe there's a potential increase in overclocking headroom?

    Seems likely that those that could afford the old set-up will be able to afford whichever set-up offers fastest performance once more.....so at least it will match their tri-sli Titans :)
     
  4. theshadow2001

    theshadow2001 [DELETE] means [DELETE]

    Joined:
    3 May 2012
    Posts:
    5,162
    Likes Received:
    141
    If its only a 10% increase, where does this put the chip against a current 3770k on single core performance. Which I believe was faster on single threaded applications than the 3970k. I know the 2011 series is all about the cores, but for the kind of money these chips command you want the fastest single threaded performance as well.
     
  5. Christopher N. Lew

    Christopher N. Lew Folding in memory of my father

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,347
    Likes Received:
    44
    Do we have any figures for power use?
     
  6. Blackshark

    Blackshark New Member

    Joined:
    13 Apr 2004
    Posts:
    135
    Likes Received:
    2
    I think 'diminishing returns' is what Intel is coming up against. In the old days it was easy enough to drop in extra compute units, drop the FAB size and they were brilliant to come up with the Core and Core 2 designs. However at some point, as with the P4, its no use trying to squeeze more out of the hose.
     
  7. Tangster

    Tangster Butt-kicking for goodness!

    Joined:
    23 May 2009
    Posts:
    3,078
    Likes Received:
    150
    Time for an architecture change then. At least Intel can afford the R&D cost.
     
  8. dicobalt

    dicobalt New Member

    Joined:
    21 Mar 2009
    Posts:
    169
    Likes Received:
    2
    That's nice, I'm still happy with my OC'd 2500K. I am interested in how the PS4 handles memory though, it would be nice for a PC to be able to do that. Maybe Intel should try something new like that.
     
  9. Nexxo

    Nexxo Queue Jumper

    Joined:
    23 Oct 2001
    Posts:
    33,572
    Likes Received:
    1,250
    Exactly. We've got plenty of performance. Lower power consumption is where it's at.
     
  10. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    It's a little short-sighted to be blaming AMD for this when it's not really their fault. Keep in mind their entire net income of last year was LESS than Intel's PROFIT. It's hard to pay for engineers when people would rather pay extra for a few additional FPS or some higher arbitrary number.


    Anyways more on topic of the product itself, CPUs these days have more to worry about than just performance, power efficiency is a big deal now. Perhaps IB-E is considerably more power efficient than SB-E.
     
  11. rollo

    rollo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    7,700
    Likes Received:
    99
    AMD dropping out of the high end has given intel its free ride, we would of seen a 6 core ivy for the cheaper range by now if AMD was competitive.
     
  12. true_gamer

    true_gamer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 May 2009
    Posts:
    6,357
    Likes Received:
    987
    Things may change with AMD winning all the next gen consoles. With that amount of income could see them spending on more research and come out with a better architecture, which they may have a come back to rival Intel.

    You got to question why/how AMD has won these contracts - Have they got something up their sleves?
     
  13. RedFlames

    RedFlames ...is not a Belgian football team

    Joined:
    23 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    11,215
    Likes Received:
    1,352
    Things like this I always remember something a friend of mine once said -

    Be better or be cheaper. Offer something the competition can't/doesn't or offer the same thing for less money... If you're both [better and cheaper], you're laughing... If you're neither, you're ****ed...

    AMDs offering either offered something Intel's didn't [most likely the GPU element which Intel aren't great at], or was considerably cheaper...
     
    Last edited: 26 Apr 2013
  14. Gradius

    Gradius IT Consultant

    Joined:
    3 Feb 2009
    Posts:
    284
    Likes Received:
    1
    10% = nothing to me.

    Make it 100% !
     
  15. damien c

    damien c Mad FPS Gamer

    Joined:
    31 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    2,716
    Likes Received:
    97
    Will be interesting to see if Intel made the same mistake with these chip's as they did with the standard Ivy Bridge CPU's in terms of the thermal paste fiasco, causing most people who want low temp's with high speeds to void the warranty on the cpu, by de-lidding it.

    If it's 10% faster but uses 20% less power then that's a win in my book, but I don't know yet if I will or would be willing to drop the cash on a IB-E cpu for 10% performance gain over my SB-E.
     
  16. fluxtatic

    fluxtatic New Member

    Joined:
    25 Aug 2010
    Posts:
    507
    Likes Received:
    5
    I stick with my original theory that it was partly that AMD was a one-stop for the console makers, CPU and GPU both from the same shop. I also have a suspicion that Intel and NVidia weren't all that interested - it's good publicity, but rumored to be comparatively low-profit. NVidia and Intel are both making money hand over fist, and enjoy solid positions in their markets. AMD is going broke and has a shaky position. It was reasonable to assume the next-gen consoles would be x86-based, and there aren't exactly a lot of other shops that can do that. Getting the GPU from the same house just keeps things easier (and likely cheaper on MS & Sony.)
     
  17. Parge

    Parge the worst Super Moderator

    Joined:
    16 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    12,866
    Likes Received:
    552
    I wouldn't automatically assume that there is a lot of money in providing chips for the next gen consoles.
     
  18. rollo

    rollo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    7,700
    Likes Received:
    99
    If the rumours are true AMD are providing the first batch of chips for each console around 2-3mil give or take,( its where all there tsmc space has gone hence not alot of new pc parts this year) then they are just given licence money after that. The licence money will be between 50-100mil per console per year so we are not talking huge sums.

    Nvidia did not want to do it for this gen stating it was more hassle than it was worth. Intel have never offered themselves to a console manufacture or anybody for that matter so I'd say they were a none entity. IBM with power pc would be the other option.
     
  19. andrew8200m

    andrew8200m Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 May 2009
    Posts:
    2,180
    Likes Received:
    120
    5.7% if the math is done correctly it seems...

    Ouch.
     
  20. true_gamer

    true_gamer Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    4 May 2009
    Posts:
    6,357
    Likes Received:
    987
    Being fully supported by PCI-E 3.0 I wonder if there will be any increase in performance with multi card setups?

    If all problems are fixed from that of the Skt1155 Ivy bridge - I'm sold! :)
     
    David and Teelzebub like this.
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page