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

News Intel reveals more Sandy Bridge details at IDF

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Claave, 14 Sep 2010.

  1. Claave

    Claave You Rebel scum

    Joined:
    29 Nov 2008
    Posts:
    691
    Likes Received:
    12
  2. Hustler

    Hustler Member

    Joined:
    8 Aug 2005
    Posts:
    978
    Likes Received:
    20
    What is the point of these intergrated Gfx cores on the CPU?.......what useful purpose do they serve?...

    What market are Intel going after?. If they are giving you inbuilt Gfx, how are they taking market share away from Nvidia/AMD?.....

    Those who need extra Gfx grunt, will still buy a dedicated Gfx card anyway.......will the inbuilt Gfx cores be able to be used as an additional benefit to a dedicated card, or are they bypassed once you add a dedicated Gfx card?....
     
  3. TWeaK

    TWeaK New Member

    Joined:
    28 Jan 2010
    Posts:
    521
    Likes Received:
    7
    Sounds interesting. I doubt I'll be upgrading for a long time yet, but the 2x 8 lane PCI-E sounds good. Hopefully this will mean fewer boards with the second slot limited to 4 lanes.

    As for the TDP, hopefully at the least Intel will release 'normal TDP's and a 'max TDP'. Don't know if that's likely but it would be better than having a single figure that isn't right half the time.
     
  4. BlackMage23

    BlackMage23 RPG Loving Freak

    Joined:
    4 Aug 2006
    Posts:
    259
    Likes Received:
    1
    Sounds like they will be for business PC's.
     
  5. Mraedis

    Mraedis New Member

    Joined:
    5 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    153
    Likes Received:
    0
    Motherboards would not require GPU's anymore, the cooling of the CPU/GPU would be concentrated and the shared cache etc would mean less need of RAM.

    Of course, you'd use this type of core for desktops that aren't meant for gaming or otherwise video-heavy tasks, such as simple office management and regular browsing.
     
  6. TSR2

    TSR2 New Member

    Joined:
    19 Aug 2009
    Posts:
    160
    Likes Received:
    4
    If all 4 cores can overclock simultaneously, surely that's basically SpeedStep on a per-core basis? After all, if everything's good, its simultaneously awful.
     
  7. frontline

    frontline Punish Your Machine

    Joined:
    24 Jun 2007
    Posts:
    825
    Likes Received:
    12
    Saw a few perfomance figures for the integrated GPU recently and it looked quite impressive when compared to something like a 5450 dedicated card. Certainly a lot better than Intel's previous integrated efforts and probably makes the entry level cards costing around £35-£45 redundant.
     
  8. Snips

    Snips I can do dat, giz a job

    Joined:
    14 Sep 2010
    Posts:
    1,940
    Likes Received:
    66
    Maybe online gaming in work is back on the menu boys and girls!
     
  9. dangerman1337

    dangerman1337 Member

    Joined:
    2 Sep 2010
    Posts:
    256
    Likes Received:
    5
    I wonder if intel are going to annouce details of the die shirnk and its tick tock after 22nm?
     
  10. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag New Member

    Joined:
    30 Jul 2010
    Posts:
    1,082
    Likes Received:
    10
    overall it seems to me that sandy bridge is just a few touch-ups to nehalem. its nice to hear their integrated video is improved but i still think amd's and nvidia's are going to be better. on top of that, you can use the integrated video of an amd or nvidia chipset and use a descrete video card to get more processing power for free. with intel, you get a worse integrated video that doesn't have a descrete card to merge with, but, you at least can do sli or crossfire.

    overall i find a cpu with built-in video a bad idea for desktops. you end up paying more for something you're probably not going to use. its a great idea for mobile devices or mini itx boards, but for a full-blown desktop its just dumb. i'm not too sure i like the idea of intel using the l3 cache for video either. sure, it'll make a great performance difference for video but the cache is going to have to be large, and the whole purpose of cache is to have a SMALL amount of memory that is quick to access.
     
Tags: Add Tags

Share This Page