Westemere/Gulftown to sandybridge/Ivybridge

[JGBR]

I was just wondering if anyone thought the new sandybridge/ivybridge is not bringing much to the i7 range.

I have a i7 920 and i7980x and could not see what intel has improved at the performance level?

Also I'm aware it may require a MB upgrade? Rampage 3 users like me would be annoyed at such a thought!

 

[nightmare99]

You are comparing apples to oranges Sandybridge is not a replacement for people that already have 1366 based systems, Sandybridge-E on socket 2011 would be the upgrade for 1366 users.

It is true however that Sandybridge eats a lot of the low end 1366 market though for people that are buying new platforms.

 

[Vertigo]

Whilst nightmare99 is correct in that the successor to LGA1366 is LGA2011, due later this year, that's not to say that LGA1155 can't compete.

If you take a look at the reviews, both the i5-2500 and specifically the i7-2600 easily beats all the quad-core Nehalem processors, whether Lynnfield or Bloomfield, in virtually every test. Even your 980X Gulftown is beaten by the i7-2600 in all but the most compute-intensive tasks, and is still given a damn good run for its money in those tests.

Basically, whilst the direct upgrade for LGA1366 is indeed LGA2011, for the vast majority of users and applications, Sandy Bridge on LGA1155 is more than enough.

Whether it's worth the hassle and expense of upgrading both processor and motherboard is down to each user. Personally I don't see the point in changing with each new platform, which is why I'm still on Penryn and have skipped Nehalem completely.

You say you'd be annoyed at having to change your platform but this was inevitable at some point. Given that the new i7-2600 kicks the 980X's backside in most tests and will cost a third of the price, I'd be inclined to sell yours while it's still worth something

 

[JGBR]

Somehow i dont see 980x users running out to the stores to change something that only overclocked performs on par.

 

[JonJ678]

If the price of the 980X crashes as a consequence of sandy bridge I'll be a happy man

 

[Randomface74]

None of these CPUs are the bottleneck in gaming.

 

[JonJ678]

Well that's us told, better not change to a faster processor after all.

 

[Skyrocket]

2011 is a server board and NOT a replacement for 1366.

LGA 1356 is.

But the idea is right. 1366 offers a bit more on the table than 1155 and Sandy bridge especially if you go into 3-SLI 3-Xfire.

 

[nightmare99]

2011 is a server board and NOT a replacement for 1366.

2011 Sandybridge-E is coming at the end of this year and is the replacement for 1366.

 

[Vertigo]

Somehow i dont see 980x users running out to the stores to change something that only overclocked performs on par.

Read the reviews again - the i7-2600K outperforms the 980X at stock speeds in everything that isn't rendering or encoding.

 

[JonJ678]

If i7-2600K outperforms the 980X in tasks which are not sufficiently well multi-threaded to benefit from six hyperthreaded cores (which I believe is the gist of your comparison), then the comparison is a touch meaningless.

If your program can only benefit from four cores / eight threads, you'd be running it on an i7 920 and not on a 980X. So I'm quite happy to accept that the 2600K is an improvement on the 920, subject to only desiring dual channel ram / fewer pci-e lanes etc.

However anyone who bought a 980X (and isn't a fool) is using it for things which do benefit from the increased number of threads. So these same 980X owners won't want a i7-2600K, as it would be slower than their existing chip.

Things are more complicated as far as clock-for-clock and maximum achievable clockspeeds go, but off the top of my head I believe gulftown and sandy bridge clock to approximately the same speeds.

 

[Typhoon]

I wonder how many of those on Overclocker with a 980x use it for things which benifit from increased threads...

 

[Skyrocket]

I wonder how many of those on Overclocker with a 980x use it for things which benifit from increased threads...

0.01% Its more a epeen extension.

 

[Vertigo]

If i7-2600K outperforms the 980X in tasks which are not sufficiently well multi-threaded to benefit from six hyperthreaded cores (which I believe is the gist of your comparison), then the comparison is a touch meaningless.

The whole point is that so few applications or games are sufficiently well multi-threaded and optimised that the i7-2600X outperforms the 980X in 90% of applications.

If every application took full advantage of all six cores then I've no doubt the 980X would be faster in all of them. They don't and so it isn't.

If your program can only benefit from four cores / eight threads, you'd be running it on an i7 920 and not on a 980X.

So I'm quite happy to accept that the 2600K is an improvement on the 920, subject to only desiring dual channel ram / fewer pci-e lanes etc.

However anyone who bought a 980X (and isn't a fool) is using it for things which do benefit from the increased number of threads. So these same 980X owners won't want a i7-2600K, as it would be slower than their existing chip.

99% of people with a 980X have no need whatsoever for such a processor. As demonstrated by countless benchmarks, only seriously compute-intensive, multi-threaded and linearly scaling applications such as video encoding or rendering benefit from the additional cores. You seriously think everyone with a 980X performs enough of these tasks to warrant spending £800 on a processor?

You said "anyone who bought a 980X (and isn't a fool)". I'm afraid 99% of owners are indeed fools.

0.01% Its more a epeen extension.

Exactly.

 

[JGBR]

Well my 3dsx max 2011 usually 100% each core.... LOL

The bottom line is weither the new CPU's warrant an upgrade and i suspect for 960 - 980 users it won't be. Far wiser to wait till haswell.

 

[Shayper]

To be honest, the i5 2500k looks like the best bang for buck. It even overclocks higher than the 2600k (and please no one say that it might clock higher if you turn off hyperthreading )

 

[jayextreme]

if someone chooses i7 980X I don't think there is any reason not to upgrade to SB, since money is not their primary concern.

 

[Ade74]

To be honest, the i5 2500k looks like the best bang for buck. It even overclocks higher than the 2600k (and please no one say that it might clock higher if you turn off hyperthreading )

from the reviews i have seen they both seemed to clock the same, where did you see the 2500k clocking better please?

 

[3DSAM]

Going from a 980x to a 2600k is not an upgrade any way you cut it. Of course the 2600k beats it in poorly threaded apps, but poorly threaded apps are not the future.

 

[JPNUFC]

The Sandybridge-E will be the next step from the 1366 and I sure the 1155 sandbridge CPU's will perform better than most of the current platforms however I will not bother taking the upgrade this time as the 1366 platform has plenty of performance for what I need for now.

I made this mistake last time and wish I had kept my cash in my pocket and stuck to the core2quad I had before I upgraded to the i7 on release it's a great chip but the cost was not worth the benefit so I will wait until the next round to upgrade instead of needing to extend my E-penis by splashing out for the sake of it!!