• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Am i the only one not disappointed by IB?

Is it pretty much the norm now that air coolers get SB to 4.8? because the most common OC I seem to see is 4.5/4.6 which would put a 4.5 ivy ahead of that, but everyone mentions 4.8/5 as if it's the norm now, but I really dont see that many 5ghz SB setups on air coolers, but maybe as the process matured the clocks got higher and higher? i'm interested in Ivy so that'd be nice to know :)
 
AssaTM said:
Is it pretty much the norm now that air coolers get SB to 4.8? because the most common OC I seem to see is 4.5/4.6 which would put a 4.5 ivy ahead of that, but everyone mentions 4.8/5 as if it's the norm now, but I really dont see that many 5ghz SB setups on air coolers, but maybe as the process matured the clocks got higher and higher? i'm interested in Ivy so that'd be nice to know :)
Click to expand...

A Hyper 412s will get it to 5Ghz at SB thermal limit, It will run fine @ 4.8Ghz

That's a £30 CPU cooler.

[Edit] here is a 2500K @ 4.7Ghz with a 46c Delta on a 412s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kP7k9f5tWuA
 
Last edited:
:cool: ...still need FAR too many post's required to visit the members forum to buy a second hand i5 2500k when the enthusiasts buy IVY ...so I'm watching the retail price :D with a keen enthusiasm and waiting to compare with an IVY!
 
humbug said:
For a new build i would still go sandy, 4.8 - 5Ghz on an inexpensive cooler, less heat and pretty much the same performance for what will no doubt be less money.

Its a no brainer to me.
Click to expand...

It wasn't quite a "no brainer" to me, but it was not too difficult a decision.

For -

1. I got a brand new i5-2500K for less than £150.

2. I spent £26 on a decent air cooler, which should easily keep the thing cool when OCing.

3. It's proven technology.

Against -

1. It's "old" technology.

2. It's a bit slower at the same clock speed.

3. It uses more power.

4. I won't get PCIe 3.0.

In summary......

I got CPU + decent cooling for £170. It will hopefully be a big step up from my existing AMD kit. I won't be needing PCIe 3.0 during the lifetime of this setup, and I think I can live with losing out on ~ 5-10% performance, and the extra 20 watts(?) that it will require to feed it.

I know that there is a chance that I might get more performance from an IB (if it overclocks better than I expect), but the CPU would almost certainly cost more, and I would probably choose a slightly more expensive cooling option. I'm guessing that IB chips will turn out to be excellent CPUs, especially after Intel have updated them later in the year. They may even end up being cheaper than current SB chips. The problem is that waiting a few more months will take us ever closer to the next big thing, Haswell, so because I'm a latecomer to Intel/Skt1155/SB, I feel that the potential performance increase of IB is not worth waiting/paying for.
 
What i see is its only people who already have a decent sandy bridge who are missing the ivybridge and its us people who has a q6600 or there abouts who are getting the ivybridge. But i emailed oc yesterday asking if they would be selling new build pc as soon as ivy bridge is released and they said. We will be selling computers with the IvyBridge Processors however we may not sell them immediately (we may need time to perfect the oveclocking of the CPU's before we can put them on the market.)
 
I've waited months to upgrade, so I don't know why I'm getting so impatient with only a few days to go :D :D
 
Last edited:
Ive waited over a year as people keep saying. I wouldnt buy a new one yet this and thats coming out soon and as soon as this and that comes out they say. I would wait for this now.lol
 
humbug said:
For a new build i would still go sandy, 4.8 - 5Ghz on an inexpensive cooler, less heat and pretty much the same performance for what will no doubt be less money.

Its a no brainer to me.
Click to expand...

Problem is most people don't get 4.8-5ghz on inexpensive coolers for 24/7 operation. Those chips are the exception not the rule. If 4.8ghz was certain don't you think ocuk would sell them like that in bundles?

The real choice imo is starting to look like between a pretty certain 4.5ghz on either chip vs the *chance* of better performance if by chance you get a good SB chip capable of over 4.9ghz (IB as is 10% faster clock-for-clock).
 
covenantuk said:
Problem is most people don't get 4.8-5ghz on inexpensive coolers for 24/7 operation. Those chips are the exception not the rule. If 4.8ghz was certain don't you think ocuk would sell them like that in bundles?

The real choice imo is starting to look like between a pretty certain 4.5ghz on either chip vs the *chance* of better performance if by chance you get a good SB chip capable of over 4.9ghz (IB as is 10% faster clock-for-clock).
Click to expand...

10% clock for clock? that's an exaggeration, its 5% with a higher clock :)

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4..._ud5h_intel_z77_and_core_i7_3770k/index1.html

http://www.overclockers.com/intel-i7-3770k-ivy-bridge-cpu-review/

Look, power consumption is identical bar 2 system watts, at load IB is 10% hotter than SB, the only real advantage is IGP, and if its IGP performance your looking for you should be looking at Trinity APU's as they have as near as makes no difference double the IGP performance.

If it turns out the same money then it is a choice over SB (if you don't already have SB) if its more expensive, forget it.... (and maybe Intel are listening)

Ivy Bridge is Sandy Bridge DIE shrunk with updated PCIe and Integrated Graphics, nothing more. Even in IPC performance aspects and behavior they are almost identical twins. (which one of you is Sandy?) It was never intended to be anything more.
 
Last edited:
^^^

Those power consumption figures look very dodgy.


I think this is a very good review to read, shows 5ghz power consumption as well (likely best overclock for both chips). They used a Be Quiet! Dark Rock Pro.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/1

-----3570k@stock ------- 2500k@stock ----- 3570k@5ghz ------ 2500k@5ghz

idle/load ---- 97/161 ---- 114/162 ---- 119/267 ------ 131/311
 
Last edited:
anyon said:
^^^

Those power consumption figures look very dodgy.


I think this is a very good review to read, shows 5ghz power consumption as well (likely best overclock for both chips). They used a Be Quiet! Dark Rock Pro.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/2012/04/23/intel-core-i7-3770k-review/1

-----3570k@stock ------- 2500k@stock ----- 3570k@5ghz ------ 2500k@5ghz

idle/load ---- 97/161 ---- 114/162 ---- 119/267 ------ 131/311
Click to expand...

I trust Toms Hardware. :)

3770K: 140w vs 2700K: 146w

How Much Faster Is Core i7-3770K Than -2700K? answer 3.7% overall

Nothing like the Bulldozer disaster, but i'm not impressed.

If i was going to replace my Thuban now it would be a SB unless IB is just as cheap.
 
Last edited:
It's a bit meh really. A 5-10% performance boost clock for clock and slightly poorer overclocking pretty much cancel each other out and you end up with something no better than Sandy Bridge. Yeh it's fine if you're building a new PC or upgrading from something ancient, but you'd have to be clinically insane to upgrade from SB :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom