Confused about this Sandybridge thing...

[Bluelion]

Hi Guys and Gals,

Intel's marketing strategy has me beat. I struggling to make head or tail or what is currently the best CPU for heavy duty graphics processing work, please could you help?

I'm currently running a Q6600 @ 3.0Ghz with 8Gb ram, and would like to improve the performance of raw photo manipulation. I was all set to pick up a nice little i7 950, load it up with 24Gb RAM and off we go.

Then Sandybridge hit the market, and I see many threads asking the same basic question: How does it compare?

From what I can tell, its not truly an i7 class of CPU. It should be an i5, with proper 6 and 8 core i7s coming out later in the year. However, if we look at:

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/CPU/2

in fact the 2600K beats everything hands down in the CPU intensive bits. But, its clocked higher - so its not a fair comparison. If you take a i7 950 and crank it up to the Sandybridge's 3.4Ghz, how would they compare?

Basically, is it worth keeping a tri-channel memory controller, or embrace the new chip, save some cash and make do with 16Gb RAM? I'm not keen to do a mad overclock I value stability and longevity over a bit of extra grunt (although I will using a water-cooled rig).

Last question - I assume if I don't intend to use the on-die GPU, there is absolutely no difference between the 2600 and 2600K except in cost?

Thanks for your time!

 

[Blue160]

The reviews I have read reckon only the six core 1366 i7's are ahead of the high end sandy bridge chips, and they cost mega money.

The main difference between the 2600 and the 2600k is the unlocked multiplier on the k which allows for overclocking. You cannot overclock the non k chips due to the new way the clock generators are linked.

 

[Bluelion]

Ah I hadn't spotted the unlocked multiplier. Thanks blue160.

 

[cmndr_andi]

In CPU heavy tasks the Sandy Bridge i7 is 10-20% faster at the same clockspeed (depending on app) than Bloomfield i7s (like the i7 950). Thats not to mention the higher stock clockspeed of sandy bridge and the ability to hit ~4.5GHz with air cooling.

As for memory performance, have a look at this article (all CPUs set to 3GHz).

 

[Bluelion]

That's a great review, thanks cmndr_andi. 2600k it is then Cheers all!

 

[pmc25]

Tbh, I'd wait for Bulldozer if you're doing heavily threaded stuff. But if you need to upgrade now and you're not going to overclock, the 2600(K) is a fairly safe bet. Platform longevity is likely to be poor, as is usually the case the with Intel these days.

 

[JonJ678]

I'm using a 4ghz 920 chip with 12gb of ram for computational work, but would change it for a 4ghz sandy bridge quite happily. I don't think it's worth upgrading, but if buying new it would be sandy bridge.

As it stands, I'm hoping to accumulate funds and move to a 980X. Whether that is an option depends mostly on whether you make a profit from graphical work or not, I believe most people would view £400 extra as a bad idea for a hobby.

 

[Blue160]

Tbh, I'd wait for Bulldozer if you're doing heavily threaded stuff.

And then when you've waited for Bulldozer you may as well wait for Ivy Bridge

 

[drunkenmaster]

And then when you've waited for Bulldozer you may as well wait for Ivy Bridge

Difference is Bulldozer should handily beat i5 sandy's in multithreaded stuff, and most importantly, for the same price, maybe even less. i7 setups will be a massive increase in price, ok the lowest end 6 cores won't be $1k, but they'll be $100-200 more than the 2600k, and the mobo's, quad channel memory, you're talking another £100 for a similarly specced mobo most likely.

Bulldozer should become and remain king of mainstream performance. £100 mobo and maybe a £200-250 octo core chip vs likely £350-450 hex core i7 + £200-300 mobo. Even then the hex cores might not easily beat bulldozer octo cores, the octo cores shouldn't be a contest but expect them to be £600-1000.


So the answer is less about time frame and more about budget. If you want cpu + mobo for under £500 its likely Bulldozer will be the fastest chips for the next year or two, and maybe 3 months away. If you can spend really anything you want, i7 Sandy's will be king, but cost you a lot more.

If its for business and making your living, cost shouldn't really matter, if of course you end up waiting a long time for stuff to finish before you can move on. If you're on a budget, Bulldozer looks very very tempting over Sandybridge.

Most boards that can take a Q6600 can take a pretty decent, higher clocked and further overclocked penryn which could be a short term inbetween step.

 

[CmdrTobs]

The reviews I have read reckon only the six core 1366 i7's are ahead of the high end sandy bridge chips, and they cost mega money.

The main difference between the 2600 and the 2600k is the unlocked multiplier on the k which allows for overclocking. You cannot overclock the non k chips due to the new way the clock generators are linked.

Don't forget K series lack vanderpool visualization imo to deliberately gimp small savy companies that use VM.

To OP

Q6600 is fine for now imo unless you really are noticing a problem. It's not time to jump on board if you don't have to and the Q6600 @ 3Ghz+ is 'not having to'.

If you want increased render performance the relatively low core count of intels ain't the way to. Sure you can hexa intel at a ripp off premium, but go dual Opteron C32 socket and get 12 real cores for hexacore intel money. That system *should* kick an intel hexcore all night and has confirmed bulldozer chips out this year with 8 Cores.

Hmmmmmm 16 3ghz cores cable of executing 32 integer threads simultaneously.... mobo with like 12+ dims..... for sub gulftown extreme money.