• 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.

Did Intel Make A Big Mistake With sandy Bridge?

I remember getting my 2500k and it doing 4.5ghz straight away with ease and 5ghz when pushing it on air, my 3770k is sitting at 4.6ghz but that's about the max without chucking way more volts at it and risk going over 70c in some games, this is on a H110 cooler as well.

I was going to go for a 5820k build but the DDR4 prices are putting me off for now. I'll probably wait for Skylake.
 
I can do that later.

It says 3.3Ghz because GB reads the windows properties spec. The clock speed was benched at 4.5. :)
 
Last edited:
stuie said:
Maybe intel are as frustrated as we are?

The problem might actually be technology limitations. Moores law is slowly coming to an end dropping down silicone size is becoming harder and harder and the new technology to do away with silicone limitations just isnt there yet. Its not just an intel problem look at the gfx card segment with nvidia and amd year on year minimal performance gains everyone is hoping 20/16 nm is going to bring in big performance improvements im not convinced. Personally i dont think its just these big companies dragging their heels it is a real problem similar to the car industry and oil issues the last 30 years have skyrocketed performance and efficiency in just about every manufacturing sector we have but theres only so much you can do with what is 100 year old tech something new needs to come along unfortunately it isnt there yet, in the meantime before the future tech comes along weve just got to deal with minimal gains

Hand on heart do you really think that if someone like intel could break into bio mech tech or carbon nano cpus that could smash everything then they wouldn't? Of cause they would theyd get it out there get a patent on it and run the next 100 years of their company doing nothing but selling royalties as much as we like to think big companies drag their heels it would be business suicide to do so
Click to expand...

Intel have had 18 core Xeons released for quite a while now.

They could easily upgrade future I5's to 6core parts, and i7's to 8 core parts, but there is no incentive for them to do so.

Intel have 75-80% of the desktop market. Their current offerings will continue to sell like hotcakes, as demonstrated by their last quarterly earnings showing an increase in profit for just the desktop segment.

If AMD had a competitive CPU, Intel would have made 6 and 8 core CPU's mainstream already.
 
My 2500k was no better clocker than my 3770k.

In fact the voltage required to run my 2500k @ 4.6ghz was higher relatively to what I need to do the same on my 3770k.

The 3770k does run warmer though and I have 1 core that can be 15c hotter than the lowest.
 
If you make good product like core 2 duo or quad people will keep it for long time due to performance, if you getting very little increase you will go through 3 intels products :p look at Apple's strategy :p mistake is us buying their product with only 15% performance increase
 
Morfinel said:
If you make good product like core 2 duo or quad people will keep it for long time due to performance, if you getting very little increase you will go through 3 intels products :p look at Apple's strategy :p mistake is us buying their product with only 15% performance increase
Click to expand...

True. I had my Q6600 for over six years, served me well. Only just replaced with a Xeon 5650 which I'm well impressed with. Can't see me replacing this for another good few years.
 
Justintime said:
Been holding my breath since Conroe for an AMD answer.. i think i died a few years back :(
Click to expand...

The problem is, that Intel have been walking the race for so long now that if AMD did manage to launch something unprecedented and catch up, Intel would simply take the breaks off and disappear into the horizon.

Lets be honest here, if AMD boosts their IPC to Sandy Bridge levels or higher, then intel is still faster per core and can answer with more cores. If AMD try and push even more cores, then Intel is still faster per core and can answer with more cores.

In order to compete in the high end AMD would have to release a ~5GHz chip with at least 8-10 cores and 20-25% faster IPC than their current flagship and they would have to do it for <£200, or Intel could answer immediately and render it obsolete. I don't see that happening.
 
Morfinel said:
If you make good product like core 2 duo or quad people will keep it for long time due to performance, if you getting very little increase you will go through 3 intels products :p look at Apple's strategy :p mistake is us buying their product with only 15% performance increase
Click to expand...

I kept my q9550 for 6 years before moving on to my current second hand setup, it was that good a chip
 
Intel can't actually "progress" till AMD do.

What's the next logical step for Intel?

Intel could keep the Pentiums as they are (Or make them 2C 4T)
The i3 as we know it becomes a 4 core 4 T chip and AMD becomes redundant?
The i5 becomes a 4C 8T. There goes AMD's high threading advantage.
The i7 (4770K etc) becomes 6 Core.

Where would an AMD FX CPU fit in that?
 
Martini1991 said:
Intel can't actually "progress" till AMD do.

What's the next logical step for Intel?

Intel could keep the Pentiums as they are (Or make them 2C 4T)
The i3 as we know it becomes a 4 core 4 T chip and AMD becomes redundant?
The i5 becomes a 4C 8T. There goes AMD's high threading advantage.
The i7 (4770K etc) becomes 6 Core.

Where would an AMD FX CPU fit in that?
Click to expand...

In the bin, where it belongs :D
 
Martini1991 said:
Intel can't actually "progress" till AMD do.

What's the next logical step for Intel?

Intel could keep the Pentiums as they are (Or make them 2C 4T)
The i3 as we know it becomes a 4 core 4 T chip and AMD becomes redundant?
The i5 becomes a 4C 8T. There goes AMD's high threading advantage.
The i7 (4770K etc) becomes 6 Core.

Where would an AMD FX CPU fit in that?
Click to expand...



The next logical step is cpu-gpu compute, Larabee take VI.
On another note there's been a recent lot of shout from Amd about HSA,
:p
 
Martini1991 said:
All I hear are "buzzwords" to be honest.
It's basically just hardware acceleration with a fancy spin as far as I can see it.
Click to expand...

Agreed. To be fair though I wouldn't be happy with 10% increases every generation so instead of buzzwords your talking die shrink which doesn't coax most people to buy either.

Taking Davedree's post along - the GPU's can be utilised better when developers focus and when dx12 is mainstream are you going to need to upgrade from a good clocking SB?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom