Ivy fail

ssmacc · 24 Apr 2012 at 12:43

atheos said:
http://techreport.com/articles.x/22833/5

It seems from that report at least that 4.5 is reachable.

Indecision is killing me here! I may order the other parts and wait for more reviews on IB and then decide on the CPU

Coming from a Q9550 (@3.4), I think the IB is the one to get. However, if I had a SB I would not upgrade, wouldn't be tempted, but coming from an older platform it seems the one to get (notwithstanding price gauging), if prices are silly, I’ll be getting a 2600k / 2700k.

atheos · 24 Apr 2012 at 12:45

ssmacc said:
Coming from a Q9550 (@3.4), I think the IB is the one to get. However, if I had a SB I would not upgrade, wouldn't be tempted, but coming from an older platform it seems the one to get (notwithstanding price gauging), if prices are silly, I’ll be getting a 2600k / 2700k.

Good advice

the_director · 24 Apr 2012 at 12:46

@ smack I agree, if prices are reasonable then core 2 buyers like us would be silly not to go with latest tech.

kristmace · 24 Apr 2012 at 13:10

horrorwood said:
is there any benchmarks that compare it to the i7 920?

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/47?vs=551

Not a huge difference really, especially if your 920 is at 4Ghz.

Ethermaster · 24 Apr 2012 at 13:14

ssmacc said:
Coming from a Q9550 (@3.4), I think the IB is the one to get. However, if I had a SB I would not upgrade, wouldn't be tempted, but coming from an older platform it seems the one to get (notwithstanding price gauging), if prices are silly, I’ll be getting a 2600k / 2700k.

This ! Ivybridge is the one you want to jump to as quick as you can if you are on 775,1133,1156 or ANY AMD, if you already have Sandybridge stick with it as you WILL NOT see any real performance improvements! your better off upgrading to either Sandybridge-E or waiting for the next TICK .... Haswell

Ivybridge does support upto 2133Mhz RAM (and hold it there unlikey Sandybridge) so anyone buying Ivybridge and running stock should buy some nice fast stuff (e.g 1866Mhz) and you will see a nice perforance improvement over stock Sandybridge users.

Ivybridge isn't a fail people just a smaller version of Sandybridge so they could use more space for the iGPU and give it a huge boost. Ivybridge was designed with Intel Ultrabooks in mind remember which will not be running stand alone graphics cards so Intel needed to improve in this area.

Overclocking on Ivybridge can be done and I think for the Intel Core i7 3770k
a nice stable one would be around the 4.6Ghz mark with a decent cooler which is not to say considering this is new tech for Intel is really that bad, 22nm will always run hotter with bigger volts then 32nm that's a simple fact because thinner wall's in the processor = more heat saturation.

Hope this help's

lets just hope Ivybrigde prices aren't sky high like around the £300 mark for the Intel Core i7 3770K.

And for the people asking what the performance different is between their Intel 1133/1156 chip and Ivybridge any Intel Core i5/i7 Ivy or Sandy knocks the pants off them part from the bigger 980x the only chip that will give you more real world performance then this is the 2011 3930k or the 3960X

james_ati · 24 Apr 2012 at 13:15

kristmace said:
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/47?vs=551

Not a huge difference really, especially if your 920 is at 4Ghz.

Lol 50% difference in some cases and if you say 920 @4ghz then you must compare that with 3770k at 4.5ghz(which seems easy to reach).

coughs · 24 Apr 2012 at 13:50

Would IB be good in small form factors such as a shuttle since it produces less heat/power?

CAT-THE-FIFTH · 24 Apr 2012 at 13:51

The problem is that a Core i5 2500K is not only cheaper than a Core i5 3570K but also can use a cheaper cooler.

Unless you really need improved Quick Sync or need the faster IGP,the Core i5 2500K looks a better choice.

Also,power consumption under idle and low load conditions is not that much different with SB too and SB only consumes more power under heavy load.

SPCR does quite accurate power consumption tests and they have extensively tested the power consumption of the Core i7 3770K:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1259-page3.html

They have tested power consumption using both the IGP and discrete cards.

Toms Hardware also have done extensive power consumption tests using a range of applications too:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1259-page3.html

As an SFF fan,I am hoping the T and S series Core i5 and Core i7 CPUs will show the advantages of the 22NM finfets,ie,at lower voltages. These might be the more interesting IB parts for me.

opethdisciple · 24 Apr 2012 at 14:28

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
The problem is that a Core i5 2500K is not only cheaper than a Core i5 3570K but also can use a cheaper cooler.

Unless you really need improved Quick Sync or need the faster IGP,the Core i5 2500K looks a better choice.

Also,power consumption under idle and low load conditions is not that much different with SB too and SB only consumes more power under heavy load.

SPCR does quite accurate power consumption tests and they have extensively tested the power consumption of the Core i7 3770K:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1259-page3.html

They have tested power consumption using both the IGP and discrete cards.

Toms Hardware also have done extensive power consumption tests using a range of applications too:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1259-page3.html

As an SFF fan,I am hoping the T and S series Core i5 and Core i7 CPUs will show the advantages of the 22NM finfets,ie,at lower voltages. These might be the more interesting IB parts for me.

This is all true, but the lack of PCI-Ex 3 is quite a big problem. Even IF it makes no difference to single card set ups, by the time your going to pay hundereds of pounds on new hardware, it should support all the latest standards.

Energize · 24 Apr 2012 at 14:48

I think I'll pass on ivybridge, sandybridge seems to offer the same performance for less money while running cooler. No brainer.

Dervious · 24 Apr 2012 at 15:03

CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
The problem is that a Core i5 2500K is not only cheaper than a Core i5 3570K but also can use a cheaper cooler.

Unless you really need improved Quick Sync or need the faster IGP,the Core i5 2500K looks a better choice.

Also,power consumption under idle and low load conditions is not that much different with SB too and SB only consumes more power under heavy load.

SPCR does quite accurate power consumption tests and they have extensively tested the power consumption of the Core i7 3770K:

http://www.silentpcreview.com/article1259-page3.html

Two things put a little doubt in my mind, having just purchased an i5-2500K.

1. It's "old" technology.

2. It might fall in price in the coming weeks.

Plenty of things cancel out most of that doubt, most of which I`ve just read in the above article -

Hardly any performance difference. Probably cheaper (when IB launches). Proven technology. Not so much concern about cooling.

I suppose I wish I'd gone SB sooner, but my Phenom II was still a bit "new" when SB was launched. Maybe IB will suprise us when becomes available, but somehow I doubt it. SB may be "old hat" soon, but it'll be new to me, and I suspect it will see me well into the days of Haswell.

^

Looks like the previous poster has come to the same conclusion.

Krono5 · 24 Apr 2012 at 15:41

Ethermaster said:
This ! Ivybridge is the one you want to jump to as quick as you can if you are on 775,1133,1156 or ANY AMD, if you already have Sandybridge stick with it as you WILL NOT see any real performance improvements! your better off upgrading to either Sandybridge-E or waiting for the next TICK .... Haswell

Ivybridge does support upto 2133Mhz RAM (and hold it there unlikey Sandybridge) so anyone buying Ivybridge and running stock should buy some nice fast stuff (e.g 1866Mhz) and you will see a nice perforance improvement over stock Sandybridge users.

Ivybridge isn't a fail people just a smaller version of Sandybridge so they could use more space for the iGPU and give it a huge boost. Ivybridge was designed with Intel Ultrabooks in mind remember which will not be running stand alone graphics cards so Intel needed to improve in this area.

Overclocking on Ivybridge can be done and I think for the Intel Core i7 3770k
a nice stable one would be around the 4.6Ghz mark with a decent cooler which is not to say considering this is new tech for Intel is really that bad, 22nm will always run hotter with bigger volts then 32nm that's a simple fact because thinner wall's in the processor = more heat saturation.

Hope this help's lets just hope Ivybrigde prices aren't sky high like around the £300 mark for the Intel Core i7 3770K.

And for the people asking what the performance different is between their Intel 1133/1156 chip and Ivybridge any Intel Core i5/i7 Ivy or Sandy knocks the pants off them part from the bigger 980x the only chip that will give you more real world performance then this is the 2011 3930k or the 3960X

Faster memoy provides little benefit and the overclocking will hit a point where the temps will just **** the bed with a tiny voltage increase. So far this seems to be around the 4.5Ghz range so if you want to overclock as high as possible unless you have high end cooling like chilled water SB will clock better and therefore provide better performance.

At the moment it's a complete toss up between the two and the gap between the overclocks could be mitigated somewhat by a combination of faster memory, the 5-10% greater performance from IB and all the extra features like PIe 3.0 that very few will need within the next 3-4 years. But then it all comes down to price.

It's finely balanced like the 7970's/680's and you can't go too wrong with either tbh.

Krono5 · 24 Apr 2012 at 15:45

Since when did anyone care about power consumption? Unless you run your desktop off a battery it's meaningless as the £££'s saved over a year period would still be in single digits.

DaGooN · 24 Apr 2012 at 15:52

If anything, these IB have just made SB chips cost more than they should.
if the reaction over IB is the same world wide, retailers will milk SB chips as they to know that no OC will want a IB when you can get a SB chip that is more or less as good.

Don't be looking for 2500/26/700 chips to drop much unless on offer for short times.

Admiral Huddy · 24 Apr 2012 at 16:00

Krono5 said:
Since when did anyone care about power consumption? Unless you run your desktop off a battery it's meaningless as the £££'s saved over a year period would still be in single digits.

Lower TDP also means better headroom for potential overclocking. This is Intel's first go at both 22nm process and trigate transistors. I'm sure that as time progresses, the effectiveness of this technology will only improve.

DaGooN said:
if the reaction over IB is the same world wide, retailers will milk SB chips as they to know that no OC will want a IB when you can get a SB chip that is more or less as good.

An OC'd IB @ 4.8Ghz on air isn't to be sniffed at really. What kind of cooling is required for a2600k to run at that speed? I'm guessing a water cooled version should hit 5GHz without too much problem, although this remains to be seen.

Dervious · 24 Apr 2012 at 16:03

DaGooN said:
If anything, these IB have just made SB chips cost more than they should.
if the reaction over IB is the same world wide, retailers will milk SB chips as they to know that no OC will want a IB when you can get a SB chip that is more or less as good.

Don't be looking for 2500/26/700 chips to drop much unless on offer for short times.

I don't think SB(K) chips will drop much in price. I would think that most Ks are bought by enthusiasts who know their Celerons from their Phenoms. Unless unlocked IB chips can O/C consistently to reasonable levels, the unlocked SB will still be a desireable CPU. What makes matters "worse" is that there appears to be no real competition against Intel at the moment.

As Krono5 mentioned earlier, it appears that, on a performance level, you can't go far wrong with either IB or SB at the moment. What is quite unknown is how pricing is going to play out.

Martini1991 · 24 Apr 2012 at 16:06

Ivy isn't a fail, but it's also not a logical choice over a 2500k when you're overclocking for most people.

Admiral Huddy · 24 Apr 2012 at 16:10

Martini1991 said:
Ivy isn't a fail, but it's also not a logical choice over a 2500k when you're overclocking for most people.

..but all the IB reviews I've read today are overclocking using air. Surely there's more headroom with a watercooled system. Your 2500K for example, is watercooled but the reports i've read the 3750 can hit 5GHz on air.

Zeed · 24 Apr 2012 at 16:14

Well

Temperatures is exacly the reason why last Friday i got:
http://a7.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hpho...62091_100000175906083_87339869_29369677_n.jpg

Over weekend i got it to 5ghz stable with my water cooling.
Today i payd 12.5f for intels Overclocking warranty aka Tuning plan. When it kicks in i will see how far I can push my 2500k. And if it Fries after 1 year or something i wont give a flying **** cos will get new one

Ethermaster · 24 Apr 2012 at 16:19

Krono5 said:
Faster memoy provides little benefit and the overclocking will hit a point where the temps will just **** the bed with a tiny voltage increase. So far this seems to be around the 4.5Ghz range so if you want to overclock as high as possible unless you have high end cooling like chilled water SB will clock better and therefore provide better performance.

At the moment it's a complete toss up between the two and the gap between the overclocks could be mitigated somewhat by a combination of faster memory, the 5-10% greater performance from IB and all the extra features like PIe 3.0 that very few will need within the next 3-4 years. But then it all comes down to price.

It's finely balanced like the 7970's/680's and you can't go too wrong with either tbh.

Did you actually read my post

we came to the same poiny, i jusy listed it at the top of my post