1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. 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.

    Dismiss Notice

Sandy Bridge or wait for Haswell?

Discussion in 'CPUs' started by core2core, 10 Dec 2010.

  1. core2core

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Dec 2010

    Posts: 119

    Location: UK

    Hi. :)

    At the moment, I have a Q6600, it's ok but is getting on a bit. I will be looking to upgrade at some point but i'm not in a rush to, unless it's a worthwhile upgrade.

    I don't really game, only a bit of emulation but I do a fair bit of video editing and some graphics, rendering and stuff.


    I was wondering if it's worth going for a sandybridge CPU or wait for Haswell in 2013?

    Anyone know if Haswell will support DDR4 or will we still be stuck on DDR3?

    What do you think?

    Thanks.
     
  2. r3loaded

    Gangster

    Joined: 20 Mar 2006

    Posts: 383

    Location: Manchester, UK

    Haswell is absolutely eons away in computing terms. Don't worry about it. Only upgrade your computer to SB if it's not performing the tasks you need it to.

    As for DDR4, I'd expect it to be widely available by the time Haswell drops by. However, this is purely conjecture - very little is known about Haswell so far, Intel have not confirmed any details or even whether they're currently developing it. Everything that we do know is on the wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell_(microarchitecture)
     
  3. garyfl

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 26 Jun 2010

    Posts: 2,118

    Location: west yorkshire.

    wow! didnt know about this, so much for the halt in how far we can shrink a die :p
     
  4. core2core

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Dec 2010

    Posts: 119

    Location: UK

    Thanks for the reply.

    I do see what you are saying.

    I normally only upgrade every 3 to 4 years, as I can't afford to buy a new PC every six months. My current PC will be 4 years old by next year.

    Computers do go out of date very quickly. Sandy bridge will be out of date in the next 10 months or so.

    So I skip a few generation and buy the best but most upto date.

    The thing is, i'm not even 100% sandy bridge supports things like usb3 or the next SATA.

    So if Haswell is not far round the corner and will be supporting these features more, then my money is better spent on that. Then it would need to last about 4 years, before I do the same again. :)
     
    Last edited: 11 Dec 2010
  5. core2core

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Dec 2010

    Posts: 119

    Location: UK

    Btw is this true about sandy bridge? It's from wiki.

    No way will i buy a CPU with that kind of feature. That will be used to spy on people and get there computers shut down illegally. That has all the potential for abuse by anyone.

    That is the sort of thing the US goverment would love, so it can shut down wikileaks.

    Edit Link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Bridge_(microarchitecture)
     
    Last edited: 11 Dec 2010
  6. core2core

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Dec 2010

    Posts: 119

    Location: UK

    With all you clever members on here, does no one know if it is true? :confused:

    If OCUK do reviews on the sandy bridge, then hopefully they can find out if that feature is, or is not on that CPU.

    I think if it is true, I will skip sandy bridge for Haswell. I may even go AMD if intel screw up.

    Back later to see if anyone knows. :)
     
  7. nightmare99

    Mobster

    Joined: 19 Oct 2006

    Posts: 3,682

    That is a chipset/mainboard feature which is called Intel Anti Theft Technology, it is not on the chip but will be launched in tandem with Sandy Bridge business platforms.

    Info here http://www.intel.com/technology/anti-theft/
     
  8. namnoc

    Hitman

    Joined: 21 Dec 2005

    Posts: 575

    Location: Felixstowe

    They ought to embed a few ounces of Semtex that can be remotely detonated. That would at least cut down on repeat crime.
     
  9. Rofflay

    Perma Banned

    Joined: 28 Nov 2006

    Posts: 5,746

    Location: N Ireland

    like mission impossible, you get a message that comes up saying this pc will self destruct in 5,4,3

    /jumps behind sofa
     
  10. core2core

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Dec 2010

    Posts: 119

    Location: UK

    I think the information on that link is ment for laptops and older technology, than the one going to be used on sandy bridge.

    I contacted intel over this but the woman on the phone was useless. I was advised to contact an intel partner, who has not got back to confirm or deny it.

    Well I have no reason to believe it's not true. I put this into google "Remote Kill Switch Added to Intel’s Newest Processor" and a lot of news about it.

    See here http://www.infowars.com/remote-kill-switch-added-to-intels-newest-processor/


    It's hardware based and looks like it can not be turned off. It looks like it's something to do with some USA bill that's being brought in.

    I think I'll give Sandy bridge a miss and even haswell, if it has the same feature.

    AMD could make a lot of money on the new bulldozer CPU at intel's expense. So long as they don't have anything like the kill switch on intel CPU's.

    I don't recommend anyone buy a intel processor with that feature.

    Looks like my next computer will be with a AMD bulldozer, or I will just keep what I have now.
     
    Last edited: 17 Dec 2010
  11. nightmare99

    Mobster

    Joined: 19 Oct 2006

    Posts: 3,682

    LOL no it is actually anti theft technology and will be controller by system administrators who can set conditions for a poison pill in case computers are stolen or laptops don't check back into the company domain in time.
     
  12. mmj_uk

    Caporegime

    Joined: 26 Dec 2003

    Posts: 25,600

    If this is true I'm not touching one with a bargepole, how long before a virus developer creates something to wipe peoples' hard drives or disable their £200 CPU?
     
  13. Dark_Angel

    Capodecina

    Joined: 12 May 2005

    Posts: 12,634

    I'm finding it hard to fight temptation and just buy now.

    For all I know, RAM prices could shoot up by the time of its release... :(
     
  14. Zairs

    Wise Guy

    Joined: 3 Jan 2010

    Posts: 1,872

    Location: Hailsham

    I know i wont buy a chip that can be disabled by a US C*c* or hacker
     
  15. bakes0310

    Capodecina

    Joined: 22 Oct 2004

    Posts: 12,898

    Looks like ill go amd again, i wont be upgrading till atleast 2013 anyway so now need to think about it yet.
     
  16. r3loaded

    Gangster

    Joined: 20 Mar 2006

    Posts: 383

    Location: Manchester, UK

    FUD alert anyone?

    First of all, this feature is only going to be in the business-oriented B and Q-series chipsets, and will be managed through Intel's vPro Technology by the sysadmin. Secondly, you physically need to be at the computer to enable vPro in the first place. Finally, the connection to the out-of-band system is heavily encrypted, so it's unlikely a rogue actor could access it without the password.

    That article doesn't even talk about the technology and how it works, it just briefly mentions the phrases "kill-switch" and "Sandy Bridge", then launches into a FUD-laced tirade about how the CIA is spying on everyone.

    Remember the pertinent point - the hardware needed for vPro doesn't even exist on the H65/P67 chipset that the vast majority of consumers will have.
     
  17. core2core

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Dec 2010

    Posts: 119

    Location: UK

    That is exactly my thinking.

    I called round some more intel partners but it's like banging your head against a brick wall. Some would not help, others did not know but one did say something about it.

    I was told that you would need some subscription service for this anti theft feature and you should be able to turn it off in the bios. The subscription service i was told about, seems to be backed up from this i found on the web.
    http://www.techzone360.com//topics/...ote-kill-switch-added-new-intel-processor.htm

    I am still not convinced just yet, as this could be abused or lead to far worse on future intel processors. Far as i'm concerned, this kill switch should not be on CPU's or motherboards for domestic end users.

    I would feel better if it was not used at all but should only be for business use.


    This situation is similar to the Chip-Tracking ID thing, that were going to be used on the old pentium 3 CPU's. This caused an outcry for privacy reasons and intel disabled it. The same could happen again with sandy bridge.
    See here http://www.wired.com/politics/law/news/2000/04/35950

    Found this. Maybe of interest.
    http://communities.intel.com/docs/DOC-4463

    I will be asking some of you who buy the sandy bridge, in the new year, if any of this is on your new computer. Plus if you can disable it.
     
    Last edited: 17 Dec 2010
  18. nightmare99

    Mobster

    Joined: 19 Oct 2006

    Posts: 3,682

    You are talking to some on here already. Please stop with this FUD.

    Did you even read what this guy posted? Please read his post and take it onboard as it is spot on correct.
     
  19. core2core

    Gangster

    Joined: 7 Dec 2010

    Posts: 119

    Location: UK

    I'm sorry but whats FUD about calling round some intel partners? Thats exactly what I did. If You think that is FUD, then that is your problem.

    Yes i did read it but i had already done some finding out as in my last post. So I thought it best I report my findings.

    At the end of the day, information is here for people to see but i'm sure they can make up their own minds.
     
    Last edited: 18 Dec 2010
  20. nightmare99

    Mobster

    Joined: 19 Oct 2006

    Posts: 3,682

    The information that r3loaded posted is 100% correct.

    You seem to be under the impression that anybody with a Sandy Bridge CPU will be exposed to having thier PC locked when this is clearly not the case.

    You do realize that this technology is already available on the current range of mobile 2010 Core systems? proper info is here http://antitheft.intel.com/how-it-works.aspx