• 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.

SB-E 3820 Overclocking guide.

Associate
Joined
5 Nov 2011
Posts
403
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5276/intel-core-i7-3820-review-285-quadcore-sandy-bridge-e

4.63Ghz overclock on a semi-locked chip is quite impressive. I've been thinking of updating to SB-E, but with 6-core CPUs I found to be too expensive.

I'm very impressed by this chip which is a fair bit quicker than the 2500/2600K in gaming due to the larger 10MB cache, and it costs less than a 2600K according to Anandtech.

This seems a far more viable option compared to Ivybridge which is lower specced. (smaller cache etc)

Also going SB-E means if you want to get some crazy CPU's (IB-E) later down the road then that options open!
 
I'm very impressed by this chip which is a fair bit quicker than the 2500/2600K in gaming due to the larger 10MB cache, and it costs less than a 2600K according to Anandtech.

How do you work that one out?

Based on the link you posted at 3.6GHz stock speed there's very little difference between it and a 3.3GHz i5-2500K and a 3.4GHz i7-2600K.

All 3 will overclock to 4.6GHz so if overclocking makes any difference the i5-2500K and i7-2600K will make up for any small deficit due to the higher percentage overclock.
 
How do you work that one out?

Based on the link you posted at 3.6GHz stock speed there's very little difference between it and a 3.3GHz i5-2500K and a 3.4GHz i7-2600K.

All 3 will overclock to 4.6GHz so if overclocking makes any difference the i5-2500K and i7-2600K will make up for any small deficit due to the higher percentage overclock.

Greater cache could be useful though, and it is slightly faster in games compared to the 2600K at stock, and I can't see why that trend wouldn't continue at OC.

Also you get to reap the benefits of X79, and its cheaper than outgoing SB and no doubt cheaper than IB.
 
I see three reasons why you'd want the Core i7 3820:

1. You need PCIe 3.0 today and/or you need more PCIe lanes than a Core i7 2600K can provide,

2. You need tons of memory bandwidth for a particular application,

3. You want a 2600K but you need a platform that can support more memory (32GB+).

*Shamelessly ripped from Anand*
 
Yeah, but they will all overclock to 4.6GHz, which as Surveyor points out is a bigger overclock on the i5 and i7-2600K. What small advantage in a few of the games (and it wasn't quicker in all of them by the way) the 3820 had at stock would I suspect would be more than overturned by the bigger overclock on the other two. Also any money you save on the 3820 is going to be spent on a more expensive motherboard.
 
Greater cache could be useful though, and it is slightly faster in games compared to the 2600K at stock, and I can't see why that trend wouldn't continue at OC.

Also you get to reap the benefits of X79, and its cheaper than outgoing SB and no doubt cheaper than IB.

I can't agree with you, certainly as far as you addressed your comment to gaming performance.

It gives marginally better performance than a 3.3GHz i5-2500K in 7 out of the 10 tests and only marginally beats the 3.4GHz i7-2600K in 5 out of the 10 tests.

If you overclock all the chips to 4.6GHz then that's a 27.8% increase for the i7-3820, 39.4% increase for the i5-2500K and 35.3% increase for the i7-2600K.

At stock speeds there's hardly any difference and if all the chips were tested at 4.6GHz there'd be even less.
 
Actually I'll take that back, the datasheet says:-

sbet.jpg
 
yes i have read somewhere that x79 boards are pci-e 3.0 but they have not been verified, so they cannot state the pci-e 3.0 support on the labelling. im sure someone here will correct me if im wrong.
 
My x79 sabertooth claims to be PCI-E 3 ready...

taken from Anandtech..

At the launch of Intel's LGA-2011 based Sandy Bridge E CPU we finally had a platform capable of supporting PCI Express 3.0, but we lacked GPUs to test it with. That all changed this past week as we worked on our review of the Radeon HD 7970, the world's first 28nm GPU with support for PCIe 3.0.
The move to PCIe 3.0 increases per-lane bandwidth from 500MB/s to 1GB/s. For a x16 slot that means doubling bandwidth from 8GB/s under PCIe 2.1 to 16GB/s with PCIe 3.0. As we've seen in earlier reviews and our own internal tests, there's hardly any difference between PCIe 2.1 x8 and x16 for modern day GPUs. The extra bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 wasn't expected to make any tangible difference in gaming performance and in our 7970 tests, it didn't.
Why implement PCIe 3.0 at all then? For GPU compute. Improving bandwidth and latency between the CPU and the GPU are both key to building a high performance heterogenous computing solution. While good GPU compute benchmarks on the desktop are still hard to come by, we did find one that showed a real improvement from PCIe 3.0 support on the 7970: AMD's AES Encrypt/Decrypt sample application.
Simply enabling PCIe 3.0 on our EVGA X79 SLI motherboard (EVGA provided us with a BIOS that allowed us to toggle PCIe 3.0 mode on/off) resulted in a 9% increase in performance on the Radeon HD 7970. This tells us two things: 1) You can indeed get PCIe 3.0 working on SNB-E/X79, at least with a Radeon HD 7970, and 2) PCIe 3.0 will likely be useful for GPU compute applications, although not so much for gaming anytime soon.


http://www.anandtech.com/show/5264/sandy-bridge-e-x79-pcie-30-it-works
 
decent SLI support is one reason, the other advantage of an SB-E system is that it will have a better upgrade path for longer than going with a SB system now

pcie-3.0 ready Z68 boards are not far off the cheaper X79 boards which are not just pcie3.0 ready but with SB-E actually DO support pcie3.0 out of the box
 
Last edited:
If an R4E Gene comes out soon I'll get one of those and a 3820. Would be pretty sweet to watercool :D
 
Back
Top Bottom