Gulftown vs. Sandy Bridge or wait for Ivy Bridge?

[jorgeireyes]

Hello,

I'm trying to build a solid gaming rig which I've saved for a couple of years now but the fall of the SB and the early introduction of IB has me at somewhat of a question mark. I was prompt to buy the 990X Gulftown in replacement of the SB 2600K that I returned due to recall but now find myself in the eve of the Ivy Bridges introduction. My current setup is this:

2 PNY XR8 580 GTX nVidia GeForce Cards
1200 Corsair Gold 80+ Power Supply
LG 12X Blu-ray/ DVD RW Drive
HP DVDRW 24X
Full ATX Tower
Corsair H70 Liquid Cooling

What should I do? Should I buy the 990X or wait for the fixed Sandy Bridge or just wait for the Ivy Bridge?

 

[Chad Boga]

As a gaming rig I would definitely choose Sandy Bridge over the 990x, and you probably only have 6 more weeks to wait for it to be available.

The 2600K is faster for gaming and a hell of a lot cheaper.

Ivy Bridge won't be out till Q1 2012 at the earliest.

 

[jorgeireyes]

Yeah, plus you get the price difference but I'm at a stalemate. Supposedly the Sandy Bridge processor was due out soon right? Or is the 2600K the top processor for the SB lineup before an extreme edition?

 

[Leaps-from-Shadows]

As far as I know, the 2600K is the top mainstream Sandy Bridge version. Sandy Bridge E (includes regular and Extreme) in LGA2011 packaging is due out before the end of the year.

Only one question determines my advice to you: Are you using a multi-monitor setup with huge resolution like 5760x1200, or are you using a single monitor?

If multi-monitor, get Gulftown + X58 platform.

If single-monitor, get Sandy Bridge + Cougar Point.

The X58 platform pulls ahead at extreme resolutions due to having full PCIe bandwidth to both graphics cards. At regular resolutions like 2560x1200 the PCIe bandwidth isn't the limiting factor, so I recommend Sandy Bridge.

 

[enzo matrix]

As far as I know, the 2600K is the top mainstream Sandy Bridge version. Sandy Bridge E (includes regular and Extreme) in LGA2011 packaging is due out before the end of the year.

Only one question determines my advice to you: Are you using a multi-monitor setup with huge resolution like 5760x1200, or are you using a single monitor?

If multi-monitor, get Gulftown + X58 platform.

If single-monitor, get Sandy Bridge + Cougar Point.

The X58 platform pulls ahead at extreme resolutions due to having full PCIe bandwidth to both graphics cards. At regular resolutions like 2560x1200 the PCIe bandwidth isn't the limiting factor, so I recommend Sandy Bridge.

Even in those situations, I can't see it possibly having more than a 1% performance difference.

 

[jorgeireyes]

As far as I know, the 2600K is the top mainstream Sandy Bridge version. Sandy Bridge E (includes regular and Extreme) in LGA2011 packaging is due out before the end of the year.

Only one question determines my advice to you: Are you using a multi-monitor setup with huge resolution like 5760x1200, or are you using a single monitor?

If multi-monitor, get Gulftown + X58 platform.

If single-monitor, get Sandy Bridge + Cougar Point.

The X58 platform pulls ahead at extreme resolutions due to having full PCIe bandwidth to both graphics cards. At regular resolutions like 2560x1200 the PCIe bandwidth isn't the limiting factor, so I recommend Sandy Bridge.

I have three 23' DELL LED monitors on standby due to my 2 PNY nVidia 580GTX's. I want to avoid bottleneck on the CPU. I was recommended the SB to achieve the OC and help with the bottleneck that might happen on the 980X.

 

[enzo matrix]

I have three 23' DELL LED monitors on standby due to my 2 PNY nVidia 580GTX's. I want to avoid bottleneck on the CPU. I was recommended the SB to achieve the OC and help with the bottleneck that might happen on the 980X.

I doubt you will have a bottleneck in most games at that resolution. CPU load decreases with increased resolution.

 

[jorgeireyes]

I doubt you will have a bottleneck in most games at that resolution. CPU load decreases with increased resolution.

Yep. But then again I want to have the CPU future-proof, especially for gaming. So I'm assuming SB would be better? I do a lot of video and media creation but have a MacBook Pro for that. That's the main reason that the 980X for those types of things doesn't worry me so much. I guess it comes down to 980X or 2600K and they're OCs?

 

[enzo matrix]

Yep. But then again I want to have the CPU future-proof, especially for gaming. So I'm assuming SB would be better? I do a lot of video and media creation but have a MacBook Pro for that. That's the main reason that the 980X for those types of things doesn't worry me so much. I guess it comes down to 980X or 2600K and they're OCs?

It's kinda like the i5 760 vs Phenom IIx6 1090t. The 760 performs better in a lot of cases even though it lacks the additional cores.

As for future-proofing, what would you rather have today? In the future?

An Athlon 7750 2.7GHz dual core and $50 extra cash on hand now or a phenom x3 8750 2.4GHz?
A core i7 2600k 4 core with better performing cores and $700 on hand to pay for a processor better than anything out now? or a 990X with lesser cores but two additional ones and $700 less?

I may have become a bit too opinionated but that is my opinion on value and so called "future proofing". What's more future proof? A 980X? or $700?

The simple answer to "future proofing" is to buy the best. But honestly, by the time you need the extra "power" in the future, either system will be weak by modern standards and the price difference between them will be more in line with the performance between them, ie, relatively little. By the time you need 6 cores, your i7 990X will be insufficient in core speed. Look at the phenom x4 from 2007 (The 9650 is a later model but equal to the 9600 released in 2007) vs a modern Phenom IIx2 565BE (not even the best):
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/23?vs=204

In gaming today, I would rather have the phenom IIx2 over the Phenom x4. Why? Because the phenom is too weak per core. Games that can use the extra cores still won't run well because they need more power. And older 1-2 threaded games like Crysis would just suck on the phenom x4

Sorry for all the AMD examples. I'm just more familiar with their model numbers and release history.

i7 sandy vs 980x
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/142?vs=287

i5 760 vs phenom IIx6
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/146?vs=191

 

[jorgeireyes]

It's kinda like the i5 760 vs Phenom IIx6 1090t. The 760 performs better in a lot of cases even though it lacks the additional cores.

As for future-proofing, what would you rather have today? In the future?

An Athlon 7750 2.7GHz dual core and $50 extra cash on hand now or a phenom x3 8750 2.4GHz?
A core i7 2600k 4 core with better performing cores and $700 on hand to pay for a processor better than anything out now? or a 990X with lesser cores but two additional ones and $700 less?

I may have become a bit too opinionated but that is my opinion on value and so called "future proofing". What's more future proof? A 980X? or $700?

The simple answer to "future proofing" is to buy the best. But honestly, by the time you need the extra "power" in the future, either system will be weak by modern standards and the price difference between them will be more in line with the performance between them, ie, relatively little. By the time you need 6 cores, your i7 990X will be insufficient in core speed. Look at the phenom x4 from 2007 (The 9650 is a later model but equal to the 9600 released in 2007) vs a modern Phenom IIx2 565BE (not even the best):
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/23?vs=204

In gaming today, I would rather have the phenom IIx2 over the Phenom x4. Why? Because the phenom is too weak per core. Games that can use the extra cores still won't run well because they need more power. And older 1-2 threaded games like Crysis would just suck on the phenom x4

Sorry for all the AMD examples. I'm just more familiar with their model numbers and release history.

i7 sandy vs 980x
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/142?vs=287

i5 760 vs phenom IIx6
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/146?vs=191

You're good though. I think the same way and agree with you. Plus the fact that cashing out $1000.00 is hard at least for most of us. My assumption that SB can reach on air 5.0GHZ through testing would lead me to believe that properly OC it could run "SAFER" and possibly faster. Though I still have to wait a month and a half for it. The 990X ain't bad either but the SB has 8 cores vs the 980X's 6 right?

 

[wribbs]

SB has 4 cores, i7 has hyperthreading which can run 2 threads per core.
2600K - 4core 8thread
980X - 6core 12thread
Compare

 

[jorgeireyes]

SB has 4 cores, i7 has hyperthreading which can run 2 threads per core.
2600K - 4core 8thread
980X - 6core 12thread
Compare

My bad. Thanks!

 

[Wish I Was Wealthy]

Hello,

I'm trying to build a solid gaming rig which I've saved for a couple of years now but the fall of the SB and the early introduction of IB has me at somewhat of a question mark. I was prompt to buy the 990X Gulftown in replacement of the SB 2600K that I returned due to recall but now find myself in the eve of the Ivy Bridges introduction. My current setup is this:

2 PNY XR8 580 GTX nVidia GeForce Cards
1200 Corsair Gold 80+ Power Supply
LG 12X Blu-ray/ DVD RW Drive
HP DVDRW 24X
Full ATX Tower
Corsair H70 Liquid Cooling

What should I do? Should I buy the 990X or wait for the fixed Sandy Bridge or just wait for the Ivy Bridge?

Hi jorgeireyes ...If you got the money you can go for the 990X gulftown,but do not forget that soon there is a new LGA 1366 socket pinset number processor coming out at 3.46 GHz & it is extreme & will be unlocked & is for the X58 chipset ...Also if you go for the ivy bridge gear,do not forget that it also has the same LGA 1155 socket pinset number like the sandy bridge processors have ...So if you want to also you can buy the P67 chipset based mainboard when they get repaired & a sandy bridge & later on upgrade to the ivy bridge ...

 

[saaiello]

Hi jorgeireyes ...If you got the money you can go for the 990X gulftown,but do not forget that soon there is a new LGA 1366 socket pinset number processor coming out at 3.46 GHz & it is extreme & will be unlocked & is for the X58 chipset ...Also if you go for the ivy bridge gear,do not forget that it also has the same LGA 1155 socket pinset number like the sandy bridge processors have ...So if you want to also you can buy the P67 chipset based mainboard when they get repaired & a sandy bridge & later on upgrade to the ivy bridge ...

Ivy bridge will be in the 1155 package, but it will not be compatible with cougar point chipsets. You will still need a new board. Even the Panther point PCH chipset is pin compatible with Cougar Point chipset of Sandy Bridge, but again this might help board manufactures to make boards faster, but we will still need to buy a new board for Ivy Bridge.

@Wish I was Wealthy Please stop giving bad info I have seen you in alot of threads giving bad information I think somebody needs to stop focusing on the smilies and get your facts straight before posting.

 

[Leaps-from-Shadows]

Why would they make it with the same socket but not actually compatible? That would be exceedingly confusing to customers and stupid of Intel. I don't believe that they are that dumb.

Links to the "Ivy Bridge Socket H2/1155 but not compatible with Cougar Point" info please.

 

[binoyski]

Will the IB X68 be in LGA 1155 or LGA 2011.

 

[saaiello]

Why would they make it with the same socket but not actually compatible? That would be exceedingly confusing to customers and stupid of Intel. I don't believe that they are that dumb.

Links to the "Ivy Bridge Socket H2/1155 but not compatible with Cougar Point" info please.

It will be backwards compatible with sandy bridge, but to support the new 22nm processor a new chipset will be needed.


http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/21621-ivy-bridge-22nm-sticks-with-socket-1155

 

[amnotanoobie]

Why would they make it with the same socket but not actually compatible? That would be exceedingly confusing to customers and stupid of Intel. I don't believe that they are that dumb.

Links to the "Ivy Bridge Socket H2/1155 but not compatible with Cougar Point" info please.

Remember the Socket 478 Canterwood barrier, Or the LGA775 Core 2-Pentium D barrier, or LGA775 Core2 65m-45nm barrier?

Intel has been doing this practice for a very long time. They do make the old processors compatible with the newer boards, but newer processors usually require new boards.

* They aren't dumb, they are just being Intel as they have been

 

[saaiello]

Remember the Socket 478 Canterwood barrier, Or the LGA775 Core 2-Pentium D barrier, or LGA775 Core2 65m-45nm barrier?

Intel has been doing this practice for a very long time. They do make the old processors compatible with the newer boards, but newer processors usually require new boards.

* They aren't dumb, they are just being Intel as they have been

Its not Intel just trying to bleed us dry its the fact that to evolve there must be change. There will never be progress without change no matter how small of a change it is there will have to be new chipsets to accommodate them.

 

[saaiello]

I am an Electronic Engineering student, but seriously it does not take an engineer to figure that out. Its so ignorant that people think they should get the latest and greatest, but not have to pay for it.

 

[amnotanoobie]

I am an Electronic Engineering student, but seriously it does not take an engineer to figure that out. Its so ignorant that people think they should get the latest and greatest, but not have to pay for it.

Intel makes a lot of money selling its chipsets along with its processors, AMD doesn't have this luxury. It doesn't take an engineer to figure out that making more money is good.

What I am impressed with AMD's chip designers is that they are able to make designs that are backwards compatible yet contain new features and run faster. It's a heck of a lot easier to work with Greenfield projects (Intel) rather than making things backwards compatible (AMD).

Though AMD does also change sockets when it is really really needed. They changed sockets when they added the memory controller to the processor, switched from DDR to DDR2, and DDR2 to DDR3.

 

[saaiello]

Intel makes a lot of money selling its chipsets along with its processors, AMD doesn't have this luxury. It doesn't take an engineer to figure out that making more money is good.

What I am impressed with AMD's chip designers is that they are able to make designs that are backwards compatible yet contain new features and run faster. It's a heck of a lot easier to work with Greenfield projects (Intel) rather than making things backwards compatible (AMD).

Though AMD does also change sockets when it is really really needed. They changed sockets when they added the memory controller to the processor, switched from DDR to DDR2, and DDR2 to DDR3.

The Sandy Bridge CPUs will work on the newer chipsets for Ivy Bridge like I said progress takes change. Look where AMD is at 2 almost 3 generations behind in the game. Their future is hanging on by a very thin thread if (when) Bulldozer fails who knows how or where they will go next.

 

[saaiello]

DELL













;

:lol:

 

[jorgeireyes]

Choice P67 boards come with the NF200 chip negating this advantage.

970 vs 2600K is a better comparo as the 970 is 599.99.

http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/157?vs=287

Having said that X58 is a waste and your just paying for old technology... 45nm vs 32nm as well as old architecture. 970 is Westmere where 2600K is sandy bridge.

I should then stick to SB for now and upgrade to Ivy Bridge next year when is out then right? I know that 990X will probably dominate 2600K on heavily intense multi-threaded apps but not by that much.

 

[amnotanoobie]

The Sandy Bridge CPUs will work on the newer chipsets for Ivy Bridge like I said progress takes change. Look where AMD is at 2 almost 3 generations behind in the game. Their future is hanging on by a very thin thread if (when) Bulldozer fails who knows how or where they will go next.

Because they were sitting on their butts during the X2 days. They were so overconfident that Intel couldn't keep up that they didn't do something new architecturally with their cpus. Instead they went ahead and bought AMD which did cost a lot of money, and as we see now the ATi side is earning the most dough.

History is a b*tch, hahaha. Read it

I should then stick to SB for now and upgrade to Ivy Bridge next year when is out then right? I know that 990X will probably dominate 2600K on heavily intense multi-threaded apps but not by that much.

How much performance do you want? As dadiggle has indicated, what are you going to do, production work or gaming?

If all you're going to do is game, Sandy Bridge has a heck of a lot of a performance overhead that almost no game wouldn't run quickly @ 1080p (with a proper video card). Probably switching later to Ivy Bridge would have a smaller effect on your fps than waiting for the next gen cards of nvidia or amd.