fazers_on_stun :
From the article:
However, the sources noted that Intel has adjusted its Ivy Bridge processor capacity deployment and has increased the proportion for ultrabook and smartphone platforms. As for the traditional desktop and notebook segments, Intel will mainly supply high-end processors initially.
With vendors aggressively placing orders for Ivy Bridge-based ultrabook processors, some vendors are expected to be able to release their second-generation ultrabooks as soon as May with prices to also drop to around US$799-899.
By the end of 2012, ultrabooks are expected to account for 15-20% of total consumer notebook shipments with the proportion to rise to 40% in 2013 and surpass 50% by the end of 2013, the sources noted.
Intel's new Ivy Bridge-based ultrabook processors that will launch at the end of April will include dual-core i7-2677M at 1.8GHz (US$317), Core i7-2637M at 1.7GHz (US$289), Core i5-2557M at 1.7GHz (US$250), Core i7-2657M at 1.6GHz (US$317), Core i7-2617M at 1.5GHz (US$289) and Core i5-2537M at 1.8GHz (US$259).
Clearly goes to show Triny's observations about AMD eating Intel's mobile lunch is just wishful thinking.
JS, Chad, Badtrip, myself and some others have been here long enough to see the exact same pattern of AMD fanbois (recall JennyH from 3-4 years ago??). They come here posting doom about how AMD's "superior" engineers or whatever are going to kill Intel in this market or that market (whichever is popular at the time), armed with next to no knowledge but lots of hyperbole, and then slink away and fade out when Intel doesn't go belly up like they predicted
..
What is surprising is how AMD and its track record keeps generating new fanbois to replace the old ones. Unless they are all Sharikou in disguise
..
Triny thinks Intel cannot design a GPU yet he forgets that Intel invest more into R&D a year than AMD is worth. Hell they are puttin $5 Billion into a new 14nm FAB in Chandler which is almost as much as AMD paid for ATI.
I remember when Lynnfield was coming out. The previous (Jennyh and such) said that their IGP would suck, I and a few others (along with yourself) stated it would have better performance since it was on package and faster connection than with the chipset. Then when Sandy Bridge was coming out, we again said there would be quite a performance increase (double for HD3000) since it was directly connected to the CPU itself which cut latency by a lot alone.
Of course we were dismissed and when it came out performing better than the entry level discrete of the time, it was ignored. Hell VALVe showed HD3000 playing Portal 2 which had a lot of changes from even the TF2 Source engine.
Logic seems to fail a lot of times with some people.
My current guess for IB is at least 60% better than SB in GPU and 10-15% than CPU per clock. Not even adding in higher clock speeds.
we 2500K's welcome you...
now get you a GTX 660 Ti when released and your set...
Just installed it. Running at 27c in BIOS with the Zalman 9900MAX in my R500 that has a fan on the HDD cage and two extra fans up top (140mm Antec DBB blue LED fans) so a total of 9 fans with GPU and CPU, 7 with just case. Let the Asus mobo do a auto AI overclock, put the BCLK to 103 and the multi to 42 so its at 4.3GHz right now and still 27c in BIOS.
Running memtest 86+ on my 16GB (4x4GB) Corsair Vengance RAM thats running at DDR3-1648 right now on stock timings (9-9-9-24). Its flippin bad.
Can't wait to try out some games. Skyrim should like the extra boost as should a few other games where my PCIe 1.1 and C2Q were holding my HD5870 back.
Next I need to get a HD7970 but want to wait till the price drops. Not sure I can ever go back to nVidia. Last time I used them was during the 4X00Ti days and those cards were pretty meh compared to the 9700Pro I got.
Plus AMD does do one thing proper, their GPUs. So I will probably stick with ATI/AMD GPUs until they start to do piss poor like other stuff.
then it will come to an end soon :lol:
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram