Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up From Sandy Bridge

[bsoa]

Good article, thx Toms

 

[g-unit1111]

Wow, HD4000 beat out the AMD Llano - impressive.

But I guess I get to gloat now in saying that I was right that the 3770K was only going to be a marginal improvement over SB, and I was right!

Looks like I'll be upgrading my Phenom II to a Z77 motherboard and the 2500K.

 

[Guest]

I like how they always make the newer chip's pictures much more vibrant.

 

[baracubra]

Any word on availability?? I've been checking and online retailers don't have it listed yet. I'm going to be upgrading from my trusty old Q6600

 

[sergeyn]

I have few questions to the author:
1. HD graphics performance and core performance was measured separately, but why no one bothered how many gflops can this cpu pull if you load both HD gfx and all the cores ?
2. When comparing gflops with 2720k same performance was shown, but 3720k model has AVX2, which has FMA instruction which I expect to pull twice more multiply-adds than 2720k can. How exactly those floating point gflops are computed?
3. I have P8P67pro motherboad, with latest bios. Will I be able to use opencl on HD graphics part of that cpu ?

Thanks!

 

[dragonsqrrl]

Not sure what some people were expecting in terms of performance, but the boost in performance per clock is right around what we've come to expect from a "tick".

What's a a little disappointing for me are the performance per W and general power consumption results. Given the rated TDP, I was expecting a bit more of a gap between the 2700K and 3770K. Anandtech's results shine Ivy Bridge's power consumption in a better light, although their load power consumption test is quite a bit different from the one used in this review. In a 2nd pass x264 encoding test (which can be quite stressful), the i7-3770K consumed less power than the i5-2400.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review/20

...and I may have missed this, but is there any information on stock temps? I only recall seeing overclocked results.

 

[shoelessinsight]

I like the average power charts, but an idle power benchmark would be handy too. A lot of people leave their computer sitting idle for hours, rather than putting them to sleep. It would be nice to know what to expect for them.

Great article. I have several friends pressing me for information about these new CPUs. This is the sort of thing that I love Tom's for.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]sergeyn[/nom]I have few questions to the author:1. HD graphics performance and core performance was measured separately, but why no one bothered how many gflops can this cpu pull if you load both HD gfx and all the cores ?2. When comparing gflops with 2720k same performance was shown, but 3720k model has AVX2, which has FMA instruction which I expect to pull twice more multiply-adds than 2720k can. How exactly those floating point gflops are computed?3. I have P8P67pro motherboad, with latest bios. Will I be able to use opencl on HD graphics part of that cpu ?Thanks![/citation]

P67 systems have no access to the IGP.

 

[SuperVeloce]

Actually Ivy Tick is very good. Only problem is because of a radical redesign of transistors, Ivy does not like high voltages. Undervolt to 0,9Volts and overclock of all 4 cores to 3,9GHz is nothing unusual. At 1,1V 4,4-4,5GHz should be possible. Above that voltage it really is a case of "diminishing returns"

 

[eddieroolz]

Good review Chris, as usual. I waited over 6 months for this processor, and I have some thoughts:

1. Where's increased IPC? Sure, the 3770K beats the 2700K by a small margin, but this doens't seem enough to call it "increased IPC".

2. Power use is good. Very friendly for the European/Japanese market where electricity is a lot more expensive.

3. Overclocking inconsistencies. This worries me the most, since I'm looking to run mine at 4.5GHz. I know most Ivys will hit 4.5GHz no problem, but I'd always like to reserve the possibility of jumping up to a 4.9 or 5.0GHz speed when needed.

 

[marraco]

7-Zip rules

 

[felipetga]

Should I see a notable difference going from my Core2Quad Q9550 @3.6ghz?

 

[Marcus52]

[citation][nom]tecmo34[/nom]Nice Review Chris...Looking forward to the further information coming out this week on Ivy Bridge, as I was initially planning on buying Ivy Bridge, but now I might turn to Sandy Bridge-E[/citation]

I'm not sure why anyone ever thought Ivy Bridge would compete with Sandy Bridge-E. Clearly, the -E series was intended to be the flagship until the next tock; Ivy Bridge is a tick upgrade of Sandy Bridge, not Sandy Bridge-E.

Ivy Bridge is most important to those running without an additional graphics solution (or with a hybrid solution). While its place may not look all that important to most of us "enthusiasts", consider that for the first time you can build a DX11 capable computer WITHOUT a graphics card! That's a pretty amazing stepping stone on the progress path.

 

[aodknifer]

I wish they tested x58 processors still....does anyone have a link where IV or SB is compared to the i7 920 or another variant?

 

[verbalizer]

I wish they tested x58 processors still....does anyone have a link where IV or SB is compared to the i7 920 or another variant?

Google.

 

[wavetrex]

Waiting for next stepping... maybe they fix the temperature/overclocking thing.

Right now it's bad, really bad... similar (same) architecture, smaller transistors but lower overclock potential ? These 3D transistors aren't that good it seems...

Thanks Toms for telling me to keep the money in the wallet... my Q6600 @ 3.4Ghz and only 50degrees C in full load can keep humming for a while longer.

 

[Guest]

Toms review is half hearted. Not a very good review IMO. You need to do a review of laptop parts, temperature, and delve deeper into some of the issues you uncovered. The review was clumsy and done quickly in order to "get it out the door" which is funny being that Toms accuses Intel of doing the same. FWIW, Laptop reviews are out and this processor looks like a real winner on the laptop side. The integrated graphics are actually superior to AMD solutions on the laptop side and the CPU performance looks better than the Sandy Bridge laptop variants. Honestly, this looks like a laptop chip more than a desktop chip. This chip will do VERY well in the mobile market in Ultrabooks and workstation replacement laptops. On the desktop side where Intel rules the roost by a wide margin, it isn't all that compelling. Just slightly faster with better quick sync.

 

[nforce4max]

Well I am glad that I didn't waste much time keeping up with IB before hand but I expected a little more than what it provided. In the end I look at it as an upgrade option for those who do not own any thing better than an i3. For new systems I would consider if I had wanted or a client for that matter decided on IB would be ok. Wondering if SB prices will go down but that may only be wishful thinking.

 

[verbalizer]

Waiting for next stepping... maybe they fix the temperature/overclocking thing.

Right now it's bad, really bad... similar (same) architecture, smaller transistors but lower overclock potential ? These 3D transistors aren't that good it seems...

Thanks Toms for telling me to keep the money in the wallet... my Q6600 @ 3.4Ghz and only 50degrees C in full load can keep humming for a while longer.

but the Q6600 gets housed by the AMD Phenom II X4, aren't you tired of missing frames.?

 

[stalker7d7]

I wonder if Intel is secretly trying to give AMD a chance to catch up in performance with their CPU's so they don't break the competitive pricing points? Ha, doubtful, but plausible?

Great CPU tho, hopefully I can get one soon.

 

[Guest]

Great review, surprising you got hold of it so early

 

[wavetrex]

[citation][nom]malmental[/nom]but the Q6600 gets housed by the AMD Phenom II X4, aren't you tired of missing frames.?[/citation]

I know mine's old and should have been changed in a long time, but still, these mega-temperatures Ivy is getting just aren't acceptable... I'm in no rush however, not everyone is like "omg omg omg new stuff, need to buy yesterday !!!111". The "old" Q6600 with 8 gig DDR2 still serves it's purpose, Sandy/Ivy isn't 5 times faster... it's barely 40-70% faster overall than the 4-5 year old CPU...

When I'll hear reports of new stepping able to get to 5.0+ on a good quality air cooler in a good case... then it's time for upgrade. That would mean +100% compared to my current CPU and will definitely worth it !

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]eddieroolz[/nom]Good review Chris, as usual. I waited over 6 months for this processor, and I have some thoughts:1. Where's increased IPC? Sure, the 3770K beats the 2700K by a small margin, but this doens't seem enough to call it "increased IPC".2. Power use is good. Very friendly for the European/Japanese market where electricity is a lot more expensive. 3. Overclocking inconsistencies. This worries me the most, since I'm looking to run mine at 4.5GHz. I know most Ivys will hit 4.5GHz no problem, but I'd always like to reserve the possibility of jumping up to a 4.9 or 5.0GHz speed when needed.[/citation]

What do you mean it's not enough to call it increased IPC? It's IPC averages over 3% higher than Sandy, so it has increased IPC. If it was only a tenth of a percent og a difference, then it would still be an increase in IPC. There is no need for it to be a certain level of increase for it to be called in increase.

[citation][nom]Marcus52[/nom]I'm not sure why anyone ever thought Ivy Bridge would compete with Sandy Bridge-E. Clearly, the -E series was intended to be the flagship until the next tock; Ivy Bridge is a tick upgrade of Sandy Bridge, not Sandy Bridge-E.Ivy Bridge is most important to those running without an additional graphics solution (or with a hybrid solution). While its place may not look all that important to most of us "enthusiasts", consider that for the first time you can build a DX11 capable computer WITHOUT a graphics card! That's a pretty amazing stepping stone on the progress path.[/citation]

Llano is DX11 even without a discrete card, so we've been able to have DX11 capable computers without discrete cards for quite some time. This is the first Intel platform to support DX11 on it's integrated graphics.

[citation][nom]stalker7d7[/nom]I wonder if Intel is secretly trying to give AMD a chance to catch up in performance with their CPU's so they don't break the competitive pricing points? Ha, doubtful, but plausible? Great CPU tho, hopefully I can get one soon.[/citation]

That seems unlikely, but it is possible. If Intel gets too far ahead then they might get hammered with anti-trust lawsuits again.

 

[Reynod]

Great article Chris.

 

[gilgamex]

Image quality Tests!! That would be truly interesting!