Intel Core i7-3930K And Core i7-3820: Sandy Bridge-E, Cheaper

[Mac_McMan]

[citation][nom]sna[/nom]the only good reason to get X79 is the more ram .. u can get cheap 32G ram system , or go for 64G of ram and enjoy a ram diskit is a good thing[/citation]The main reason to get X79 is for the extra PCIe slots. The extra memory slots are nice though.

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]Teramedia[/nom]Now I cat wait for the next SBM. I can't see them not using the described 3930K config (perhaps w/ different Mobo and more ram) for the high-end, and it's anybody's guess what they would use for the low-end what with APUs, Zambezi and soon IB being available.Great article, Chris. I too would have liked to have seen an OC to OC comparison, which is what I'm hoping to see in the next SBM I guess.[/citation]Sorry, the next SBM systems were picked out prior to SB-E launch :/

 

[eddieroolz]

The overclock seems average for Sandy Bridge-derived processor, though I suppose it can be called great for having 2 more cores than others.

I'm surprised the 3930X won the award, however. It sure is an improvement for some apps, but in that case I would consider it to be a recommended buy for people running those apps only.

Still, good to know it's possible to build a Sandy Bridge-E system for $800 counting the core parts only. A bit out of my reach, but was giving thought to actually buying one before the $583 price tag for processor alone hit me.

 

[tomfreak]

[citation][nom]peevee[/nom]They do sell 8-core SBEs, only call them Xeons and sell for much higher even compared to the insanely priced 3960X.And I bet those 2 or 4 disabled cores in most SBEs are PERFECTLY GOOD, at least on stock speeds. It is called marketing, market segmentation. Wonton destruction of value. My engineering heart weeps.[/citation]If u read carefully I already mentioned in my previous post that the volume of 2011 consumer CPU are still going to be higher than XEON server chips. I still doesnt make any sense to disable the 2 last cores for no reason. An 8 core desktop chips wouldn't canibalize the XEON sales. They could have just leave the 3960X as 8 full cores to justified that $400 extra charges.

[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]Only, they don't sell them yet. Early next year. And you're right, the disabled cores probably work fine. Don't feel *too* bad, though. Disabled cores also don't consume power. Turned on, these things wouldn't run at the same clocks (or at least they'd dissipate more heat). So the trade off is fewer cores and more frequency, which is probably more useful to more desktop users anyway.[/citation]They could have just leave the 3960X as 8 full cores @ 150w tdp @ similar stock speed. Intel did release a 150w desktop CPU back then, so 150w shouldnt be any issue. And I am positive the people who buy 3960x wouldnt even bother about that tiny extra TDP if the performance gain reasonable.

 

[rahulkadukar]

After reading this

Gaming : i5-2500K

Real Work : i7-2600K

Save the money and have beer

 

[giovanni86]

[citation][nom]gmcizzle[/nom]Why would you use Crysis 2 as a CPU benching game? Use Starcraft 2 instead.[/citation]
I think someone else on another article pointed this out, they need to start benching with RTS games as well. Great review, though $600USD over $200USD for the 2500k seems a bit steep, but if your in the market for that extra edge beyond gaming i guess it is worth the price. Hoping to see better numbers from ivy with gaming if not its offical the 2700k will do.

 

[Guest]

I know where lengthwise is...

 

[cangelini]

[citation][nom]giovanni86[/nom]I think someone else on another article pointed this out, they need to start benching with RTS games as well. Great review, though $600USD over $200USD for the 2500k seems a bit steep, but if your in the market for that extra edge beyond gaming i guess it is worth the price. Hoping to see better numbers from ivy with gaming if not its offical the 2700k will do.[/citation]

The point is not to run all CPU-limited games, because not all games are CPU-limited. Instead, I went for multiple genres, some of which are CPU-bound and others that aren't. This is a more realistic expectation of gaming performance.

Thanks for reading,
Chris

 

[slabbo]

prices are still pretty darn high. Intel needs some competition!

 

[Guest]

I don´t understand why you are comparing an i7 920 with all those new processors clocked at higher speeds,it would be more reasonable using at least an i7 960-975 to compare clock per clock performance.

 

[devinsmit]

for anyone trying to enter the costest but can't get the screen to load, try using internet explorer. I couldnt get the form to submit on chrome or firefox.

 

[devinsmit]

if you couldnt get the contest form to submit, try using i/e. i tried chrome and firefox and it wouldnt load.

 

[capslockdj10]

only US citizens can win? how about the other's like us?

is there a way we can win too? >",<

--------------------
Want A -3930K Of Your Own?

Would you like to win your own Intel Core i7-3930K? How about a DX79SI motherboard and SSD 320 drive? Click here to enter for your chance!

The contest opens on December 8, 2011 9:00 PM PST and closes on January 12, 2012 9:00 PM PST.

Four Winners Will Be Chosen Randomly.

Prizes (provided by Intel):
Four (4) prizes consisting of one (1) Core i7-3930K CPU, one (1) DX79SI motherboard, and one (1) 320 Series 120 GB SSD. Approximate Retail Value Each: $600+$280+$200=$1,080

DUE TO LEGAL REQUIREMENTS, THIS CONTEST IS LIMITED TO LEGAL RESIDENTS OF THE USA (EXCLUDING RI) AND 18 YEARS OF AGE OR OLDER.

UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED, ALL PERSONAL INFORMATION WILL ONLY BE USED TO QUALIFY AND CONTACT THE WINNER.
----------------------

 

[uruquiora]

very clearly , no point in upgrading from my 2600k, as a gamer, still crunching anything i throw at it....

 

[Guest]

@agnickolov
umm a developer needs lots of resources, exspecialy those of us that make intricate software, and use high demanding tools.

 

[masterasia]

Holy crap....I know AMD had just said they're not going to compete against Intel anymore. I guess this is the reason why. Their stuff is light years behind Intel.

 

[peevee]

[citation][nom]masterasia[/nom]Holy crap....I know AMD had just said they're not going to compete against Intel anymore.[/citation]

????

Link?

 

[devinsmit]

[citation][nom]peevee[/nom]????Link?[/citation]


i think he means this http://www.tomshardware.com/news/AMD-APU-Z-Series-ARM-Tegra-3,14114.html

 

[gestapoz]

Very good article.thank you so much.

 

[assassin123]

what will come out in the up coming year and what will be its performance . . . . . . . . No one can tells the future hmmmm. . . . . . . .

 

[assassin123]

what will come out in the up coming year and what will be its performance . . . . . . . . No one can tells the future hmmmm. . . . . . . .

 

[assassin123]

what about ivy bridge hmmm.m.m,

 

[silicondoc]

[citation][nom]FunSurfer[/nom]Why are the gaming benchmarks on ultra settings where the GPU is the bottleneck? This is a CPU benchmark so resolution and settings should be on the lowest possible.[/citation]

Downgraded again for pointing out the all too obvious. When a PERSONAL OWNERSHIP fanboy gets all juicy and wet, the brain doesn't function properly -

so here is the link where the 2500k, if we use the often stated definitely biased just because they can performance metric analysis for AMD vs Intel we get " 2500K really stretched it's legs and offered equivalent performance to the over priced $600 monster for 1/3rd the cost !!!!!! "

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-3960x-x79-sandy-bridge-e,3071-14.html

Yeah, their Wow Cataclysm stresses the cpu....

See that - ONLY A FREAKING MORON WOULD BUY THE $600 CPU OVER THE $200 2500K !

Now, expect in only a blink of the eye (Merry Christmas) suddenly a $5 or $10 shift or even $2 shift in cpu or gpu pricing will IMMEDIATELY and CONVINCINGLY swing and sway the "unbiased reviewers here" to recommend and AMD product over Nvidia or perhaps Intel (although on the cpu side the word is only the beyond wonderful X3 amd favorite of all low end - oh and the amd 955 for the xmas upgrade... and whatever else, is "still in favor no matter what").

How many YEARS has the biased crap been fed us now...

 

[silicondoc]

[citation][nom]giovanni86[/nom]I think someone else on another article pointed this out, they need to start benching with RTS games as well. Great review, though $600USD over $200USD for the 2500k seems a bit steep, but if your in the market for that extra edge beyond gaming i guess it is worth the price. Hoping to see better numbers from ivy with gaming if not its offical the 2700k will do.[/citation]

The answer of course is NOW THAT AMD CPU'S ARE CRUSHED TO HELL, IT'S TIME TO BE FAIR AND PRESENT A MORE REALISTIC CPU METRIC AND ANALYSIS, THAT MORE CLEARLY REPRESENTS "REAL WORLD LIKELYHOODS"...

As soon as AMD crpas out something better, the benches will change back to cpu intensive bottlenecked gaming and rezzes so that the true price performance leadership can be explicitly shoved down everyone's throat.

AMD LOOKS GOOD MAN! BETTER THAN IT IS !
DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

 

[Crashman]

[citation][nom]silicondoc[/nom]Downgraded again for pointing out the all too obvious.[/citation]I thought about giving you a thumbs up, but I was only 70% certain of my understanding of this post. Could you edit it for clarity?[citation][nom]silicondoc[/nom]The answer of course is...IT'S TIME TO BE FAIR AND PRESENT A MORE REALISTIC CPU METRIC AND ANALYSIS[/citation]I thought about giving THIS post a thumbs up, but with all the "screaming" and vulgarity...

You know, sometimes being right isn't enough