Intel Core i7-3960X (Sandy Bridge-E) And X79 Platform Preview

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.
with all this talk about the i7, I do not need or want HT.
so how does the i5-2500K stack up against these.?
I like to see charts / benches..

I love how everyone is like "oh yeah I am going to buy an Ivy bridge no problem"
I lol @ the thought of Ivy Bridge being a mass consumer product.
Click to expand...
pricing might just be crazy for Ivy, we'll have to wait and see what it's about and then,,,
another 100 threads about it too..
 
[citation][nom]cats_paw[/nom]well, im still running on a Q6600, and i was planing to wait for the bulldozer/sandy-E to see if i upgrade one way or another.So far, it looks like its either a 2500-k or the bulldozer. Lets wait and see.(i do hope that if the sandy-e comes out, the 2500-k will drop a bit ;D-[/citation]

Same here, still chugging along on my s775 platform. It's currently running on a quad core and if I want to upgrade it's got to be at least a six-core, but what I really want is a 8 core CPU. Upgrading to a i5 2500K isn't appealing to me because it's still a quad, a very fast quad, but still a quad.
Sandy Bridge-E looks meh, maybe Ivy Bridge or I'll just keep using my old
system until the m/b explodes or something...
 

do you really need more than or just want more than (a quad)...?
 
You nerds can't seem to realise that your superiors, those who have jobs and do research in computational science, can and do use 6, 12, 128, 256... cores already. Just an example, Neural Networks software, Genetic Algorithms, ALife, Robotics, we can't get enough cores or enough memory throughput. So no, this is not FAIL like the pimply faced idiot geekaproved said, this is an excellent chip, with an improvement to cryptographic functions, and memory throughput needed in Computational Intelligence applications.
Click to expand...

Your being really harsh - which does not speak well of you. Also you fail to grasp that most people on this forum are not going to need the small extra umph in speed that the 6 - cores that this chip provides. In fact, you also fail to grasp that the 6 cores don't mean a hell of a lot in most applications for most desktop users. Frankly, the 2600K kicks Intel Core i7-3960X's ass or at least equals it in most common applications.

Therefore they are saying that this is a "FAIL" because it really provides no real benefit to them though it may benefit heavy "computational" users with science applications. And really, it is questionable how much better the Intel Core i7-3960X will be for those applications because very few are probably set up to utilize all 6 cores.

Further the 2600K kicks the I-7 990's ass in almost EVERYTHING and it has 6 cores - especially when overclocked. So your juvenile statement about counting cores is in your own words, "idiotic."

I agree that you have a point that more cores potentially will bring more performance. But really you are stating the obvious - of course more cores should equal more performance - especially for science heavy applications. However in the I-7 990 and the SBE, this really isn't the case - their performance is no better and in many cases worse than the much cheaper 2600K. This could change with the release of SBE as Intel tweaks it, but it is doubtful.

AMD's six core CPUs don't even come close to competing with the SB CPUs. The 2500K is something like 40% faster than AMD's top CPU and it is a $200 CPU. So this is yet another real-life example that more cores does not necessarily equal more performance for the buck.

This is why many people are expressing their disappointment with the new SBE CPU and to them it is a failure. You don't have to be an ass when you disagree with someone!
 
My 2600k rig just gave a nod to the new guy...

I'm very pleased overall. For gamers, if you're somewhere between budget and bada$$, the 2600k+2 GTX 580s, is cheaper than the $1k chip and 1 GTX 580. That's all I need to know.

Can't wait to see what all those over the top builders do with it though later. Youtube's gonna see a lot of traffic between these, Bulldozer, and later Ivy Bridge.

For gaming, I think I'm plenty content and will not be holding my breath. I want whatever comes after Ivy Bridge+1 generation.
 
[citation][nom]cangelini[/nom]As mentioned in the story, it'd crash without proper cooling, which we don't have yet ;-)[/citation]

Can it be confirmed that the cpu didn't throttle anything during the rest of the benchmarks due to the heat caused by the cooling issues? Getting proper cooling on short notice for a new new platform had to be hard!
 
@ arkadi

My sentiments exactly. Running an i7 920 at 3.8 since it's launch and I've waited. Was looking to LGA2011/X79/SB-E as the next step, but this, although a preview, doesn't look too compelling.

 
[citation][nom]p07h34d[/nom]I love how everyone is like "oh yeah I am going to buy an Ivy bridge no problem"I lol @ the thought of Ivy Bridge being a mass consumer product.[/citation]

Why? Intel has always had a 'tick' 'tock' release system where they release a low end consumer version first, and then they go nuts with it and release their bigger brothers on the refresh of the series. This has been done for 15+ years, and there is no reason to think this will be any different. Now because of the popularity of the current gen processors the new IB procs may be a little more expensive, but the flagship on the initial release will still be a sub $500 processor meant for extreme home users/gamers. The next 'cheap' new architecture processor will be Haswell, but that is still 1-2 years away, and I am personally not going to wait that long to upgrade.
The largest 'surprise' could be in the motherboards designed for IB processors. With the added costs of more USB3 ports, PCIe3, WiDi, and the potential for thunderbolt/lightpeak inclusion, and rumors of going back to triple DDR, the boards could get pricey. But these will still be 'consumer' grade duel and quad core chips with big brothers of their own coming out later.

Besides, if IB is a complete flop, or too expensive then we know we can still get a 2500K or 2600K proc for cheap (and with a few price drops between now and then). But with bulldozer, and more importantly Piledriver, coming down the line Intel will still pull out some incredible stuff to keep AMD at bay.
 
Very Interesting review i still to this day am not grateful INtel introduce 4 different sockets in such a small space of time as i was the unlucky one who bought a 1156 socket setup! =(. However i cannot wait for AMD'S Zambezi chip to be launched, its going to be Epic! =)
 
It's too bad it didn't become everything Intel originally intended. They sure didn't feel any pressure from the competition. Honestly though, would it have made a difference if desktop bulldozer had been out a month or two now? idk. Remember, anything I think is from a gamer's perspective.

I'm not sold on anything new hardware-wise until game development takes a huge leap forward. The same goes for desktop-oriented software for the average users. That's probably too expensive to do in this market. So we'll see the "best" games running at 250fps on good to better systems, but who knows.
 

Most program available right now won't take advantage of more than 4 cores, so many will say 6 cores is useless and just don't bother with 8 cores?
No matter what, upgrading to any current platform from my personal s775 will result in major improvement in performance, but I like to have a 8 core as that is what I consider a "money well spent" upgrade. If the system dies early, I'll opt for a 6 core (SNB-E even I said was meh).
I upgrade to parts that satisfies my taste, not upgrade for the sake of getting a gold medal in some e-pee contest.
 
For whatever reason, it looks like this chip is much better suited to productivity than gaming. Its a shame about the multi-GPU issues, but it looks like one might be better off with a i5 2600k anyway.
 
[citation][nom]lp231[/nom]Most program available right now won't take advantage of more than 4 cores, so many will say 6 cores is useless and just don't bother with 8 cores?No matter what, upgrading to any current platform from my personal s775 will result in major improvement in performance, but I like to have a 8 core as that is what I consider a "money well spent" upgrade. If the system dies early, I'll opt for a 6 core (SNB-E even I said was meh).I upgrade to parts that satisfies my taste, not upgrade for the sake of getting a gold medal in some e-pee contest.[/citation]

I upgraded my Q6600 ($300 in 2007) to the i7-2600k ($300 today). I wish I had jumped on them at release except z68 wasn't out yet. I'm very satisfied with the upgrade. The Q6600 topped out at 3.6ghz. This 2600k is at 4.6ghz now... backed it down from 4.8ghz for no real reason, and expect it to do 5ghz later when I feel more comfortable. Add the fact that if you are using ddr2 memory, upgrading to ddr3 today costs less and you get more for what ddr2 was back in 2007. I'm not pushing you to upgrade or anything, but I can tell you at current prices, you'll be pleased, and even more-so if/when the prices drop. You just can't go wrong with SB. Yes, you can wait for bulldozer of course. If bulldozer was already out, I would have no qualms with going that route if the performance added up. We'll have to see. I game and do amateur audio/video stuff.
 


I upgraded to a Xeon X3350 (Q9540) around that year too from my Pentium D. And I fully agree that DDR3 is better and it cost less than DDR2, thus I held on upgrading my ram from 4 to 8GB as that will be a total waste.
If my system just conks out all of a sudden, I can use my netbook for the time being until SNB-E arrives unless I really need it now, I'll grab a Xeon E3 even if it's still a quad. I don't OC, so K CPUs don't matter that much.
 
[citation][nom]rantoc[/nom]Can it be confirmed that the cpu didn't throttle anything during the rest of the benchmarks due to the heat caused by the cooling issues? Getting proper cooling on short notice for a new new platform had to be hard![/citation]

I've been doing follow-up testing all day, and it looks like temperatures weren't the problem...removing 8 GB memory modules (adding up to 32 GB), I'm able to finish a 3ds Max run. So, I think at DDR3-1600, I was running into memory problems using a high-density kit. It looks like I'll probably need an alternate kit for the final review--likely a quartet of 4 GB DDR3-1600 modules able to do CAS 7 or 8.
 


Oooh, that's exactly what I would love to see. I run 4x4gb ddr3 1866 9-10-9-28 and when you get it all smoothed over, I hope to see dual 580s in the runs! When everything's no longer top secret, please include a healthy dose of pictures from every angle. ;-)
 
[citation][nom]Cryptos123123[/nom]You nerds can't seem to realise that your superiors, those who have jobs and do research in computational science, can and do use 6, 12, 128, 256... cores already. Just an example, Neural Networks software, Genetic Algorithms, ALife, Robotics, we can't get enough cores or enough memory throughput. So no, this is not FAIL like the pimply faced idiot geekaproved said, this is an excellent chip, with an improvement to cryptographic functions, and memory throughput needed in Computational Intelligence applications.[/citation]

IDK about your shitty little research operation but in the real corporate world. Where the money is made. We use Xeons...
 
[citation][nom]clonazepam[/nom]I upgraded my Q6600 ($300 in 2007) to the i7-2600k ($300 today). I wish I had jumped on them at release except z68 wasn't out yet. I'm very satisfied with the upgrade. The Q6600 topped out at 3.6ghz. This 2600k is at 4.6ghz now... backed it down from 4.8ghz for no real reason, and expect it to do 5ghz later when I feel more comfortable. Add the fact that if you are using ddr2 memory, upgrading to ddr3 today costs less and you get more for what ddr2 was back in 2007. I'm not pushing you to upgrade or anything, but I can tell you at current prices, you'll be pleased, and even more-so if/when the prices drop. You just can't go wrong with SB. Yes, you can wait for bulldozer of course. If bulldozer was already out, I would have no qualms with going that route if the performance added up. We'll have to see. I game and do amateur audio/video stuff.[/citation]

I went from a Q6600@3.2 to a 2500K@4.5 and DAMN ITS FAST. Especially since my GTX 470 was chocked by the CPU/MoBo. The boot SSD also helps. 😀

My only regret is to have waited that long...
 
[citation][nom]wicko[/nom]Just bought a 2600k, and after reading this I have no regrets.[/citation]
true, it is the BEST mainstream product i ever had. i think i will stick to it for a long time.
 
After seeing virtually no difference in gaming performance between these chips, I am extremely happy that I chose to get a 2600K instead of waiting for Sandy Bridge-E.
 
Let me be the next person to say a big "meh"...

It may be good for some professional applications and I'll wait till the real review to judge fully, but I can only hope that Zambezi isn't this big of a let down.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom