Intel Core i7-4960X Preview: Ivy Bridge-E, Benchmarked

Status
Not open for further replies.

designasaurus

Honorable
Sep 1, 2012
52
0
10,630
0
There's a rumor going around that Ivy-E is going to have a soldered heatspreader instead of using thermal paste. Obviously this would be a big differentiator for enthusiasts picking between Haswell and Ivy-E. Given your access to Ivy-E, do you guys at Tom's have any opinions on this rumor?
 

sna

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2010
1,303
0
19,660
114
too early to judge...

The 6 cores ivyBridge-e "K" version is the real thing.

and I dont get it , how Tomshardwae fails to say about the SandyBridge-e not having PCIE 3.0 support , while the ivy-E has PCIe 3.0 support . this is a Big factor here.
 

ingtar33

Illustrious


they did say it. You didn't read the beginning of the review. Of course pci-e 3.0 is a gimmick and not a reason to buy a new 2011 mb and ib-e chip... and it will remain a marketing gimmick untill gpus can actually be bottlenecked by pci-e 2.0 x16... high end gpus barely bottleneck on pci-e 2.0 x8 atm... it will be a little while (another generation or 3) before gpus will NEED pci-e 3.0.

 
official PCI Express 3.0 compliance (remember, Sandy Bridge-E only claimed 8 GT/s signaling support), and 22 nm manufacturing.
That's pretty much saying it did it unofficially.

Besides, you have to look hard to find something bottlenecked by PCIe2.0x8; even high-end GPUs won't run into bandwidth limitations.
 

sna

Distinguished
Jan 17, 2010
1,303
0
19,660
114
:) PCIe 3.0 is a Gimmick ?

you people think this is a Gaming only Machine?

try to buy PCIe 3.0 8x/4x Raid Card for example ... they are around starting at $300

LAN cards as well , and coming cards etc ..

and who knows ? maybe Titan 2X cards apper :)

And Many people Compalind about their SandyBridge-e not supporting PCIe 3.0 speed..

as for the lack of USB3.0 and few Sata3 ports , this is a 40 Lanes CPU , just buy that 4X PCIe usb 3.0 card and add it problem solved.
 
First off, yes it is largely a gaming machine. If not, it would likely be using Xeons.

I'd like to see a situation in which you need 4GB/s each way SAS/SATA, but can't afford a Xeon based platform

LAN cards. At 500MB/s each way (for an PCIe2.0x1 card, plus you're more likely to use an x4 card). You got something with 10GbE?

Even a Titan 2x could run on PCIe2.0x16.

Most people don't like running many addin cards. Besides, where's the room given the expected use of this platform is multi-GPU systems?
 

ingtar33

Illustrious


psh... there ARE pci-e 2.0 x16 boards with multiple card support you know. And pci-e 2.0x16 is identical speed to pci-e 3.0 x8... just as pci-e 3.0 x4 is equal to pci-e 2.0 x8... and as we pointed out, pci-e 2.0 x8 is about the upper limit for gpu to mb interface speed at the moment, and pci-e 2.0 x16 is well beyond any gpu to max out as of now.
 

tomfreak

Distinguished
May 18, 2011
1,334
0
19,280
0
expensive X version clocked high 3.6GHz 6 core.... why not 150w tdp and 8 core @ 3.1-3.3GHz? Do I need a reason to pay extra when the 4930K is doing almost the same performance?
 

flong777

Honorable
Mar 7, 2013
185
0
10,690
2
Wow SB is looking better and better. IB was at least a modest upgrade to SB but Haswell is just a loser and that's sad.

There is one exception; the Haswell processors for laptops are much more efficient and provide huge increases in run time without losing any speed. But for desktops, Haswell appears to be a complete bust.
 

daglesj

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2007
443
9
18,785
0
A nice chip for someone I'm sure but surely the market for these high end chips is dwindling really?

I'd be intrigued to see the sales figures for Intels high-end chips today compared to say eight years ago.
 

ingtar33

Illustrious


considering they're selling 6 cores for 1000, they wouldn't sell a 8 core for less then 1500 (probably 2k)... anyone expecting less is kidding themselves. this will remain true as long as AMD is uncompetitive.
 

orca_sweets

Distinguished
Dec 4, 2011
4
0
18,510
0
Wow. 30% more efficient means with power consumption means use a less powerful light bulb in one of the lamps you use every day. No real performance increase compared to its predecessor. This is depressing. GPU competition right now is awesome. Makes powerful GPUs inexpensive. Now that Intel has passed AMD too much they dont even have to compete with price or performance upgrades. Intel is garbage for what price they charge for some of their processors. Granted, there are several awesome $180 and less options, but anything higher then that and you are paying for BEATS by Dre price premium. We all know how mediocre those are. Sorry. I am done ranting now.
 

daglesj

Distinguished
Jul 14, 2007
443
9
18,785
0
Really though, what's the issue?

You can pay $200 and get 90FPS or pay $800 to get 95-100FPS.

Intel's high-end chips are dead men walking really. More and more niche as time goes on.

 

gnarr

Distinguished
Sep 2, 2009
22
0
18,510
0
They could have fitted 8 cores within the 130W TDP, given the architecture is 30% more efficient.
Hopefully this will be an OC beast.
 

chesteracorgi

Distinguished
It looks like Intel is trying to avoid canniblizing its established lineup as opposed to producing new bleeding edge processors. Unless and until AMD can produce true competition in this segment, I expect that Intel will be satisfied with their ROI, and keep to a conservative upgrade regime.
 

godfather666

Distinguished
Aug 10, 2011
132
0
18,680
0
In the extremely unlikely event that my i7-3820 becomes inadequate in the next 3 years, I might pick up a 4830k if it's at $400 or so...

Otherwise, nothing interesting here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS