Intel Reveals More About Sandy Bridge Core CPUs

[L0tus]

Isn't anyone still seething about the lack of overclocking.

Intel will be charging us an extra ~$100 per GHz on the SAME damn chip. The same GHz we could have achieved with cheap aftermarket cooling and some BIOS tweaking.

Effing thugs!

 

[Tamz_msc]

[citation][nom]Gin Fushicho[/nom]As cool as it is, I'd rather not have an IGP and have the focus entirely on the CPU. That's why I buy graphics cards, for graphics.[/citation]
Adding a snady bridge to a p67 motherboard will completely disable the on board GPU.

 

[g00fysmiley]

i like it 😀 i hope it works. but where i see AMD having an advantage if if the allow amd graphics cards to crossfire with on die gpu... that is unless intel wanted to enter the descreet graphics card market... which i wouldn't complain about, the more competition the better for the consumer and amd/ati and nvidia seem content at delivering similar performance at specific pricepoints, perhaps a third vendor could shake that up a bit

 

[georgecale]

[citation][nom]zipzoomflyhigh[/nom]Seems like they just tweaked Nehalem and added gpu. It's sad the s1155 wont be backwards compatible with s1156. At least with AMD's new AM3+ socket you will still be able to drop in your old AM3 cpu.[/citation]
yeah. this is the thing that bums me out the most. seems to be an unkind move to those who bought into the current cpus & mobos thinking they'd be future proofed to some degree.

 

[helldog3105]

Seems interesting enough. Sadly Intel has done everything in their power to control every aspect of their platform, right down to rescinding licenses for developing chipsets for their processors. Granted, nVidia didn't have the best chipset, it was more affordable than Intel. It always boggles my mind that you pay 280 USD for a processor and then the most affordable price for a motherboard is something like 150 USD. For some people that is okay. For me, I cannot justify spending that much for a 20 percent performance increase over what I have. Second, I haven't encountered anything that I do that requires more processing speed than I already have. What is so special about this platform? On-die GPU? That's neat, but isn't AMD coming out with something similar, except that the on-die GPU is a cut down ATI graphics processor? I will reserve my concerns and judgements until I see benchmarks. Maybe Intel is hiding the remains of their dedicated video card in this on-die GPU. It would be nice to see a good gpu from Intel since the last one I remember was in the late nineties.

 

[eddieroolz]

Kinda annoying to have integrated graphics forced on you even if you are a bulider.

 

[nitrium]

I don't really see how people expect Sandy Bridge to be compatible with most 1156 mobo's - except those with integrated grpahics on the mobo that would somehow need to be deactivated to allow the Sandy brdge graphics to override it??? How is the integrated graphics supposed to work without a DVI connector on the mobo? How is it suppposed to override integrated graphics on the mobo? Or would you seriously a buy a CPU that you can't even properly use?

 

[dertechie]

[citation][nom]f-14[/nom]cool lets go one step further and limit the I-930 to pc6400 memory speed as well. now that your quard core just got it's speed crippled the only three advantages it has is 4 cores, and higher cache, and a crippled FSB at 800mhz instead of 1600/2000mhz now your right back inline with core2 which we have charts showing P4 vs dual core/core2/core2quad. i think you'd find the encoding charts a bit interesting[/citation]

Actually, let's do this the other way round. Anandtech's Bench section has the Pentium Extreme Edition 955 (3.46 GHz dual-core Netburst) and the Pentium 4 660. Both of them are running on an X38 motherboard, 4GB DDR3-1066 and a GTX 280. It still has an FSB disadvantage, but it's running modern RAM, chipset and graphics.

Let's check out that DivX Encode, where we find the 3.6 GHz P4 neck and neck with a Celeron 440 (1.6 GHz single core) and the EE running with the Pentium Dual-Core E2160 (1.8 GHz).

It's hard to compare the P4, since most of the benchmarks there scale with threads, but you can compare the EE dualie with modern dualies apples to apples (sort of, the EE has HT, C2D doesn't, EE is on X38, C2D is on X48). Put it against an E4500 (2.2 GHz, 2 MB L2), out of 31 benchmarks it wins 3 (flash creation, 2 archiving) and ties 6 (I'm considering anything within ~5% a tie). Vs. E7200 (2.53 GHz, 3 MB), it ties 3. E8200 (2.53 Ghz, 6 MB) simply kills it every single test.

[citation][nom]nitrium[/nom]I don't really see how people expect Sandy Bridge to be compatible with most 1156 mobo's - except those with integrated grpahics on the mobo that would somehow need to be deactivated to allow the Sandy brdge graphics to override it??? How is the integrated graphics supposed to work without a DVI connector on the mobo? How is it suppposed to override integrated graphics on the mobo? Or would you seriously a buy a CPU that you can't even properly use?[/citation]

Clarksdale i3s and i5s already have graphics integrated into the chip itself. H55/H57/Q57 simply provide a path between the on-die graphics and the VGA/DVI/HDMI outputs. H67 motherboards will do the same thing with the Sandy Bridge graphics.

 

[amillion]

Architecturally, ofc it makes sense to put graphics closer to the power house of a machine - they've been trying for ages with different graphics card interfaces. So why stop at graphics? Sound? Storage? hell, let's just integrate everything into one chip! (sarc)

This "development" is nothing but commercial - it's anticompetitive, and down right cheeky. Intel should be putting effort into working with orgs to increase our freedom of choice when it comes to things that we think are important - like graphics, sound, storage - rather than reacting to competitors presenting tech like CUDA that weakens their position in the market.

 

[enzo matrix]

[citation][nom]Seikent[/nom]If you read carefully, you should know that bulldozer is am3 compatible, but it doesn't support it fully. That means bulldozer performance will be crippled using am3.[/citation]
If YOU read carefully you will realize the article says it was possible for AMD to make the processors AM3 compatible BUT they decided NOT to because they would have to remove features and thereby cripple performance. AMD decided NOT to do this. So the new processors will only work on AM3+.