Intel's Ivy Bridge Core i3 Details Leaked

[nforce4max]

Besides the better TDP I am very much unimpressed and was expecting well a little more than this. Would have liked higher clocks and maybe an unlocked i3.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]soldier37[/nom]Need a worthy upgrade for my 2600k @ 4.8 and this isnt it, i7 Ivy or nothing.[/citation]

You're obviously a big overclocker, so you should be pleased to know that Ivy should have more overclocking headroom than Sandy due to it's much lower power usage and heat output. Ivy also has a small increase in IPC too. Ivy might have a better memory controller, but that's more speculation than already demonstrated, as far as I'm aware.

 

[livebriand]

Come on AMD, are you going to keep releasing crappy products or are you going to get off your lazy ass and make something good with Trinity?

 

[illusiongamer12]

i5-3570k for me
this have good information to be a fake
bad that not have MSRP.

 

[Guest]

i'm upgrading from e7500 to i7-3770k aint it worth the wait ?

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]greatgin[/nom]i'm upgrading from e7500 to i7-3770k aint it worth the wait ?[/citation]

That depends on what you do. Unless you use highly threaded software very often, it's a waste to go above an i5-3570K. i7s are only noticeably faster in applications that use their four logical threads and most software, including games, doesn't use many threads.

 

[alyoshka]

That's a hell of a lot of models....

 

[tlmck]

I can understand the different speed offerings due to manufacturing yields, but why the 2500 graphics. Surely it cannot cost any more to give all of them 4000 series. Sounds like price point marketing run amok. I say cut down the number of offerings and fire half the marketing staff. Bigger profits.

 

[verbalizer]

I can understand the different speed offerings due to manufacturing yields, but why the 2500 graphics. Surely it cannot cost any more to give all of them 4000 series. Sounds like price point marketing run amok. I say cut down the number of offerings and fire half the marketing staff. Bigger profits.

bravo.
+1

 

[hannibal]

I would gues that 2500 eats les power than 4000, so those needing very energy effience CPU are going to use those 2500 parts and those who are not so conserned power usage will take better GPU...
But without knoweing how much more power hungry 4000 is it is hard to say if it is sensible...

 

[phate]

A netbook with one of these would be pretty sweet. Atoms were always pretty slow, but at 35w one of these would be a big step up while still be conservative on power.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]phate[/nom]A netbook with one of these would be pretty sweet. Atoms were always pretty slow, but at 35w one of these would be a big step up while still be conservative on power.[/citation]

The Atom with the highest TDP is probably less than half that 35w TDP, somewhere around 15w or so. Besides, we already have 35w Sandy Bridge CPUs. Some notebook Sandy CPUs go well below 35w anyway. A netbook with these would be pretty decent, especially since Ivy could perform much faster than Sandy at the same TDP. Intel could then have some serious competition for AMD's Brazos netbooks.

 

[dgbkiller]

i3 arent no so good as the AMD equivalents

 

[verbalizer]

i3 arent no so good as the AMD equivalents

so very not true, the i3-21xx beats most AMD has to offer if your talking CPU performance..
all athlon ii x3 and x4's and have you seen the charts against the FX.?
deneb quads beat it though but not in all fields (phenom ii x4's like the 955be and better)
but overall the i3-21xx around $115 US is worth the $10 more than the FX-4100.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]malmental[/nom]so very not true, the i3-21xx beats most AMD has to offer if your talking CPU performance..all athlon ii x3 and x4's and have you seen the charts against the FX.?deneb quads beat it though but not in all fields (phenom ii x4's like the 955be and better)but overall the i3-21xx around $115 US is worth the $10 more than the FX-4100.[/citation]

Agreed, at least for gaming and other lightly/single threaded work loads. AMD wins against similarly priced CPUs in highly threaded workloads, but since gaming is not well-threaded, the fewer, faster cores of Sandy Bridge reign supreme in gaming. At stock, the i3s beat even the most expensive stock AMD CPUs. Of course, there's overclocking, but then you have the AMD CPU still not winning by much, if it's not still losing. Then the AMD CPU uses as much as twice or more than twice as much power as the i3 and that's not an attractive situation.

AMD's tri and quad core budget CPUs are all pretty decent values, but the FX-4100 is not a great option, especially when the Phenom II 960T can be had for just a little more, or an i3. Even the Sandy Bridge Pentiums give the FX-4100 a good fight until you go well over 4GHz with the 4100.

 

[blazorthon]

[citation][nom]tbtctvtn[/nom]I did after you pointed it out. What will be the incentive to buy an i7 with IB, 2mb of extra cache?[/citation]

The incentive to buy an i7 is the same as it has always been, four cores and hyper-threading with more cache and slightly higher clock frequencies, but mostly the hyper-threading. Hyper-threading improves multi-threaded performance significantly and allows i7s to move past an FX eight core and Phenom II six core, that way they win in performance in everything against AMD instead of just lightly threaded performance.