More Details on Intel's Ivy Bridge and Maho Bay Leaked

Page 2 - 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.
Guys, guys, guys... we're missing the bigger picture here. Short of the integration of the usb3.0 and the pci-e 3.0 and lowered power usage how much better will this new platform make your games? The answer is "very little". Dont get me wrong it sounds sweet but like some said I have an x58 with an i7-920... got the thing the week it came out and it's still able to perform in games at almost exactly the same level as the brand new sandy bridge-e chips!

the integrated graphics will be nice for people like my dad who rarely if ever play a game and dont want to spend any money on a dedicated graphics card but would still like some level of dx11 performance. But for everyone else integrated graphics will only be useful if you can plug your monitor into it and your graphics card (via a y cable or something) and when doing 2d or low power 3d (like a screen saver) use the onboard but when you launch a game switch over to the gaming card. Otherwise integrated graphics are well laughable. Though I do suppose they had to do something with the cpu since like I said earlier... you wont see any benefit in game...

Look here
 
[citation][nom]campb292[/nom]A nice gaming platform for sure, but a feature set not much different than the current sandy 6-series. Many 6 series boards have pcie3.0 support, usb 3.0, etc. Not to mention current, and probably next gen, graphics cards don't even saturate pcie 2.0 bandwidth.[/citation]

Single GPU cards barely saturate PCIe 2.0 X8. The only thing PCIe 3.0 will benefit is multiple GPUs on a single PCB. And again, you also have power restrictions placed on PCIe slots. In other terms, PCIe 3.0 is worthless, at least for the next 2-3 generations, and even then only dual GPU cards will really benefit over 2.0.
 
What about Lightpeak/Thunderbolt? Where is the support for that? Has Intel abandoned their own tech? Isn't that why they weren't pushing USB 3 to begin with? Why on earth would it not be integrated into their series 7 chipset?
 
[citation][nom]Christopher1[/nom]For most users. Unfortunately, most people buying desktops and even laptops today are gaming users who need a little more 'oomph' than any Intel GPU would bring to the table.[/citation]
depends on social factors really...in developing countries people usually wait around 5 years before upgrading (can vary of course), and most of them don't game. Like in India, a lot of computers are in circulation but most people have older desktops (p4/Core/Core 2) with newer laptops. So here integrated matters, especially since most people don't want external GPUs.

Will be kind of sad for us gamers, the demand for separate graphics solutions may fall, possibly increasing the already high prices.
 
[citation][nom]fazers_on_stun[/nom]Probably true even with the IB top-end GPU which Intel says will be some 60% faster than the one in Sandy Bridge, although S/A has an articlen mentioning 2X performance. It should be comparable to LLano's.[/citation]
http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/gaming-graphics-card-radeon-hd-6870-geforce-gtx-570,2834-7.html
Seems like Intel Graphics compare to other cards that can't play games... just bought a 9600 GSO fxf for 20$, way better then intel graphics. throw in a cheap AMD CPU and its a better cheaper platform, its memory cost less, its mobo cost less. why buy intel?
 
Worthless cpu for gaming and everyday computer basic use. They need to work on coding app to get better use for multi-thread for gamer a graphic is the best solution over spending extra 500$ for 5 fps gain. Even bf3 with a dual core to a quad core have around 10 fps gain. its an other story for video/computing user.
 
I'll be happy to stick with my I7-2600K until Ive Bridge, definitely looking forward to it.
Question is, with how fast Intel is moving, how can AMD possibly catch up? So sad, I really love AMD but I am forced to stick with Intel CPU's for the time being.
 
danwat: Agreed, at least for the desktop parts a couple extra cores would be nice for power users(but probably not gamers).

77w is quite frankly, not that impressive for 22nm. The Core 2 Extreme QX6850 was 65nm, 3.0ghz and had a TDP of 130w, and there isn't THAT much of a difference in IPC, or a powerful enough GPU, or a big enough bump in clockspeed to justify Ivy Bridge not having a TDP under 60w for a quad. Even compared to Sandy Bridge having 95w TDP, it should be lower just from the shrink.
 
[citation][nom]campb292[/nom]A nice gaming platform for sure, but a feature set not much different than the current sandy 6-series. Many 6 series boards have pcie3.0 support, usb 3.0, etc. Not to mention current, and probably next gen, graphics cards don't even saturate pcie 2.0 bandwidth.[/citation]

Pretty much this. I just did a new build and got a ASRock P67 Extreme4 Gen 3 mobo. It has the PCI-E 3, USB 3, and I put a i2500k in it. I think we'll see slightly better temps and computation power is all.
 
What can i say... Im still using LGA775... Q9450 @ 3ghz (basic o/c) with 8gb DDR2 and a 570GTX.

I did a minor upgrade on the mobo to a P5Q-SE2 to support PCIE-2.0 recently... and still... im happy to wait till halfway next year for a decent performance gain 😀.

All my games are played @ max... maybe ill throw in an SSD for good measure after a hopeful xmas drop :)
 
would it be to hard to have a nameing convention that makes sense?

iX(planned performance tier) x(generation number)x(cores)x(threads)x(revision) and at the end ghz

1x xxxx x.xghz

i mean seriously, would it kill them to do this?
 
I was hoping ivy bridge would come with 8 cores. Sad to say I might have wait another year for haswell.
 
[citation][nom]ojas[/nom]So this means pcie 3.0, usb 3.0, IGP with dx11, similar naming scheme, lower tdp...if they manage to deliver decent entry level gpu performance while delivering on their promised performance increase over sandy bridge, intel have a huge win lined up for them.i hope amd gets its act together soon enough...[/citation]
intel already has huge wins lining up for long..the loser is user these days as there is no competition from AMD
 
All I'm seeing is up to 4 cores. Couple questions here:
When are Ivy Bridge 6 and 8 cores expecting to release??
What clock rate ranges are expected?
Thank you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom