Official Intel Ivy Bridge Discussion

[Guest]

Sounds alright. Try turning turbo back on and running a CPU stress test. As long as it doesn't go above 65-70C it's fine.

+1

no offense but turning off turbo is wasting money; you paid for it getting the i5.

you may want to consider lowering the volts (Vcore) by setting the offset to negative (-) and raising it in 0.05 increments then testing in prime95 for a good 45-60 minutes each time. when it fails prime95 or doesn't post, bump down 0.05 and test a few hours for stability. keep a notebook or pen and paper handy to keep track of the settings if you need to reset the BIOS, which will clear any previous setting.

if you need further help, open a thread in the forums.

 

[srtrny]

Well I don't have to upgrade yet!

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

The new HD 4600 will push forward with 20 instead of 16 pipelines and slightly higher clock rates in the performance of an Nvidia GeForce GT 620M regions.

http://translate.google.com/translate?depth=1&hl=en&rurl=translate.google.com&tl=en&u=http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/Erste-Haswell-Notebooks-angekuendigt-1813374.html

 

[de5_Roy]

Hackintosh lover's dream and Apple's nightmare: the Z77MX:QUO-AOS motherboard
http://vr-zone.com/articles/hackintosh-lover-s-dream-and-apple-s-nightmare-the-z77mx-quo-aos-motherboard/19160.html

Intel giving away free snowboards with K-series CPUs
http://techreport.com/news/24447/intel-giving-away-free-snowboards-with-k-series-cpus
there might be a black eyed peas song promoting this..... 😉

 

[clintwilks]

is 1.28v with LLC on next to highest setting for 4.5ghz a pretty crappy chip if you're talking 3570K?

 

[e56imfg]

Has anyone every achieved 4.1 Ghz with the 3470's limited multiplier?

 

[de5_Roy]

Has anyone every achieved 4.1 Ghz with the 3470's limited multiplier?

if i understood correctly, you can achieve 4.0 ghz by setting maximum single core turbo multiplier and extra 100 mhz from changing bclk. you'll need a z75/77 mobo for that.

if you use an asus or gigabyte motherboard, you might be able to get 4.0 ghz on all 4 cores of 3470 by setting xmp. it's called multicore enhancement, might have different names in different bios. asrock might have it on their high end z77 mobo, but i can't confirm that.

 

[gamerk316]

Since we have no Haswell thread:

http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-4770k-haswell-performance,3461.html

So another 7%-13% performance jump. GT2 still looks "meh" (OK, crap) at best.

 

[de5_Roy]

we have a 'Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews' thread, sorta sequel to haswell thread:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1581001/intel-future-chips-news-rumours-reviews/

 

[sarinaide]

we have a 'Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews' thread, sorta sequel to haswell thread:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1581001/intel-future-chips-news-rumours-reviews/

I wondered where that went to. 😀

I will brave HD4600 @ 1080, skyrim fully maxed, I have a tingly feeling this is very playable at those settings😀

- So HD4600 is still theoretically weaker than Llano based HD6550D unless the ES is different from final release which it never is more than a 1% then it looks like a very expensive disappointment.
- On mobility GT3 now has its match, AMD notebooks until now have had very watered down iGPU's but with Richland around 50-60% faster I don't realistically see GT3 beating that either.
- Looks like broadwell will threaten Trinity which means Kaveri will have no natural competitor.

One thing I will like to see is benches between L4 cache used by intel and GDDR5 likely to be used by AMD what the price/performance yields are and power/performance ratio.

 

[gamerk316]

we have a 'Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews' thread, sorta sequel to haswell thread:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1581001/intel-future-chips-news-rumours-reviews/

I wondered where that went to. 😀

I will brave HD4600 @ 1080, skyrim fully maxed, I have a tingly feeling this is very playable at those settings😀

- So HD4600 is still theoretically weaker than Llano based HD6550D unless the ES is different from final release which it never is more than a 1% then it looks like a very expensive disappointment.
- On mobility GT3 now has its match, AMD notebooks until now have had very watered down iGPU's but with Richland around 50-60% faster I don't realistically see GT3 beating that either.
- Looks like broadwell will threaten Trinity which means Kaveri will have no natural competitor.

One thing I will like to see is benches between L4 cache used by intel and GDDR5 likely to be used by AMD what the price/performance yields are and power/performance ratio.

Do remember that Skyrim favors Intel chips, so Intel CPU's, even with weak IGP's, will look better then AMD chips. You are measuring the difference in CPU power, not GPU power.

Take a GPU bound game (Far Cry 3 or similar), and I'd expect Trinity to remain ahead by quite a bit.

 

[sarinaide]

we have a 'Intel's Future Chips: News, Rumours & Reviews' thread, sorta sequel to haswell thread:
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/id-1581001/intel-future-chips-news-rumours-reviews/

I wondered where that went to. 😀

I will brave HD4600 @ 1080, skyrim fully maxed, I have a tingly feeling this is very playable at those settings😀

- So HD4600 is still theoretically weaker than Llano based HD6550D unless the ES is different from final release which it never is more than a 1% then it looks like a very expensive disappointment.
- On mobility GT3 now has its match, AMD notebooks until now have had very watered down iGPU's but with Richland around 50-60% faster I don't realistically see GT3 beating that either.
- Looks like broadwell will threaten Trinity which means Kaveri will have no natural competitor.

One thing I will like to see is benches between L4 cache used by intel and GDDR5 likely to be used by AMD what the price/performance yields are and power/performance ratio.

Do remember that Skyrim favors Intel chips, so Intel CPU's, even with weak IGP's, will look better then AMD chips. You are measuring the difference in CPU power, not GPU power.

Take a GPU bound game (Far Cry 3 or similar), and I'd expect Trinity to remain ahead by quite a bit.

I did bring that up actually. Skyrim is more demanding on a CPU than GPU so at low resolutions the i7 is to look mighty impressive but upping the resolution to HD and detail quality should see the GT2 take a lot of strain. From the rumblings I heard is that it is purely a low detail part, medium and upward settings see exponential fall offs in FPS.

Another interesting thing is my APU with 2133 achieves less bandwidth than a 3770 with 1333 yet the graphics performance is well off. I am questioning the conventional thought that iGPU bandwidth is really as critical as made out and whether a 60gb/s bandwidth in a hybrid processor is not capable of say the same throughput as a entry level GPU of the 7700 ilk.

 

[de5_Roy]

I did bring that up actually. Skyrim is more demanding on a CPU than GPU so at low resolutions the i7 is to look mighty impressive but upping the resolution to HD and detail quality should see the GT2 take a lot of strain. From the rumblings I heard is that it is purely a low detail part, medium and upward settings see exponential fall offs in FPS.

Another interesting thing is my APU with 2133 achieves less bandwidth than a 3770 with 1333 yet the graphics performance is well off. I am questioning the conventional thought that iGPU bandwidth is really as critical as made out and whether a 60gb/s bandwidth in a hybrid processor is not capable of say the same throughput as a entry level GPU of the 7700 ilk.

apus' shaders are more powerful while intel's imc is more powerful. imo, having more powerful igpu is better than more powerful imc or higher memory bandwidth (e.g. radeon hd 6670 ddr3 vs gt440 gddr5). even though devastator is bw-starved, the igpu can crank out far better fps than competition. intel won't hit memory bottleneck until they buff up their shaders. that's why intel's memory bw advantage doesn't mean much in igpu-based gaming.
that does not mean devastator igpu doesn't deserve higher bandwidth.

 

[sarinaide]

I did bring that up actually. Skyrim is more demanding on a CPU than GPU so at low resolutions the i7 is to look mighty impressive but upping the resolution to HD and detail quality should see the GT2 take a lot of strain. From the rumblings I heard is that it is purely a low detail part, medium and upward settings see exponential fall offs in FPS.

Another interesting thing is my APU with 2133 achieves less bandwidth than a 3770 with 1333 yet the graphics performance is well off. I am questioning the conventional thought that iGPU bandwidth is really as critical as made out and whether a 60gb/s bandwidth in a hybrid processor is not capable of say the same throughput as a entry level GPU of the 7700 ilk.

apus' shaders are more powerful while intel's imc is more powerful. imo, having more powerful igpu is better than more powerful imc or higher memory bandwidth (e.g. radeon hd 6670 ddr3 vs gt440 gddr5). even though devastator is bw-starved, the igpu can crank out far better fps than competition. intel won't hit memory bottleneck until they buff up their shaders. that's why intel's memory bw advantage doesn't mean much in igpu-based gaming.
that does not mean devastator igpu doesn't deserve higher bandwidth.

I have said on many occasions that the $100s of dollars saved on CPU's and GPU's when opting for a APU setup the $20 extra to get at least DDR3 2133 makes a massive difference. I purchased DDR3 2800 and OC'd it to that speed, to say the FPS performance takes massive gains but $120 kit is not feasible. DDR3 2133 is the sweet spot for current APU's, you get Skyrim on High textures, no AA or AF, medium presets at 1366x768 you will get around 7 FPS difference and that for skryim at that setting is a massive gain, you get medium/high settings at a smooth resolution and very playable.

In Dual Graphics mode you get somewhere around a 7790 performance which for $190 is a absolute steal.

 

[de5_Roy]

I have said on many occasions that the $100s of dollars saved on CPU's and GPU's when opting for a APU setup the $20 extra to get at least DDR3 2133 makes a massive difference. I purchased DDR3 2800 and OC'd it to that speed, to say the FPS performance takes massive gains but $120 kit is not feasible. DDR3 2133 is the sweet spot for current APU's, you get Skyrim on High textures, no AA or AF, medium presets at 1366x768 you will get around 7 FPS difference and that for skryim at that setting is a massive gain, you get medium/high settings at a smooth resolution and very playable.

In Dual Graphics mode you get somewhere around a 7790 performance which for $190 is a absolute steal.

apus are only viable if you stick with the igpu. problem is, regular users get tired with igpu (and 768p gaming) fast and want to add discreet cards. that's why it doesn't make sense to add ram higher than 1600-1866 speed.

dual graphics needs a lot of work. amd needs to deliver timely and bug free catalyst profiles for dual gfx support. afaik, they don't. then there's stuttering due to weak cpu power.
$190 what? for gpu alone? at that price get a 7850 1gb and screw apus and dual gfx. 😉 even the best dual graphics (7660d+6670) get around radeon 6750-6770 level gaming performance. in ideal, perfect situations where 7660d is oc'ed to 6670 level and driver support is perfect, it'll reach 6790 level, max. nowhere near a 7790.

 

[sarinaide]

I have said on many occasions that the $100s of dollars saved on CPU's and GPU's when opting for a APU setup the $20 extra to get at least DDR3 2133 makes a massive difference. I purchased DDR3 2800 and OC'd it to that speed, to say the FPS performance takes massive gains but $120 kit is not feasible. DDR3 2133 is the sweet spot for current APU's, you get Skyrim on High textures, no AA or AF, medium presets at 1366x768 you will get around 7 FPS difference and that for skryim at that setting is a massive gain, you get medium/high settings at a smooth resolution and very playable.

In Dual Graphics mode you get somewhere around a 7790 performance which for $190 is a absolute steal.

apus are only viable if you stick with the igpu. problem is, regular users get tired with igpu (and 768p gaming) fast and want to add discreet cards. that's why it doesn't make sense to add ram higher than 1600-1866 speed.

dual graphics needs a lot of work. amd needs to deliver timely and bug free catalyst profiles for dual gfx support. afaik, they don't. then there's stuttering due to weak cpu power.
$190 what? for gpu alone? at that price get a 7850 1gb and screw apus and dual gfx. 😉 even the best dual graphics (7660d+6670) get around radeon 6750-6770 level gaming performance. in ideal, perfect situations where 7660d is oc'ed to 6670 level and driver support is perfect, it'll reach 6790 level, max. nowhere near a 7790.

1) Submitted BF3 multiplayer fraps recordings, medium textures @ 1600x900; Min - 24 Avg - 37 Max - 48 with DDR3 1600. That is very playable on a 64 man server, DDR3 2133 achieves a min - 31 avg 43 and Max over 50, these fuddy duddy cores are hardly weak and 16:9/10 is HD resolutions so for a budget an APU murders anything in its price range, hell it murders a 4770K which is almost 4x its cost. This "weak cores" nonsense is very depressing, enough benches have been done to show the L3 less APU's more than handsomely keeping up with Denebs and FX4000 parts, sure in some instances it can affect the performance but on every test we have done and online review sites have done, with a HD7970 the APU achieves well over the "this is being bottlenecked" line.

I did submit a list of games which I have played that the iGPU can handle 1080 and eye candy just fine, hell some maxed out yet there is still the put it down crowd, its very depressing.

2) $190 for a CPU + supported dual graphics that is very low cost. Dual Graphics drivers are improving, there are enough benches and recorded ones on youtube with dual graphics playing Skyrim, Dirt Showdown, Planetside 2 at 1080 on medium-high settings and very playable. if a HD6790 is basically a HD6850 which is stronger than a HD7770 due to its higher buffers and throughput, why not, the 7790 is a midpoint between that and the 7850 which is a little monster.

 

[de5_Roy]

1) Submitted BF3 multiplayer fraps recordings, medium textures @ 1600x900; Min - 24 Avg - 37 Max - 48 with DDR3 1600. That is very playable on a 64 man server, DDR3 2133 achieves a min - 31 avg 43 and Max over 50, these fuddy duddy cores are hardly weak and 16:9/10 is HD resolutions so for a budget an APU murders anything in its price range, hell it murders a 4770K which is almost 4x its cost. This "weak cores" nonsense is very depressing, enough benches have been done to show the L3 less APU's more than handsomely keeping up with Denebs and FX4000 parts, sure in some instances it can affect the performance but on every test we have done and online review sites have done, with a HD7970 the APU achieves well over the "this is being bottlenecked" line.

I did submit a list of games which I have played that the iGPU can handle 1080 and eye candy just fine, hell some maxed out yet there is still the put it down crowd, its very depressing.

2) $190 for a CPU + supported dual graphics that is very low cost. Dual Graphics drivers are improving, there are enough benches and recorded ones on youtube with dual graphics playing Skyrim, Dirt Showdown, Planetside 2 at 1080 on medium-high settings and very playable. if a HD6790 is basically a HD6850 which is stronger than a HD7770 due to its higher buffers and throughput, why not, the 7790 is a midpoint between that and the 7850 which is a little monster.

1) avg. 37 fps at 900p for bf3 mp might be some kind of an achievement for the apu but the other players (playing at 60+ fps) picking you off before you can react due to sub-60fps isn't worth it really. getting average 30-40 fps isn't undermining the apu's performance, imo it's not good enough for mp fps gaming. self-gratifying? definitely, since a core i3 will get bottlenecked by 2 cores and a core i5/i7 doesn't have the powerful igpu nor the cheap price.
i see amd favorers always drag in a core i7 to compare with entry level apus. core i3 is a better target, some of them even have top igpu e.g. core i3 3225 (hd4000). same with high end card like 7970. when i mentioned how 5800k bottlenecks a 7970 more than core i3 3220, i was told that that's an 'unreasonable' combo, so i had to explain why an apu owner might want to have one.
haswell's spec table says that all cpus will get gt2 igpu with varying clockrate, not just 4770k.
your perception of 'playable', 'smooth', 'fine', 'maxed out' is quite different from the norm. that's all i'm gonna say about this matter since perception is highly subjective.
apu's cpu cores are too weak to handle discreet card crossfire because of cpu overhead. as for dual gfx, the driver performance doesn't trickle down to entry level - this is known fact. amd is also visibly less motivated in supporting dual gfx than providing performance drivers for hardware like 7970/7870.
2) i trust youtube benches as much as i trust eteknix or obr hardware.
actually, a 6790 is a cut-down radeon hd 6870. it's not close to 6850 performance-wise. saying a 6790 is close to 6850 is like saying 7770 is close to 7850. 7770 itself can evenly compete with a 6850 due to driver improvement. if you can't tell the different between these cards, i'm not gonna post benches where the difference clearly shows.

 

[gamerk316]

1) avg. 37 fps at 900p for bf3 mp might be some kind of an achievement for the apu but the other players (playing at 60+ fps) picking you off before you can react due to sub-60fps isn't worth it really. getting average 30-40 fps isn't undermining the apu's performance, imo it's not good enough for mp fps gaming. self-gratifying? definitely, since a core i3 will get bottlenecked by 2 cores and a core i5/i7 doesn't have the powerful igpu nor the cheap price.

30 FPS is fine as long as its constant. (worst case of 16ms latency)

Conversely, 60 FPS is not fine if its rapidly jumping between 30 and 120 FPS (worst case of 48ms latency)

When playing multiplayer, the average/maximum latency is far more important then FPS.

 

[lalji]

Good Information, Thanks for sharing.

 

[JAYDEEJOHN]

http://semiaccurate.com/2013/04/15/putting-intels-new-hd-4000-drivers-to-the-test/

 

[de5_Roy]

less jaggies with new drivers. looks like gpu-bound games will keep sucking on hd4k. i can't believe the reviewer played cs:go on hd4k and won matches. i hope it was in single player mode.

 

[Chris Rodinis]

Here is an overview, IBM System X iDataPlex DX360 M3 Computer Server: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWR7D39omoQ

So today is April 23rd... the release of Ivy Bridge! I'm making this thread to hopefully centralize the actual information for everybody who wants to know. Hopefully people who got ahold of an IB chip today can post benchmarks and overall opinions. I'm separating this from the "news" thread because that thread seems to focus on pre-release information.

When you post (and this is edited in the original thread as well), please tell us what cooler you're using (H100, custom liquid, Hyper 212 Evo, Noctua, etc.) so that we can evaluate its temperatures (which has been the main concern). Also, please use the format malmental (apparently now "verbalizer") used below, but include the cooler you're using (of course).

So for anyone with the chip--post your findings, overall opinions, benchmarks, etc. here!

EDIT: Benchmarks have been released on hwbot.org

i5-3570k: http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i5_3570k/
i7-3770k: http://hwbot.org/hardware/processor/core_i7_3770k/

Other Various Reviews on the i7-3770K: put together by user Jaquith from source @Hms1193
Intel Core i7 3770K @ PCPerspective
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Tomshardware
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Anandtech
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Hexus
Intel Core i7 3770K @ VR-Zone
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Wccftech
Intel Core i7 3770K and 3570K @ Sweclockers
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Guru3D
Intel Core i7 3770K @ HardOCP
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Expreview
Intel Core i7 3770K @ TweakTown
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Maximum-tech
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Hardware Info
Intel Core i7 3770K @ HardwareCanucks
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Overclockers
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Bit-tech
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Hardware Heaven
Intel Core i7 3770K @ Xbit Labs (Best review @Hms1193 opinion)
Intel Core i7 3770K and i5 3570K Review @ Vortez
Undervolting and Overclocking Core i7 3770K @ Anandtech
Intel Core i7 3770K Review @ Overclockers Club[/quotemsg]

 

[Chris Rodinis]

Here is an overview, IBM System X iDataPlex DX360 M3 Computer Server: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nWR7D39omoQ

 

[technoboyhrishi]

Then is it good to go with AMD A10 5800k since integrated graphics and of course gaming GIG

 

[technoboyhrishi]

How about going with A10 or fx series processor since they are less in price as well as more in cores with Good L3 cache