# i5-3570k : not bad but a little disappointed...



## LagunaX (Apr 13, 2012)

i5-3570k : not bad but a little disappointed...

    My retail E1 chip is like the Tweaktown 3570k - no dice above 4.6ghz - up to 1.36v and still not stable at 4.7ghz.

    However, the sweet spot seems a decent 4.6ghz at 1.3v, load temps low 80's.

    So far, not bad but a little disappointed.

    Not a bad chip at all but doesn't clock as high as my 4.8ghz 2500k and 2600k AND runs at higher temps.

    Still Prime95'ing...







One hour Prime95 x64:





Benchmarks at 4.6ghz:





4.0ghz stock volts, nice load temps 50's:




4.2ghz stock volts, nice load temps 50's:




4.5ghz 1.24v, ok load temps low 70's:


----------



## MetalRacer (Apr 13, 2012)

Is that on air or water?


----------



## LagunaX (Apr 13, 2012)

Air - Prolimatech Armageddon 2 x 140mm 60cfm Xigmatek fans...


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 13, 2012)

Damn, and I thought my 3820 at 1.4v @ 4.75ghz ran hot but I don't even get close to 80*C, loaded I get about low 70s.


----------



## n-ster (Apr 13, 2012)

damn thats hot with such a cooler o.o Maybe I'll go SB-E afterall


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 13, 2012)

n-ster said:


> damn thats hot with such a cooler o.o Maybe I'll go SB-E afterall



Honestly, the 3820 is a hell of a deal for SB-E. For limited multi it has been a pretty good overclocker. Just give it 133mhz bclk and a single bump on the multiplier and you're at 4.75ghz @ 1.4v give or take some other settings depending on the rest of your rig.


----------



## n-ster (Apr 13, 2012)

I missed out on a 499.99$ ASUS P9X79 + i7 3820 combo a few days ago  FML

I wish I were in the US as it's cheaper than that at MC lmao


----------



## MetalRacer (Apr 13, 2012)

I have one of those retail chips here just waiting on my M5G mobo to arrive tomorrow. I may fire it up with some watercooling to see what the temps look like before I bolt on the SS.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 13, 2012)

n-ster said:


> I missed out on a 499.99$ ASUS P9X79 + i7 3820 combo a few days ago  FML
> 
> I wish I were in the US as it's cheaper than that at MC lmao



Ffffff. I love my P9X79 Deluxe. Cadaveca recommended it, and let me tell you, it is a whole lot of motherboard.


----------



## n-ster (Apr 13, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Ffffff. I love my P9X79 Deluxe. Cadaveca recommended it, and let me tell you, it is a whole lot of motherboard.



How's the Wi-Fi on that board?


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 13, 2012)

n-ster said:


> How's the Wi-Fi on that board?



I haven't used it a whole lot so I'm not sure how fast it will go. It only does 2.4ghz, but it connects to 802.11n. The range on it is pretty good. It picks up just as much as my Macbook Pro if not more, so I would say pretty good so far.


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 13, 2012)

n-ster said:


> How's the Wi-Fi on that board?



Wi-Fi is nice for laptops mainly, pure gaming machine calls for a cable- much faster...


----------



## phanbuey (Apr 13, 2012)

Looks like that 3d transistor technology doesn't love higher volts... it is also an engineering sample no?  Maybe the later units will clock better.


----------



## n-ster (Apr 13, 2012)

eidairaman1 said:


> Wi-Fi is nice for laptops mainly, pure gaming machine calls for a cable- much faster...



Router too far away


----------



## phanbuey (Apr 13, 2012)

***problem solvers theme music***


----------



## eidairaman1 (Apr 13, 2012)

phanbuey said:


> http://img.techpowerup.org/120412/ProblemSolved.jpg
> 
> ***problem solvers theme music***



ya bestbuy in 2009 where i was had it for 25 bux, it was nice cuz i made my own cables


----------



## n-ster (Apr 13, 2012)

I'd have to put holes in the walls to make it happen xD I'm in the opposite diagonal corner of where the router is. The distance isn't all that much though


----------



## nleksan (Apr 13, 2012)

Looks like I should at least start a "backup plan" for SB-E... :/

I hope that when the retail chips come out, especially the 3770K, they are not nearly as hot and have an extra 3-400mhz in em.


----------



## SoF (Apr 13, 2012)

Finally some retail completely tested 

I think this is exactly what you can expect...now imagine the heat of additional HT...3770K won't do any better imo...(and YES I know  )








nleksan said:


> I hope that when the retail chips come out, especially the 3770K, they are not nearly as hot and have an extra 3-400mhz in em.



This is already Retail and this is what will be in the stores for the next 1-2 month at least.
I really hope for improvements like you but this might still take some time.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 13, 2012)

Everyone seemed to talk down to me when I said to everyone that IVB will generate more heat than SB and was going to be a major issue for over-clocking. Wait, what is that? The IVB i5 runs hotter than my SB-E at a lower overclock? I was hoping I was going to be wrong, but physics doesn't lie. Smaller circuitry = more heat even if the CPU uses less power.


----------



## SoF (Apr 13, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Everyone seemed to talk down to me when I said to everyone that IVB will generate more heat than SB and was going to be a major issue for over-clocking.



I was afraid of that also from the very beginning and it won't get better unless we see some serious decreases of voltage anytime soon.

Regarding CPU steps ~10 years ago we should have 0.8V stock by now but due to the fact intel is introducing completely new stuph with IVY
it might take another 1 year to unleash its full potential.

default vcore of 0.9 would be nice with a new stepping...


----------



## cadaveca (Apr 13, 2012)

n-ster said:


> How's the Wi-Fi on that board?



It's good; I game on it every night. In the nearly 5 months I've been using the board, it's dropped connection just once, and to me, that's what matter for WiFi. I ahve a 19Mb connection, and the Wifi will use it all without problems.


Thanks for the info, SoF, good to know. Hopefully it will improve over time, or you jsut got a poor batch. Perhaps that's why they are getting away with the early release...although that doesn't quite make real sense..


----------



## EarthDog (Apr 13, 2012)

1.36v? Push that sucker...and get better cooling!

Yeah, seems like a leaky chip, which bodes well for the extreme overclocking crowd. No wonder you have seen a few of these sniff 7Ghz.



> Looks like that 3d transistor technology doesn't love higher volts...


Just needs to be kept cool is all and it will scale. These tend to like PLL voltage too up high.. real high.


----------



## BarbaricSoul (Apr 13, 2012)

I'll stick with my 2600K






system specs for details


----------



## chropose (Apr 13, 2012)

I don't understand. I thought Ivy Bridge isn't released yet, at least that's what i saw on intel site.


----------



## LagunaX (Apr 14, 2012)

Looks likes there is another U.K. review mirroring my results:
http://forums.aria.co.uk/showthread.php/100021-3rd-GEN-Intel-CPU-Semi-Stable-Testing-*Preview*-56K-WARNING


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 14, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Everyone seemed to talk down to me when I said to everyone that IVB will generate more heat than SB and was going to be a major issue for over-clocking. Wait, what is that? The IVB i5 runs hotter than my SB-E at a lower overclock? I was hoping I was going to be wrong, but physics doesn't lie. Smaller circuitry = more heat even if the CPU uses less power.



that depends on the voltage you are at Smaller circuitry = less Resistance = less voltage/amperage needed  = lower heat


----------



## de.das.dude (Apr 14, 2012)

One of my Friends has an i5 2500K which died twice in 6months. he was running @4Ghz, stock volts


----------



## LagunaX (Apr 14, 2012)

Been running 24/7 4.8ghz he must of had a bad psu overvolting the chip or inadequate stock cooling.


----------



## de.das.dude (Apr 14, 2012)

LagunaX said:


> Been running 24/7 4.8ghz he must of had a bad psu overvolting the chip or inadequate stock cooling.



nope. he is a reviewer, so cant accuse him of those stuff. he checked it himself. this will be the second time he will be RMAing


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 14, 2012)

de.das.dude said:


> nope. he is a reviewer, so cant accuse him of those stuff. he checked it himself. this will be the second time he will be RMAing



hes doing something wrong or his board is defective 
dirty power could also be to blame


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 14, 2012)

OneMoar said:


> that depends on the voltage you are at Smaller circuitry = less Resistance = less voltage/amperage needed  = lower heat



Actually smaller circuitry has more resistance because there is less area for the charge to move, therefore increasing current density, which determines how much heat is generated. According to Ohm's Law, I = V / R, where I is current, V is voltage, and R is resistance, in a circuit where resistance doesn't change (ideal fully loaded circuit,) R becomes a constant (which isn't true, because hot metals conduct electricity less efficiently than cold metals) so any increases to voltage will increase amperage.

So lets say you have a CPU that runs stock at 1.30v (for an easy number,) with some static resistance R, that has a TDP of 90 watts. The calculated current for the CPU would be P = I * V, since we're solving for current, we get P / V = I, 90-watts / 1.3 volts = 69.2 Amps. Using the amperage we can calculate the theoretical loaded resistance of the CPU (this is all very theoretical, a lot doesn't work this way, but it will give an idea for numbers.)

Since I = V / R, we can reformulate that to be R = V / I which would be R = 1.30v / 69.2 Amps = 1.88x10^-2 Ohms. Using this resistance we can calculate the current of an over-clock at 1.42 volts.

I = 1.4v / 1.88x10^-2 = 75.5 Amps which is 6.3 amps more, a 10% increase in current.

According to Joule's first law, Q is directly proportional to (I^2)*R. So heat increases exponentially as current increases. So if you double the current, heat quadruples. You triple the current, heat increases by a factor of 9.

So increasing the voltage on our pretend CPU by 9% just increased your heat generated by 19%. Smaller circuitry has the benefit of using less power, but has the adding issue of generating more heat because of the smaller circuitry. The exponential heat problem starts earlier for IVB because it is already running hot because of the smaller circuitry.

IVB's lower stock voltage (and in turn lower current,) is what makes IVB use less electricity, not the smaller circuitry (which actually diminished some of that benefit.)


----------



## radusorin (Apr 14, 2012)

Didin't this hole small die less heat less power thing worked till now ? Or is it from now on ?

 starting to get confused


----------



## Vulpesveritas (Apr 15, 2012)

@radusorin It is still beneficial due to the voltage decrease, and it is projected down into the single nm for silicon I believe.  After that they may have to turn to other mediums such as carbon nanotubes.
The 3D transistors may also be contributing to heat, although that is merely speculation on my part.


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 15, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Actually smaller circuitry has more resistance because there is less area for the charge to move, therefore increasing current density, which determines how much heat is generated. According to Ohm's Law, I = V / R, where I is current, V is voltage, and R is resistance, in a circuit where resistance doesn't change (ideal fully loaded circuit,) R becomes a constant (which isn't true, because hot metals conduct electricity less efficiently than cold metals) so any increases to voltage will increase amperage.
> 
> So lets say you have a CPU that runs stock at 1.30v (for an easy number,) with some static resistance R, that has a TDP of 90 watts. The calculated current for the CPU would be P = I * V, since we're solving for current, we get P / V = I, 90-watts / 1.3 volts = 69.2 Amps. Using the amperage we can calculate the theoretical loaded resistance of the CPU (this is all very theoretical, a lot doesn't work this way, but it will give an idea for numbers.)
> 
> ...



BUT
all the goes right out the window when we start talking about super conductive materials 
won't be to far off down strange haxoring  starts to occur when you get down below 10nm


----------



## TheoneandonlyMrK (Apr 15, 2012)

Vulpesveritas said:


> The 3D transistors may also be contributing to heat, although that is merely speculation on my part.



that would make a bit of sense as there is more surface area to the gate so it should dissipate heat quicker, but the shorter interconnect lentgh and lower gate operateing power normally mitigates this ,its a new tech and its not like its worse


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 15, 2012)

OneMoar said:


> all the goes right out the window when we start talking about super conductive materials
> won't be to far off down strange haxoring starts to occur when you get down below 10nm



Except...
A: CPUs aren't made of super conducting material.
B: 10nm has bigger issues than this, chip manufacturers will have to figure out how to get around the quantum tunneling problem before they get past 16nm.


----------



## radusorin (Apr 15, 2012)

Aquinus said:


> Except...
> A: CPUs aren't made of super conducting material.
> B: 10nm has bigger issues than this, chip manufacturers will have to figure out how to get around the quantum tunneling problem before they get past 16nm.



So for now, as long as the materials remain the same the maximum size will be 16nm?

@Vulpesveritas the same thought haunts my mind. Well at list SB (no 3D) less heat than IVB (whit 3D) and till now at list it seems to be a performance increase as well. I mean apparently a 4.8 IV can keep up whit a 5.0-5.2 SB.


----------



## Sinzia (Apr 15, 2012)

Sounds like hardcore overclockers might want to wait for the next stepping then, I had high hopes for OCing out of the gate on this one.


----------



## Vulpesveritas (Apr 15, 2012)

It would be funny if this will give AMD an enthusiast edge for OC this year.... eh fanboys can hope, right?  Then again the resonant clock mesh may cause a similar issue, and we won't know till Trinity. 
On topic though, yeah it's seeming about a 10% IPC increase for Ivy.  So it's not all bad news, though I wonder how it does under higher volts.


----------



## Random Murderer (Apr 15, 2012)

radusorin said:


> So for now, as long as the materials remain the same the maximum size will be 16nm?
> 
> @Vulpesveritas the same thought haunts my mind. Well at list SB (no 3D) less heat than IVB (whit 3D) and till now at list it seems to be a performance increase as well. I mean apparently a 4.8 IV can keep up whit a 5.0-5.2 SB.



except that clock for clock SB-E is outpacing IVB. IVB-E is going to be a real wild card in terms of performance, heat, and overclocking, but we'll have to wait until they're released to know for sure how they stack up to IVB, SB, and SB-E in those aspects.


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 15, 2012)

It won't be long before they START using Super conductors


----------



## Vulpesveritas (Apr 15, 2012)

@onemoar: Or at least get creative.  I believe Intel is trying germanium alloy and patonting it for use in processors, while I remember something with IBM and carbon nanotubes.
I don't believe either is a superconductor at high tempratures.  So eh.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 15, 2012)

Vulpesveritas said:


> @onemoar: Or at least get creative.  I believe Intel is trying germanium alloy and patonting it for use in processors, while I remember something with IBM and carbon nanotubes.
> I don't believe either is a superconductor at high tempratures.  So eh.



Carbon nanotubes is to combat the quantum tunneling problem at 16nm and smaller.


----------



## OneMoar (Apr 15, 2012)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor 
^^^


----------



## Vulpesveritas (Apr 16, 2012)

OneMoar said:


> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Room-temperature_superconductor
> ^^^



Right well... I don't see carbon nanotubes or germanium on that list.  lol


----------



## BrooksyX (Apr 16, 2012)

Hmm glad I just went ahead and went the sandybridge. Yes ivybridge seems nice but it doesnt seem like its panning out to be that much better.


----------

