# Intel Core i7 "Ivy Bridge-E" HEDT Lineup Detailed



## btarunr (Apr 1, 2013)

Intel's Core "Haswell" processor family may be just around the corner (June 2013), but that isn't stopping enthusiasts from looking out for the next HEDT (high-end desktop) processor from Intel, codenamed "Ivy Bridge-E." The new lineup could look similar to the company's current Core i7 "Sandy Bridge-E," in that it features a quad-core part in the $300-400 range, a six-core unlocked part in the $500-600 range, and an Extreme Edition six-core part around $1000. All three parts will be available in the LGA2011 package, and compatible with current X79 chipset-based motherboards (BIOS update could be needed). DDR3-1866 MHz could become the standard memory frequency for these chips.

The lineup will begin with Core i7-4820, a quad-core chip with a nominal clock speed of 3.70 GHz, Turbo Boost speed of 3.90 GHz, and 10 MB shared L3 cache. Moving on, there's the Core i7-4930K, a six-core chip with an unlocked BClk multiplier, nominal speed of 3.40 GHz, Turbo Boost speed of 3.90 GHz, and 12 MB shared L3 cache. The series will be topped off with the Core i7-4960X Extreme Edition, featuring an unlocked BClk multiplier, 3.60 GHz nominal clock speed, 4.00 GHz Turbo Boost speed, and 15 MB shared L3 cache. The Ivy Bridge-E silicon will be built on the 22 nm silicon fab process, and TDP for all three parts is rated at 130W. The three will be released some time in Q3, 2013.





*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## Kaynar (Apr 1, 2013)

How certain it is that this will be LGA2011? Also, do we know if new LGA2011 mobos will come out with newer features that can be considered as an upgrade to the current ones? I need to upgrade my PC this year but I haven't made up my mind if I should go on a 4770K in June with new mobo or buy a 3820 with Asus Gene iv now and just upgrade CPU next year...


----------



## btarunr (Apr 1, 2013)

Kaynar said:


> How certain it is that this will be LGA2011?









It's going to be just like LGA1366 and X58 chipset, which supported both 45nm "Bloomfield" and 32nm "Gulftown."


----------



## Kaynar (Apr 1, 2013)

great, thanks for the info! I guess I'm set then... I've been waiting for news on LGA2011 update for some time.

I have an off-topic question though, will my 1.5 year old Corsair H100 fit on LGA2011 with the stock backplates?


----------



## Hayder_Master (Apr 1, 2013)

so just new cpu's no new motherboards, that's good


----------



## dj-electric (Apr 1, 2013)

Welp. Waiting to hear about 8 cores.


----------



## Jorge (Apr 1, 2013)

No 8-cores and only marginally better performance according to those in the know. The only thing extreme is the price.


----------



## jagd (Apr 1, 2013)

Look here http://www.fudzilla.com/home/item/2...011-thermalright-hr-02?tmpl=component&print=1  ,pictures show 4  standoffs for H100 ,dont you have them  ?



Kaynar said:


> great, thanks for the info! I guess I'm set then... I've been waiting for news on LGA2011 update for some time.


----------



## Breit (Apr 1, 2013)

Dj-ElectriC said:


> Welp. Waiting to hear about 8 cores.



I don't get that either. These chips doesn't come with a heatsink because no one is using them in a stock environment, everybody is tinkering with clock speeds and voltages (thats the purpose of unlocked cpus right?). So that also means no one with an extreme edition cpu is really caring about the TDP on these chips. Sure, lower power requirements are fine, but that only means we can queeze a bit more out of these chips before we hit the limits of our cooling equipement. I mean 300W under load only for the cpu is fully common on a highly overclocked extreme edition heading towards 5GHz.
So why not releasing a fully unlocked and uncrippled 8-core version with the full 20MB cache enabled and rate it like 150W TDP (like its Xeon brothers) or even 170W TDP (whatever is neccesary)?!


----------



## kenkickr (Apr 1, 2013)

Kaynar said:


> How certain it is that this will be LGA2011? Also, do we know if new LGA2011 mobos will come out with newer features that can be considered as an upgrade to the current ones? I need to upgrade my PC this year but I haven't made up my mind if I should go on a 4770K in June with new mobo or buy a 3820 with Asus Gene iv now and just upgrade CPU next year...



If your going to use a single video card lga 2011 wont do much for you unless you have to have quad channel ram which isnt that much noticeably better right now compared to ivys memory controller, depending on what you use.


----------



## buggalugs (Apr 1, 2013)

Why is the TDP the same as sandy bridge-e? Shouldn't it be a little better using 22nm?



Hayder_Master said:


> so just new cpu's no new motherboards, that's good



Current boards will be compatible but I'm sure there will be new motherboards with updated features, like how Asus released Premium/pro boards with socket 1366.

 The sandy bridge-e boards are the biggest letdown, with half-baked features and stuff that wasn't implemented at all. Like no Intel USB 3 ports which are on standard mainstream ivy boards.

 So I would find it hard to believe that the mainstream ivy chipset will have better features than the highend board with a $600-$1000 CPU on it. 

 New boards will have to be coming.


----------



## sergionography (Apr 1, 2013)

Breit said:


> I don't get that either. These chips doesn't come with a heatsink because no one is using them in a stock environment, everybody is tinkering with clock speeds and voltages (thats the purpose of unlocked cpus right?). So that also means no one with an extreme edition cpu is really caring about the TDP on these chips. Sure, lower power requirements are fine, but that only means we can queeze a bit more out of these chips before we hit the limits of our cooling equipement. I mean 300W under load only for the cpu is fully common on a highly overclocked extreme edition heading towards 5GHz.
> So why not releasing a fully unlocked and uncrippled 8-core version with the full 20MB cache enabled and rate it like 150W TDP (like its Xeon brothers) or even 170W TDP (whatever is neccesary)?!



1. Intel wouldn't want to offer something that will beat its cutlrrent 8 core xeons at half the price

2. The die shrink to ivy barely brought any improvements in multicore which only goes to make bulldozer appear less of a fail. Note that this has 6 cores and still rated at 130w, in other words they could've done that on sandy bridge e but they didnt just so they can milk every penny out of people. If you care so much about multithread do yourself a favor and wait till steamroller, that design should only make amds excellent multicore scaling even better that's before we consider any single core improvements, and im sure it will be at a fraction of the price for ivy bridge E


----------



## lilhasselhoffer (Apr 1, 2013)

I give.


Intel is keeping the X79 chipset.  The inclusion of a slightly higher frequency is nice, but too little to justify spending another $650 at launch.

So you've got a 22 nm process running the CPU.  Let's look at the 65 nm running the PCH.  65-45-32-22.  Four generations between the PCH and the CPU.  No wonder the PCH only supports 2 SATA III and 4 SATA II ports.  No wonder the USB options were cut down from the initial estimates.  Intel gave up on this generation's enthusiast platform before the party began.


If I sound bitter, it's because Intel is dragging their feet.  They want $500+ for a CPU.  In turn, they give us technology that is more than half a decade old to run the PCH.  Intel is giving their high-end customers the bird.  Fine, just don't expect me to buy another high end chip any time soon.


----------



## KevinCobley (Apr 1, 2013)

*INTEL gone nuts!!*

What kind of sucker is going to touch these, if you already have Sandybridge E why would you bother to spend 500 to a grand for effectively nothing. Maybe a few updaters from x58 or earlier.
I have X58, I won't buy another until Haswell E and only then if the PCH has a minimum 6 Sata3slots and 6 USB3 ports.
If Haswell E hasn't materialized when my existing CPU/Board dies I will buy a Z87 and give INTEL high end the flick.
I will switch to AMD if they can produce something like a competitive product, they have great PCH's.


----------



## Random Murderer (Apr 1, 2013)

kenkickr said:


> If your going to use a single video card lga 2011 wont do much for you unless you have to have quad channel ram which isnt that much noticeably better right now compared to ivys memory controller, depending on what you use.



That's half-right.
When Ivy hits 2011... Just think quad channel DDR3-3000+. Considering even the lower-binned Sandy Bridge E chips can run 2400+ no problem(making its IMC a little better than vanilla Sandy Bridge), it wouldn't be inconceivable that Ivy Bridge E's memory controller is a little better than vanilla Ivy Bridge's.
That being said, I'm just as disappointed as you guys that they're still offering 6c/12t as the top chip. I really don't want to have to go Xeon and have my OC capability crippled just so I can get those last 2c/4t. And I won't. Screw that.
I'm also worried they're not going to learn from vanilla Ivy Bridge and that they'll keep using that crappy thermal paste instead of soldering the die. I don't want to de-lid a $600-1000 processor to get acceptable temps.


----------



## jihadjoe (Apr 1, 2013)

The "K" next to the 4820 makes me rather happy.
Dont' really need 8-core CPU (and if I did there's always Xeons), but the platform calls to me.


----------



## Octavean (Apr 1, 2013)

jihadjoe said:


> The "K" next to the 4820 makes me rather happy.
> Dont' really need 8-core CPU (and if I did there's always Xeons), but the platform calls to me.



Good eye,.....

For what its worth I have heard rumors of a Core i7 3980X with 8 cores / 16 threads. I know I doesn't make much sense and one would have to see it released in order to believe it,....


----------



## Mathragh (Apr 1, 2013)

I wonder how this'll turn out compared to Haswell. I suppose that Haswell won't be that big of an improvement, because that would mean this 2011 platform would be quite useless, atleast the 4 core variants. The fact that intel brings out these CPU's with these specs and prices mean that Haswell probably wont be that big of an improvement. Unless they want to cut into their own sales ofc.

Just some random speculation!


----------



## TheHunter (Apr 1, 2013)

Im waiting for a upgrade, I was about to buy I7 3820 and then upgrade to 8core IB-e but looks like there wont be 8core after all?? 

weird cause i saw some news about 8core not so long ago..
*here*: http://www.legitreviews.com/news/14815/


If this new slide is 10000% true, then im set for i7 4770K and OC that mofo to at least 5.2ghz

Anadtech said it will use new soldering not that bs like by IvyBridge, also unlocked base clock will kick some serious ass 


@Mathragh

According to wiki apparently 10% faster by default, add better OC and it will be a worthy upgrade for older cpu users. 


_Performance_
Compared to Ivy Bridge (expected):

Twice the vector processing performance.
    At least 10% sequential CPU performance increase (8 execution ports per core versus 6).
    Up to double the performance of the integrated GPU. (Haswell GT3 vs Ivy Bridge HD4000)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haswell_(microarchitecture)


----------



## GamerGuy (Apr 1, 2013)

Heh, looks like I don't need to think about an upgrade IB-E after all, actually I am rather pleased that there is no octo core IB-E.


----------



## Inceptor (Apr 1, 2013)

Breit said:


> I don't get that either. These chips doesn't come with a heatsink because no one is using them in a stock environment, everybody is tinkering with clock speeds and voltages (thats the purpose of unlocked cpus right?). So that also means no one with an extreme edition cpu is really caring about the TDP on these chips. Sure, lower power requirements are fine, but that only means we can queeze a bit more out of these chips before we hit the limits of our cooling equipement. I mean 300W under load only for the cpu is fully common on a highly overclocked extreme edition heading towards 5GHz.
> So why not releasing a fully unlocked and uncrippled 8-core version with the full 20MB cache enabled and rate it like 150W TDP (like its Xeon brothers) or even 170W TDP (whatever is neccesary)?!



There will be no 8 core version.  
These are crippled Xeons for the consumer 'enthusiast' market.  They're priced for consumers, Xeons are much much more expensive.  Intel is not going to sell a Xeon for cheap just because you want one... they would lose large amounts of money as the enterprise and workstation customers buy up all the cheap 8 cores for their servers.


----------



## nickbaldwin86 (Apr 1, 2013)

4820k.... K FTW... I might have to build a system based off this

and maybe this?
http://www.techpowerup.com/forums/showthread.php?t=182235

and at least 2 or 3 ... 4 would be cool, GTX 680s or whatever is out


----------



## ensabrenoir (Apr 1, 2013)

.........its truely the end of an era.....  the. Great. Cpu war is over.......the needlessly overpowered pc is almost gone. And we await the time until desktops become.  "The shiznit" once more to the masses.......still gonna upgrade anyway follow me if u dare..... or have enough play. Dough.


----------



## Frick (Apr 1, 2013)

ensabrenoir said:


> .........its truely the end of an era.....  the. Great. Cpu war is over.......the needlessly overpowered pc is almost gone. And we await the time until desktops become.  "The shiznit" once more to the masses.......still gonna upgrade anyway follow me if u dare..... or have enough play. Dough.



Most desktops is way way overpowered by default. No big deal there.


----------



## nickbaldwin86 (Apr 1, 2013)

Frick said:


> Most desktops is way way overpowered by default. No big deal there.



understatement of the year

What do you do? browse the interwebs all day? yes for Facebook and Techpowerup a monster workstation with a few high end GPUs is a waste of power, but I still can bring even the most top of the line workstation to its knees and watch it flop 

And I am not even talking about for gaming, though gaming will do it real quickly.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 2, 2013)

jihadjoe said:


> The "K" next to the 4820 makes me rather happy.



You make it sound like non-K CPUs on skt2011 can't overclock...




 

The highest multi I can use it 43, but that's more than enough when your bclk can hit 133Mhz.

That's my 24/7 OC, it does go higher but my motherboard doesn't let me hit 5Ghz, 4.75-4.8Ghz is about the best I can do stable at semi-reasonable temperatures, but 4.4 has been a comfy spot.

I don't think I'm going to be upgrading (even more so if I'm going to have to de-lid an IVB-E for decent temps,) but if I were, I would go with a 6c and if prices of the 3930k goes down, I might rather just go with that instead if I do take that route. We'll have to see how these new CPUs hold up. SB-E has a little higher latency because of the huge memory controller and the larger L3 cache, so maybe the shrink will do some good things with the IMC with cache latencies.

I'll wait for benchmarks before I start placing judgment on Intel.

Also for all of those who are saying X79 is a let down, unless you own a SB-E machine, I would stop talking about what you don't know anything about. I've been very happy with my X79 machine and it has delivered in every way shape and form. It's fun to use and it's a great platform to work on. I also find it rather amusing when people complain about the power consumption despite the facts that it has more cache, double the size of the IMC and double the size of the PCI-E controller, and add a couple cores. So yeah, I can perfectly understand why SB-E eats more power and I'm willing to bet that it only has part to do with the cores and has a lot to do with cache, the IMC, and the PCI-E controller.

I love my SB-E rig and I know a lot of other people who love theirs too. So despite it lacking more SATA 6Gb ports (do you really have more than two or four SSDs?) it's really not a bad platform. The PCH doesn't do nearly as much as a chipset in that position as done in the past. The CPU does most of everything and in most modern rigs, 2 integrated SATA 6Gb ports and 2 external ones if the board has it, is plenty.

Also don't complain about SATA, if you have a skt2011 machine you have 40 PCI-E lanes that are ready to get filled up with things that don't need to be video cards. If I were really going to run more than 2 SSDs, I would rather have a decent RAID controller to handle them as opposed to using RSTe.

Also last time I checked z77 also only has two SATA 6Gb ports off the PCH, so it's not like it's a downgrade though.


----------



## Breit (Apr 2, 2013)

Inceptor said:


> There will be no 8 core version.
> These are crippled Xeons for the consumer 'enthusiast' market.  They're priced for consumers, Xeons are much much more expensive.  Intel is not going to sell a Xeon for cheap just because you want one... they would lose large amounts of money as the enterprise and workstation customers buy up all the cheap 8 cores for their servers.



make an extreme edition unlocked ivb-e 8-core and charge the same amount a similiar clocked xeon would cost. i'll bet there will be buyers from the enthusiast camp...  even if this means paying 2k for it!


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 2, 2013)

Breit said:


> make an extreme edition unlocked ivb-e 8-core and charge the same amount a similiar clocked xeon would cost. i'll bet there will be buyers from the enthusiast camp...  even if this means paying 2k for it!



You would have to be paying well over 3k USD for something like that.
http://ark.intel.com/products/64622...E5-4650-20M-Cache-2_70-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI


----------



## Breit (Apr 2, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> You would have to be paying well over 3k USD for something like that.
> http://ark.intel.com/products/64622...E5-4650-20M-Cache-2_70-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI



That's madness! I like it.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 2, 2013)

Breit said:


> That's madness! I like it.



I'll stick with my 3820 which has ~1/2 the power for < 1/10th the cost.


----------



## buggalugs (Apr 2, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> I love my SB-E rig and I know a lot of other people who love theirs too. .



 I had a sandy bridge-e system with a 3930k and I didn't like it. It felt like a slow unresponsive mess to me. I got rid of it within weeks. Overclocks doesn't mean the system feels fast and responsive. I have always bought the highend Intel platform but I ditched  sandy-e for mainstream ivy and its a better system imo.

 My ivy(3770k) performs about the same as my 3930k in all benchmarks except where the extra 2 cores come into play, even then not much difference.....and the Ivy uses like 40% less power!

 The memory controller on ivy is much faster and much better latency than sandy-e. Look on the benchmarks, sandy-e mem latency is around 64ns on ivy around 40ns (at default 1600Mhz) and memory throughput is around 2,000MB/s faster on ivy(at default 1600Mhz).

 So the super duper quad channel memory system is slower and much more latency than mainstream ivy and I noticed it in responsiveness and how the system feels.

 Add to that, the half baked features, X79 basically has equal to or LESS features than a mainstream ivy board. Even the driver updates are few and far between, its like a beta system.

 X79 could have been good but it seems Intel just gave up on it, to focus on ivy and haswell.

 I haven't given up on the high end, still hoping ivy-e will be good enough to buy, tri-gate on ivy-e could really help with responsiveness and imc performance, but if they are going to use current unfinished X79 boards they can jam it, I'll move to Haswell in that case.


----------



## Breit (Apr 2, 2013)

buggalugs said:


> I had a sandy bridge-e system with a 3930k and I didn't like it. It felt like a slow unresponsive mess to me. I got rid of it within weeks. Overclocks doesn't mean the system feels fast and responsive. I have always bought the highend Intel platform but I ditched  sandy-e for mainstream ivy and its a better system imo.
> 
> My ivy(3770k) performs about the same as my 3930k in all benchmarks except where the extra 2 cores come into play, even then not much difference.....and the Ivy uses like 40% less power!
> 
> ...



looks to me like you've done something wrong here. what board did you use?
for memory throughput, i got well over 40GB/s on my R4E read and write. i suppose thats never possible on z77, even with an ivy bridge chip... but i'll check that, i've a maximus v formula lying around somewhere with a 3570k. 
memory latency is another topic, but even with ivb-e the 'small' plattform (read: ivy bridge + z77) will be better here simply because there isn't so much going on.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 2, 2013)

buggalugs said:


> I had a sandy bridge-e system with a 3930k and I didn't like it. It felt like a slow unresponsive mess to me. I got rid of it within weeks. Overclocks doesn't mean the system feels fast and responsive. I have always bought the highend Intel platform but I ditched sandy-e for mainstream ivy and its a better system imo.



Then you weren't doing it right because it should be just as fast. Yes the 3770k is a bit faster in some cases, but it doesn't mean that it is dead slow and if it felt slow and unresponsive you did something wrong.

Also if you bought SB-E for gaming, you already did something wrong. :shadedshu



buggalugs said:


> My ivy(3770k) performs about the same as my 3930k in all benchmarks except where the extra 2 cores come into play, even then not much difference.....and the Ivy uses like 40% less power!



Yes, the IVB chip also has 4 cores, not 6. 8Mb of cache, not 15Mb. 20 PCI-E lanes, not 40. It doesn't have QPI, SB-E does. SB-E has a bigger memory controller, IVB does not. IVB is also a newer CPU using a smaller process, so just the die shrink alone will reduce power consumption, so if you compare it to a similar core (2600k) it only uses 30% more power to double just about everything other than the cores.

Benchmarks also say which is faster, it doesn't explicitly mean that the faster one is fastn and the slower one is always very slow. If you bought SB-E for single-thread performance alone then you made a mistake in the first place.

So yeah, it eats more power because it has a lot more stuff shoved into it than IVB has and it is still 32nm.


buggalugs said:


> The memory controller on ivy is much faster and much better latency than sandy-e. Look on the benchmarks, sandy-e mem latency is around 64ns on ivy around 40ns (at default 1600Mhz) and memory throughput is around 2,000MB/s faster on ivy(at default 1600Mhz).



Then once again you're doing something wrong because the latency on my 3820 is only ~42ns. The cache is very slightly slower, but I also have 10Mb of it on the 3820. Also your memory benchmark must have been single-threaded because the quad-channel memory controller doesn't start chugging away until you have multiple cores hit it. Two channels is plenty for two fully loaded cores with a lot of memory I/O.

I've seen multi-threaded memory benchmarks dominate on SB-E CPUs, even my 3820 does pretty well.
View attachment 46994
Sandra also doesn't use a single-thread to measure memory bandwidth.



buggalugs said:


> Add to that, the half baked features, X79 basically has equal to or LESS features than a mainstream ivy board. Even the driver updates are few and far between, its like a beta system.



Really? Last time I checked z77 only has two SATA 6Gb ports as well. If you take a look at the back of my board I also have 6 USB 3.0 ports as well as headers for another 4. X79 is only the PCH which is basically a glorified south bridge with a couple IOH-like attributes (like 8 PCI-E lanes off the PCH.) More often than not, what the PCH offers is enough and if you need more, expand. PCI-E was developed for more than just video cards.

So before you start going on this "IVB has more" that's crap. It's also a lot less about the chipset now because the CPU handles most of everything. Also if you're complaining about SATA 6Gb ports, you only have one SSD, so why do you care?

Also no updates aren't a bad thing. My SB-E rig is perfectly stable. Why would I update my chipset drivers if it is working flawlessly and why would Intel want to introduce new bugs when they have something that works fine already.



buggalugs said:


> I haven't given up on the high end, still hoping ivy-e will be good enough to buy, tri-gate on ivy-e could really help with responsiveness and imc performance, but if they are going to use current unfinished X79 boards they can jam it, I'll move to Haswell in that case.



Since the PCH determines so much in the way of performance? Like I said, SB-E has 40 PCI-e lanes for a reason, if your board doesn't have something *that you need* then add it. If you're going to complain about the PCH not having everything you ever hoped for, you even more of a troll than I initial thought. 


Breit said:


> looks to me like you've done something wrong here. what board did you use?
> for memory throughput, i got well over 40GB/s on my R4E read and write. i suppose thats never possible on z77, even with an ivy bridge chip... but i'll check that, i've a maximus v formula lying around somewhere with a 3570k.
> memory latency is another topic, but even with ivb-e the 'small' plattform (read: ivy bridge   z77) will be better here simply because there isn't so much going on.



That's what I was thinking. My memory bandwidth is great. Always responsive, never a problem. I think he is one of those "if you have to ask about SB-E you probably don't need it" users and wasn't using it properly. Not to demean him, but to call SB-E slow and unresponsive is a sign of a problem with your platform or how it's configured, not the architecture.


----------



## Frick (Apr 2, 2013)

Wait wait wait a minute, how on earth can tri-gate make a system more responsive?


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 2, 2013)

Frick said:


> Wait wait wait a minute, how on earth can tri-gate make a system more responsive?



It doesn't, which is why I'm inclined to think he is:
A: A troll. and...
B: Unknowledgeable of the subject. and...
C: Quick to jump to incorrect conclusions.

I hope my post cleared some things up. 


Aquinus said:


> Snipped anti-troll thread.


----------



## agent00skid (Apr 2, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> You would have to be paying well over 3k USD for something like that.
> http://ark.intel.com/products/64622...E5-4650-20M-Cache-2_70-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI



If we keep to the dual socket version instead of the quad socket version, prices are a bit more forgiving. 

http://ark.intel.com/products/64583...E5-2680-20M-Cache-2_70-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 2, 2013)

agent00skid said:


> If we keep to the dual socket version instead of the quad socket version, prices are a bit more forgiving.
> 
> http://ark.intel.com/products/64583...E5-2680-20M-Cache-2_70-GHz-8_00-GTs-Intel-QPI



True, but that one 8-core core CPU costs the entirety of my SB-E upgrade.


----------



## Sabishii Hito (Apr 2, 2013)

I've been waiting on this since IB-E was first talked about, glad it's confirmed it will be a drop-in replacement for my 3930k.  Hopefully I can run 24/7 quad channel DDR3-2666   (My 3930k isn't 100% stable 24/7 with DDR3-2400).


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 2, 2013)

Sabishii Hito said:


> I've been waiting on this since IB-E was first talked about, glad it's confirmed it will be a drop-in replacement for my 3930k.  Hopefully I can run 24/7 quad channel DDR3-2666   (My 3930k isn't 100% stable 24/7 with DDR3-2400).



Really? My 3820 is running 2400Mhz stable now. I can run it up to 2450 stable, I haven't tried loosening the timings to get it higher since it's only rated for 2133@9-11-10-28 and I'm running it at 2416@10-12-11-30. Do you have memory that fast or are you trying to overclock it? I found my IMC to be pretty decent.


----------



## Sabishii Hito (Apr 2, 2013)

I have 2400 rated memory, several kits in fact.  I can boot up 2400 and run some benchmarks, but something really stressful like OCCT Linpack AVX test fails.  I've also noticed only my TridentX 2400C9 kit really works well with it, my Team 2400C9 and Vengeance 2400C9 are never stable.  Given the IMC can run memory at 2400 it could be a matter of tweaking voltage but VCCSA up to 1.25v doesn't change anything.


----------



## xtremesv (Apr 2, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> Yes, the IVB chip also has 4 cores, not 6. 8Mb of cache, not 15Mb. 20 PCI-E lanes, not 40. It doesn't have QPI, SB-E does. SB-E has a bigger memory controller, IVB does not.



And don't forget , IB has cheap TlM and SB-E fluxless solder. For some people this has become a feature.


----------



## Aquinus (Apr 3, 2013)

Sabishii Hito said:


> I have 2400 rated memory, several kits in fact.  I can boot up 2400 and run some benchmarks, but something really stressful like OCCT Linpack AVX test fails.  I've also noticed only my TridentX 2400C9 kit really works well with it, my Team 2400C9 and Vengeance 2400C9 are never stable.  Given the IMC can run memory at 2400 it could be a matter of tweaking voltage but VCCSA up to 1.25v doesn't change anything.



As I understand it, VCCSA helps bclk and cache overclocks where VTT/VCCIO is the DRAM controller voltage.


----------



## cadaveca (Apr 3, 2013)

Aquinus said:


> As I understand it, VCCSA helps bclk and cache overclocks where VTT/VCCIO is the DRAM controller voltage.



Nope, VCCSA is system agent, is memory controller  and cache, etc.

VCCIO is I/O, as it's labeled, and is the new "VTT", for BCLK.


VCCIO has ZERO relation to memory control for me. In fact, on SKT1155 I run stock VCCIO and VCCSA voltages in nearly all motherboard testing. There were a few boards that required that VCCSA is boosted, but only one or two, and only when running 2666 MHz memory.

It's just the same on X79, as VCCIO will need a boost for BCLK, but VCCSA might as well, since the base speed cache and everything is running at is higher. However, like SKT1155, I run 125x37 with stock VCCIO and VCCSA, and only increasing ram speed makes VCCSA increase needed.


Either way, hopefully our CPU reviewer will have a review when these chips launch. I also expect a few new boards, too.


----------



## Hood (Apr 3, 2013)

*Let's Go!*



ensabrenoir said:


> ........its truely the end of an era..... the. Great. Cpu war is over.......the needlessly overpowered pc is almost gone. And we await the time until desktops become. "The shiznit" once more to the masses.......still gonna upgrade anyway follow me if u dare..... or have enough play. Dough.



I'm with you - 900D, P9X79-E WS, i7-4860X, AX1200i, 8 x 8GB Dominator Plat. 3000, 2 x Titans, 480mm & 2 x 360mm radiators, about 30 fans, HUE & cold cathode lighting, triple 30" monitors, and whatever else I can think of.  I figure I'll have just $13,000 in it, only a little bit more than my Dad paid for his first house.  I have to build it.  In a year or two they'll start soldering CPUs to the board, then RAM will be stacked on-die, the extreme chips will have a TDP of 33 watts, and the Era Of Ridiculously Overblown Computers will be over forever.


----------



## Hood (Apr 3, 2013)

*You Got That Right*



xtremesv said:


> And don't forget , IB has cheap TlM and SB-E fluxless solder. For some people this has become a feature.


Yeah I'm so ready to delid my 3570K I can already feel the chill wind blowing through my case!


----------



## Frick (Apr 3, 2013)

Hood said:


> I'm with you - 900D, P9X79-E WS, i7-4860X, AX1200i, 8 x 8GB Dominator Plat. 3000, 2 x Titans, 480mm & 2 x 360mm radiators, about 30 fans, HUE & cold cathode lighting, triple 30" monitors, and whatever else I can think of.  I figure I'll have just $13,000 in it, only a little bit more than my Dad paid for his first house.  I have to build it.  In a year or two they'll start soldering CPUs to the board, then RAM will be stacked on-die, the extreme chips will have a TDP of 33 watts, and the Era Of Ridiculously Overblown Computers will be over forever.



Because a lower TDP is a bad thing. Also, workstations will automagically cease to exist, and you will have to prove you need the computing power you want.


----------



## Hood (Apr 3, 2013)

*哦靠*



Frick said:


> Also, workstations will automagically cease to exist, and you will have to prove you need the computing power you want



Is that before or after China calls in all debts and takes over America?


----------



## dj-electric (Apr 3, 2013)

Hood said:


> Is that before or after China calls in all debts and takes over America?



donno if sarcastic or actually mean it by your title of "oh really" in chinease... creepy as f*ck.


----------



## Hood (Apr 3, 2013)

*白宮到哪條路？*



Dj-ElectriC said:


> donno if sarcastic or actually mean it by your title of "oh really" in chinease... creepy as f*ck.



Actually, that was supposed  to be a translation of "Oh S**t", and sarcasm it was.  But from the things I hear, the Chinese already own large chunks of America and we owe them trillions.  And yes, it's creepy.  Hence the new title.


----------



## m1dg3t (Apr 3, 2013)

This thread is about CPUs, not Chinas Capitalist takeover of the United States.


----------



## ensabrenoir (Apr 12, 2013)

Sabishii Hito said:


> I've been waiting on this since IB-E was first talked about, glad it's confirmed it will be a drop-in replacement for my 3930k.  Hopefully I can run 24/7 quad channel DDR3-2666   (My 3930k isn't 100% stable 24/7 with DDR3-2400).



Me too ... only reason i got a 3820 was too hold me over until ivy e and some better temps


----------



## Breit (Apr 13, 2013)

ensabrenoir said:


> Me too ... only reason i got a 3820 was too hold me over until ivy e and some better temps



Don't put your hopes up too high on better temps. I'm not sure if Intel is back to fluxless solder on the IHS?! To be honest, I even doubt it... They'll probably be using their cheap TIM paste on IVB-E too like they were on IVB.


----------



## Hood (Apr 13, 2013)

m1dg3t said:


> This thread is about CPUs, not Chinas Capitalist takeover of the United States.



The two subjects aren't that far apart; when they take over, all CPUs will be cheap Chinese knockoffs, probably of Celerons and Semprons so we won't have the power to hack into their mainframes.


----------

