Thursday, June 10th 2010

Intel Sandy Bridge Quad-Core Processor Tested

At this year's Computex event, some of the most unexpected exhibits were socket LGA1155 motherboards based on Intel 6-series chipsets, across the board, from virtually every major motherboard vendor. Unexpected, because it's been less than an year since released mainstream derivatives of the Nehalem/Westmere architectures that use the LGA1156 socket. LGA1155 will form the base for performance, mainstream, and value segments of processors based on the upcoming Sandy Bridge architecture, which is a generation successor of Nehalem. With so many motherboard vendors showing off their creations in release-grade conditions, it is obvious that engineering samples of processors to go with them are already on the loose and will land in some enthusiast's hands. It did, in the skillful hands of Coolaler, who wasted no time in putting it through a quick run through popular benchmarks.

Coolaler tested an LGA1155 quad-core processor operating at 2.5 GHz, which CPU-Z can't name but marks it as a Sandy Bridge engineering sample. Among the little that's known about this processor, is that it has a base clock speed of 100 MHz (Nehalem/Westmere processors use BClk of 133 MHz), which means that to achieve 2.5 GHz, it uses a multiplier value of 25. It has all the instruction sets of Westmere including SSE 4.2 and AES acceleration, but also features AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions), a successor to SSE 4.2 which expands the processor's number crunching abilities, and increases performance per MHz. The cache structure up to the second level is the same (32 KB L1I, 32 KB L1D, 256 KB /core L2), but uses a smaller L3 cache at 6 MB (compared to 8 MB on Lynnfield). HyperThreading technology provides the OS with 8 logical CPUs to deal with.
The setup was aided with 4 GB of DDR3 memory and ATI Radeon HD 5800 series graphics. The processor crunched Super Pi 1M in 16.349 s, it scored 371 points in CPU Mark. In the multi-threaded Cinebench R11.5 benchmark, the 2.5 GHz chip scored a little under Core i7 860 (reference score). In the Everest CPU Queen, it's about as fast a Core i5 750 from what we could say, but in the Photoworxx test, it outperformed the Core i7 965 XE. In a separate set of tests run on the same hardware albeit in Windows XP, the processor was eight times faster than any other processor in the AES test (because of its native AES extensions), and edged the Core i7 965 XE in memory bandwidth despite having a narrower dual-channel DDR3 IMC.
While the results don't show a revolutionary processor, it is intended to be one. Right now it's eligible for the benefit of doubt. The real benefits will be for those models which come with embedded graphics, since the IGP and memory controller will be present on the same die, instead of the present design where the package is an MCM for two dies: CPU and northbridge. When Sandy Bridge releases is a subject of immense speculation. Since motherboard makers unveiled such mature designs of LGA1155 motherboards as early as in June 2010, a market release of the platform may not be too far away.
Source: Coolaler Forums
Add your own comment

72 Comments on Intel Sandy Bridge Quad-Core Processor Tested

#51
34.50
SRSLY Intel WTF. I built a 1156 system in October, and I thought 1156 would stick around for quite some time like 775, and this is my first real desktop, outdated and not really upgradable since I have the i7 860 (which for me is more than enough of a CPU atm). Now I'm pissed that I have no upgrade path, thanks Intel.
Posted on Reply
#52
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
HillBeastDone. 1366 is epic and will still be epic for a while to come.
LGA-1366 is also going to get a replacement around the same time. It's called LGA-2011 (on-die 32-lane PCI-E for 2~4 graphics cards; Quad-Channel DDR3 IMC; single-chip PCH-type chipset).
Posted on Reply
#53
a_ump
dam, i bet S2011 with the on die PCI-E lanes will improve multi-card scaling some, less bottleneck.
Posted on Reply
#54
HillBeast
btarunrLGA-1366 is also going to get a replacement around the same time. It's called LGA-2011 (on-die 32-lane PCI-E for 2~4 graphics cards; Quad-Channel DDR3 IMC; single-chip PCH-type chipset).
I know. My point still stands, 1366 is going to still be epic.
Posted on Reply
#55
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
HillBeastI know. My point still stands, 1366 is going to still be epic.
It doesn't. It's nearing the end of the line for LGA-1366, the last model will a Gulftown based six-core chip (i7 970), after which LGA-2011 and its 8-core chips will take over. After that your Core i7 Extreme will be as "epic" as Core 2 Extreme is now (it's not).
Posted on Reply
#56
slyfox2151
IMO have a cry for all those who are bitching about intel changing sockets.



most people dont upgrade the cpu alone. they will also buy a new motherboard and maybe even ram.



technology moves forwards, there was clearly a hardware limitation with 1156 vs 1155, so out with the old in with the new.
Posted on Reply
#57
rizla1
who here is honestly gona want intergrated gpu wasting space on a new 4-8 core cpu?
this cpu/platform doenst really make sence. anyone who wants an office pc for basic stuff isnt going to be happy paying £400-500 just for there cpu/mobo.
Posted on Reply
#58
Yellow&Nerdy?
Jesus Christ... Another socket? Like we don't have enough. Actually, Intel is probably going to release two new sockets next year. The "performance/mainstream" socket, which is this one (LGA-1155) and the "über high-end" socket to replace LGA-1366, which will be the LGA-2011. TBH, I don't expect much from Sandy Bridge. I mean, just look at Intels attempts on a GPU... Larrabee was and still is a total failure, Intel IGPs have been a subject of ridicule for a long time and the IGPs on the Arrandale/Clarksdale CPUs are pathetic. I personally am looking forward to AMDs attempt on a "CPU/GPU merging", since they atleast know everything about GPUs after merging with ATI. Now that on a laptop would be pretty awesome ;)

I don't think integrated GPUs will take off in the enthusiast section anytime soon. But for e.g. laptops and HTPCs they would be pretty awesome. I don't see any reasons why Intel would try to retire the LGA-1156, which is only a year or two old. And I don't see any point in the LGA-2011 either. It will have quad-channel memory, 8 more PCIe lanes and support 8-core CPUs. But the problem is, for 90% of the users, the current sockets offer more than they need. There are few applications that fully utilise multi-core processing and Hyperthreading, and 4 or 6 GBs of RAM is enough for the most. And not that many games can use more than 2 cores.

Honestly, when these sockets come out, and you're concidering to update your LGA-1156 or LGA-1366, don't. Save your money, or spend it on some nice SSDs, RAM or a graphics card. That will definately give a more noticalbe increase in performance than upgrading your CPU or motherboard.
Posted on Reply
#59
Flanker
the igp's don't impress me either, i mean, without the igp, the chips would probably be cheaper, and for us who use discrete graphics, it is a complete waste
Posted on Reply
#60
DaC
Intel's IGP is just a bad taste joke..... they just want to say that they are in track with the future, just like AMD..... the truth is..... amd though about Fusion a long time ago, and time shows this bet was right..... and a great cpu with a even better igp from amd is on the way...... intel just wants to show that it can do it too.... but man..... old 945 igp on this ubber new cpus...... FAIL to me.
Posted on Reply
#61
HillBeast
btarunrIt doesn't. It's nearing the end of the line for LGA-1366, the last model will a Gulftown based six-core chip (i7 970), after which LGA-2011 and its 8-core chips will take over. After that your Core i7 Extreme will be as "epic" as Core 2 Extreme is now (it's not).
It doesn't matter how many cores a computer gets, it's not going to make the games I play run any nicer. EVERY game I play runs above 60FPS. By definition it's epic. All the additional cores are doing is wasting my money. I have no intention of spending over $2000 just to get a new motherboard and CPU which I won't use to it's limits. By definition 1366 is epic.

Also Core 2 Extremes are still epic chips. i7 runs faster but in games, most games will make do just fine on a Core 2 Extreme, or even a Quad or a Duo. Most games barely use 4 cores properly.
Posted on Reply
#62
NeSeNVi
What a shame they didn't test power consumption, temperature either.

Gimme Sandy Bridge on Christmas:)
Posted on Reply
#63
pr0n Inspector
Why is it that people think they need upgrading whenever something new is out? No one is forcing you to get the new platform at gunpoint.:rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#64
rizla1
is this gona be 32nm? the only sandybridge chip that wll make sense will be the mobile chips. for performance this is just silly ,il be happy waiting for amd 32nm 8 core for £100!! hopefully am3 support. even then there new mobos will be half the price of these.
Posted on Reply
#65
phanbuey
pr0n InspectorWhy is it that people think they need upgrading whenever something new is out? No one is forcing you to get the new platform at gunpoint.:rolleyes:
gotta keep up with the joneses
Posted on Reply
#66
TheScavenger
Nobody likes to to see their baby get old (ie outdated). Its frustrating.
Posted on Reply
#67
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
Two different sockets for high/lowend was bad enough, this is just silly. Sure it's new tech and all that, but this is too much,
Posted on Reply
#68
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
btarunrIt doesn't. It's nearing the end of the line for LGA-1366, the last model will a Gulftown based six-core chip (i7 970), after which LGA-2011 and its 8-core chips will take over. After that your Core i7 Extreme will be as "epic" as Core 2 Extreme is now (it's not).
HillBeastIt doesn't matter how many cores a computer gets, it's not going to make the games I play run any nicer. EVERY game I play runs above 60FPS. By definition it's epic. All the additional cores are doing is wasting my money. I have no intention of spending over $2000 just to get a new motherboard and CPU which I won't use to it's limits. By definition 1366 is epic.

Also Core 2 Extremes are still epic chips. i7 runs faster but in games, most games will make do just fine on a Core 2 Extreme, or even a Quad or a Duo. Most games barely use 4 cores properly.
It's all about what you need/want out of a system, not everyone needs an ub3r 8-core socket 2011 rig to be ''epic''. It is true that 1366 is still a beast of a socket, it should last a few good years just like the Core 2's have been doing. An ''epic'' part is a part that does what you need it to do for a years and yet still maintains great performance today as it did when it was first released, if you define ''epic'' as always having the best of the best, then you're dead wrong.

I personally don't give a $hit about the new sockets(maybe in a couple years i will), considering as a gamer, the 1366 socket is more then enough.(Hell, even a Core 2 Duo is enough)
Posted on Reply
#70
JTS
DrPepperI won't be changing from socket 1366 for maybe 2 new generations.
Unless there are very significant performance reasons to do so - I have to agree.

The 2000 (?) 1366 socket replacement would have to show some serious improvements to entice me to buy yet another new mobo+processor+ram.

As for 1155 adding a IGP - that's fine and dandy for mums and dads/companies - but for enthusiasts, it's hardly a drawcard.

Native SATA/USB/PCI-E 3.0 is welcome - but it will be a while before there are enough mainstream devices available to warrant it the change so soon.
Posted on Reply
#72
HillBeast
pr0n Inspectorcheap on-board pci-e to pci bridge chip: problem solved.
Well originally I thought getting rid of PCI was going to be annoying, but really it's not too bad. I'm putting up with having less PCI slots just fine. Only things that need PCI these days are sound cards and TV cards, and both are going the way of PCI-e now.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Nov 27th, 2024 03:41 EST change timezone

New Forum Posts

Popular Reviews

Controversial News Posts