Thursday, April 25th 2013
Core i7-4960X "Ivy Bridge-E" Roughly 10% Faster than i7-3970X: Early Tests
PC enthusiast "Toppc" with the Coolaler.com, with access to a Core i7 "Ivy Bridge-E" sample clocked to match specifications of the Core i7-4960X, wasted no time in comparing the chip to a Core i7-3970X "Sandy Bridge-E." The two chips share a common socket LGA2011 design, and run on motherboards with Intel X79 Express chipset. An MSI X79A-GD45 Plus, with V17.1 BIOS was used to run the two chips. Among the tests Toppc put the chip through, are overclocker favorites SuperPi mod 1.6, CPU Mark '99, WPrime 1.63, Cinebench 11.5, 3DMark Vantage (CPU score), and 3DMark 06 (CPU score).
The Ivy Bridge-E chip outperformed its predecessor by roughly 5-10 percent across the board. In Cinebench, the i7-4960X scored 10.94 points in comparison to the i7-3970X' 10.16; SuperPi 32M was crunched by the i7-4960X in 9m 22.6s compared to the 9m 55.4s of the i7-3970X; CPU Mark scores between the two are 561 vs. 533, respectively; 3DMark Vantage CPU score being 38,644 points vs. 35,804, respectively; and 3DMark 06 scores 8,586 points vs. 8,099 points, respectively. In WPrime, the i7-4960X crunched 32M in 4.601s, compared to its predecessor's 5.01s. Below are the test screenshots, please note that they're high-resolution images, so please open each in a new tab.
Cinebench 11.5SuperPi and CPU Mark3DMark Vantage CPU score3DMark 06 CPU score and WPrime 1.63
Source:
Coolaler.com
The Ivy Bridge-E chip outperformed its predecessor by roughly 5-10 percent across the board. In Cinebench, the i7-4960X scored 10.94 points in comparison to the i7-3970X' 10.16; SuperPi 32M was crunched by the i7-4960X in 9m 22.6s compared to the 9m 55.4s of the i7-3970X; CPU Mark scores between the two are 561 vs. 533, respectively; 3DMark Vantage CPU score being 38,644 points vs. 35,804, respectively; and 3DMark 06 scores 8,586 points vs. 8,099 points, respectively. In WPrime, the i7-4960X crunched 32M in 4.601s, compared to its predecessor's 5.01s. Below are the test screenshots, please note that they're high-resolution images, so please open each in a new tab.
Cinebench 11.5SuperPi and CPU Mark3DMark Vantage CPU score3DMark 06 CPU score and WPrime 1.63
122 Comments on Core i7-4960X "Ivy Bridge-E" Roughly 10% Faster than i7-3970X: Early Tests
Granted, no one forces me to shell out such amount of money, but with such tiny boosts it makes even less sense. I was looking at Q6600 back then and then decided to shell out some more and take the newer Core i7 920. And i made a great decision. I don't think any of the current CPU's would last as long as this one did.
In trays of 1000s, 3770K is selling for $332, which is about €255. Shop is selling for €309 for 20% markup.
Performance difference between both is much more than 20% in most cases(with or without overclock), so I would say that you are not getting an inferior product in any way (from 1000s tray prices, to exchange rates, to mark up). Inflation has not been taken to account yet. On top of that, its cheaper to assemble a system with 3770K rather than a 920 system, iirc it costs about $1500 for a fully functioning 920 system (with graphics card etc), while you will need to shell out about $1000 for an equivalent system (equivalent used extremely loosely here).
Have you considered 3570K instead? Much cheaper than 3770k, and performance wise not too far behind. Granted the upgrade from 920 to 3570K is not as significant but that is large due to the strength and performance of the 920 more than anything else.
www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/47?vs=551
edit: I'm still on X58, my 970 Hex-core has just been great for the last 3 years.
:roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:
seriously though the entire cpu landscape is changing..... raw power is not the dominate factor anymore. 10% is more than enough for anything out there. Better temps and power consumption are king right now. Software is years behind. And it'll prob take a 20 CORE amd to match it. Most Intel users are fine with this and paying for a new board. ....There is not a lot of price haggling on Porsche lots...this is High End Desk Top. Mainstream is the value minded....and mainstream intel usually beats highend Amd
Shame that the desktop/enthusiast 'E' line only exists as a dumping ground for defective or very low bin Xeon-E parts. If this weren't the case, Intel might have actually skipped straight to Haswell-E ... but if they'd done that, nowhere to dump.
Really hope Steamroller and Excavator are on time and up to expectations. It's become patently clear that Intel won't make any push unless absolutely forced to.
AMD x86 / x64 chips are no longer much of a threat but ARM processors are selling like mad and the market for ARM based hardware is still growing. Whereas the PC industry is seeing negative growth. Intel knows they need to answer the ARM initiative. A big way of doing that is with decent performance and power efficiency not raw processing power. So this is likely where Intel is focusing their efforts.
Intel should be able to engineer monster performance chips for desktop, workstations, servers and so on while engineering power efficient chips for tablets, phones and so on,.... but that doesn't mean that they wont cut corners by focusing on power efficiency on the platforms that would better benefit from raw power,..
***edit***
Also an upcoming Intel Core i7 4960X Ivy Bridge-E processor is likely to cost just as much as its predecessor in the ~$1,000+ USD range. I'm not willing to spend that kind of money on a processor and judging from the system specs in this thread not many if any people here would either. Its all very academic to argue about the finer points of something you'll likely never buy,....
There's no way that Intel can make any inroads into the phone, tablet or embedded devices market, and ARM will continue to chew through vast swathes of the server (and soon workstation) market. The rate of market share loss is likely to increase exponentially for Intel once the the 64bit ARM chips start making their way into systems later this year.
It's going to get to the point soon where they either admit complete defeat or they start making more use of their existing ARM licenses (Intel are heavy licensees of ARM IP, contrary to popular belief).
The main reason Intel aren't pushing the envelope in desktop or E Xeons is because whilst they have a reasonable lead over AMD in absolute performance and performance per watt, they need the absolute maximum return possible on the minimum investment. Outside of the SSD business, their margins and marketshares are dropping like a stone everywhere else.
Myn new rig is an x79 in a cosmos 2(only posted on your pcatm) i got a 3820(on an asrock x79 exteme 9) to hold me over until the 6 core ivy-e comes out.
3.5 ghz (3970X) vs 3.6 ghz(4960X) turbo and not being able to see the MB for the 4960X makes the whole article from coolaler.com WORTHLESS.
Not worthy draining my loop for a 5% increase in IPC.
Might aswell bump my 3930k to 5,3Ghz and call it a day until Haswell-E comes.
Haswell on the other hand would've been a better upgrade option, but I read Haswell-E will support DDR4, so there's simply no chance it'll work on X79 boards, by the looks of it, we won't be seeing it until mid 2014 anyways...