Ivy Bridge Official Benchmarks - Markedly Better Performance Than Sandy Bridge

[mik]

This is a bit like saying Intel changed the on-chip GPU for something an upgrade twice the performance than before. Look, Intel HD graphics 2000 vs (upcoming) Intel HD graphics 4000.
The Intel HD 4000 takes casual gaming up one tier. The other productivity gains seems small, seeing as overclocking CPU would have more gains.
I just bit the bullet when Microcenter had their Black Friday deal on the 2500k+mobo combo, so I know it's cliche, but this news makes upgrading seem... "can never catch up".. but I'm still happy with my choice.
As for gaming, it's all about the dedicated GPU upgrade.

 

[ayban]

No, it really is considerably better than HD3000 graphics, if you're interested in an IGP. It also supports DX11, which HD3000 does not.

You might find the following TPU news article interesting: Super-High 4096 x 4096 Display From An IGP? The Upcoming Ivy Bridge Can Do It

Welcome to TPU.

if this is the actual list of processors i'd say the tables shown was bad.
http://www.techpowerup.com/155826/Intel-Ivy-Bridge-Desktop-Processor-Models-Tabled.html
That's 3.5ghz vs 3.4ghz.

as for the the HD graphics. i only wish they did compared it to HD3000, i was hoping HD4000 probably would perform better than hd5450 and or close to a 9500gt.

Intel is confusing us.

 

[cadaveca]

if this is the actual list of processors i'd say the tables shown was bad.
http://www.techpowerup.com/155826/In...ls-Tabled.html
That's 3.5ghz vs 3.4ghz.

Nothing is wrong. The 2600k is also 3.5 GHz (3.5-3.8 GHz when turbo is enabled), but is a default 3.4 GHz part. Likewise, the 3770K will be 3.4 GHz, with 3.5-3.9GHz Turbo modes, giving the 3770K a 100 MHz boost, but only in single-threaded workloads.

 

[ayban]

Nothing is wrong. The 2600k is also 3.5 GHz (3.5-3.8 GHz when turbo is enabled), but is a default 3.4 GHz part. Likewise, the 3770K will be 3.4 GHz, with 3.5-3.9GHz Turbo modes, giving the 3770K a 100 MHz boost, but only in single-threaded workloads.

nothing is wrong YET, unless it replaces the price point.

 

[EpicShweetness]

I've been thinking of the IB processors as an upgrade from my I7 920. I understand it uses 53 less watts (more since mines is juiced to 3.0Ghz) and its AVX instruction set makes it faster then Nehalem clock for clock. My real question is would the improvement be drastic enough to warrant an upgrade? For me the fire breathing dragon of a CPU I have, lowering the power consumption by almost half is the most appealing thing.

 

[cadaveca]

nothing is wrong YET, unless it replaces the price point.

Yeah, I see what you're saying. You'd think Intel would want to phase out current 1155 CPU when the new Ivy Bridge ones come out, but of course, there's still some stores selling 775 parts for their original cost, so you may be very right in being a bit concerned.

MInd you, if these figures are real, releasing a muc hfaster CPU for the same price is seomthing I have no problems with Intel doing More for your dollar is always good!

I've been thinking of the IB processors as an upgrade from my I7 920. I understand it uses 53 less watts (more since mines is juiced to 3.0Ghz) and its AVX instruction set makes it faster then Nehalem clock for clock. My real question is would the improvement be drastic enough to warrant an upgrade? For me the fire breathing dragon of a CPU I have, lowering the power consumption by almost half is the most appealing thing.

Considering 1155 CPUs clock better than previous parts on average, and cram 1366 tri-channel bandwidth into just two channels, SKT1155 has alot to offer other than just the power consumption side of things. Ivy Bridge is only going ot make that deal even sweeter.

 

[makwy2]

Yawn... I'll wait until I see some independent tests.

 

[Breit]

any word on ivy bridge-e? looks like a viable base to build a decent enthusiast platform around...

 

[radrok]

any word on ivy bridge-e? looks like a viable base to build a decent enthusiast platform around...

Intel clarified that there will be Ivy-E just after launching SB-E, I am talking without any kind of information backup but LGA2011 could well see a full silicon of SB-E thanks to the 22nm lithography and so we could see an 8c/16t Core i7 LGA2011 the main reason is that they could fit the 130w thermal envelope they couldn't on 32nm

 

[Damn_Smooth]

I don't think it is worth an upgrade if you already have SB, but I think it is worth a 4 month wait if you haven't bought SB. I guess that's why I'm waiting.

 

[wurschti]

Meh... The entire second graph was entirely due to the better GPU, which most of us will never use.

And the first graph was only better because of higher turboboost frequencies.

I'll wait for some real reviews, but I'm guessing performance per clock won't be all that much higher than SB, if higher at all. But the chips will likely clock higher on air, which will be nice...

That's what I think too, IB is just the new shiny version of SB! I don't need to waste mos money in shiny stuff.

 

[ensabrenoir]

......wow ivy is a die shrink & tune up of sb....not a new arc. Even here people don't get this.

 

[Wile E]

Meh, I'll wait for proper reviews. I really don't expect much improvement per clock in cpu tasks.

 

[PopcornMachine]

Even if these benchmarks are accurate, the real important part that most are ignoring is what will they cost?

Will they be good deals like SB, or overpriced like SB-E?

 

[cadaveca]

Meh, I'll wait for proper reviews. I really don't expect much improvement per clock in cpu tasks.

Neither am I. It's the power consumption drop and faster IGP that really interests me. I don't even expect more overclocks, but the SB IGP is a bit too weak for my liking right now. I'd love to use SB for HTPC without having to use an add-in card.

 

[Wile E]

Neither am I. It's the power consumption drop and faster IGP that really interests me. I don't even expect more overclocks, but the SB IGP is a bit too weak for my liking right now. I'd love to use SB for HTPC without having to use an add-in card.

SB is still plenty for HTPC. You don't need acceleration for video. All you need is the ability to display in your chosen resolution. In fact, cpu decoding is normally more accurate, and with he new 10bit encoding gaining popularity, acceleration doesn't work anyway. Acceleration is highly overrated with cpus this powerful.

 

[Deleted member 24505]

P67 supports IB too, not just Z68, my board supported it with bios 902.