Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Intel Officially Lifts the Veil On Ivy Bridge

samzenpus posted about 2 years ago | from the check-it-out dept.

Intel 200

New submitter zackmerles writes "Tom's Hardware takes the newly-released, top-of-the-line Ivy Bridge Core i7-3770K for a spin. All Core i7 Ivy Bridge CPUs come with Intel HD Graphics 4000, which despite the DirectX 11 support, only provides a modest boost to the Sandy Bridge Intel HD Graphics 3000. However, the new architecture tops the charts for low power consumption, which should make the Ivy Bridge mobile offerings more desirable. In CPU performance, the new Ivy Bridge Core i7 is only marginally better than last generation's Core i7-2700K. Essentially, Ivy Bridge is not the fantastic follow-up to Sandy Bridge that many enthusiasts had hoped for, but an incremental improvement. In the end, those desktop users who decided to skip Sandy Bridge to hold out for Ivy Bridge, probably shouldn't have. On the other hand, since Intel priced the new Core i7-3770K and Core i5-3570K the same as their Sandy Bridge counterparts, there is no reason to purchase the previous generation chips." Reader jjslash points out that coverage is available from all the usual suspects — pick your favorite: AnandTech, TechSpot, Hot Hardware, ExtremeTech, and Overclockers.

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Let me get this straight... (4, Insightful)

girlintraining (1395911) | about 2 years ago | (#39773017)

So, Intel, a company with no real competition right now in the market, has produced a product that offers only a very slight performance boost, and relied on tons of marketing to drum up anticipation for this mediocre offering. And then priced it the same as existing offerings as an apology to those who waited. Actually, that sounds about par for the course these days. The only real news in cpus and motherboards has been that they've gone multicore and continue to increase bandwidth. And now that they can't squeeze any more performance out of the designs, they're working on decreasing energy consumption.

Re:Let me get this straight... (5, Informative)

I.M.O.G. (811163) | about 2 years ago | (#39773119)

For people familiar with Intel's Tick-Tock cadence - this should not come as much surprise. Some people may have gotten caught up in marketing and expected more, but this is a "Tick" which brings a process shrink, power savings, and a modest performance increase. It is just about delivering that, though perhaps on the softer side of things.

Sandy Bridge was a Tock - a BIG performance improvement. Haswell should be a Tock - a BIG performance improvement.

On the tick, they set more modest performance goals, and focus on getting the process shrink right and tuning things up. On the tock, they should knock our socks off. So maybe Ivy Bridge is disappointing, but perhaps familiarity with their product development strategy helps to manage expectations

Re:Let me get this straight... (5, Funny)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39773189)

Sounds a little like Microsoft's method.

Win 95 - Tock
Win 98 - Tick
Win Me - Sproing
Win 2000 - Tock
Win XP - Tock
XP SP1 - Tick
XP SP2 - Tock
XP SP3 - Tick
Vista - Tock sprooooing
Win 7 - Tick
Win 8 - Tock (maybe)

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773389)

Oh look it's this tired old meme again. You even failed at it miserably.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

Glasswire (302197) | about 2 years ago | (#39773511)

Terrible analogy given that there's no analog in the software for the alteration between manufacturing process and microarchitecture design steps that Tick / Tock represents.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773689)

If you forget OSes and invent new items to make it seem like it, I guess.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773227)

Tocks used to come every year or year and a half. Now they come every three years - at best.

Re:Let me get this straight... (-1, Flamebait)

ZankerH (1401751) | about 2 years ago | (#39773243)

You've got the ticks and the tocks mixed up. The CPU that introduces a new architecture (ie, Sandy Bridge) is the Tick, and its die shrink (Ivy Bridge) is the Tock.

Re:Let me get this straight... (5, Informative)

I.M.O.G. (811163) | about 2 years ago | (#39773465)

ZankerH, I appreciate the comment, but you've actually got it backwards. The tick is a new shrink, the tock is a new architecture: http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/silicon-innovations/intel-tick-tock-model-general.html [intel.com]

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774293)

I know this is how intel defines it, but that's always seemed odd to me. Tick comes before tock. A new architecture comes before the refinement of that architecture. Seems like the tick should be the new architecture. and the tock should be the refinement.

Re:Let me get this straight... (4, Funny)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#39774549)

I know this is how intel defines it, but that's always seemed odd to me. Tick comes before tock. A new architecture comes before the refinement of that architecture. Seems like the tick should be the new architecture. and the tock should be the refinement.

It should come as no surprise given that Intel also got the order of bytes in a word backwards.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

BorgDrone (64343) | about 2 years ago | (#39774821)

They probably see it as a new manufacturing process (die shrink) comes before a new architecture designed with that process in mind.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

StikyPad (445176) | about 2 years ago | (#39774807)

Either way, the party don't stop.

Re:Let me get this straight... (4, Informative)

Glasswire (302197) | about 2 years ago | (#39773531)

No, Tocks (Penryn, Nehalem, SandyB, Haswell) are new architecture, Ticks (Merom, Westmere, IvyBridge, Haswell-sucessor-on-next-gen-XXnm-process) are updated architecture on new process.

Re:Let me get this straight... (3, Insightful)

devman (1163205) | about 2 years ago | (#39773533)

Where is the (-5 Wrong) moderation when you need it. You can verify that Ivy Bridge is, in fact, a tick by looking at any of the linked reviews, Intel's own marketing, or wikipedia.

Hopefully meta mods are paying attention to this one.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773563)

That would make the most sense, I agree, but for some reason intel does it backwards. Anyway the whole analogy is retarded anyway, because it's invariably qualified with a sentence explaining that it's a die shrink or a new architecture. So why bother with the whole tick-tock business?

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#39774587)

the whole analogy is retarded anyway, because it's invariably qualified with a sentence explaining that it's a die shrink or a new architecture. So why bother with the whole tick-tock business?

Because Intel wants it to sound like a clock ticking away the life of its competitors?

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

AliasMarlowe (1042386) | about 2 years ago | (#39774767)

the whole analogy is retarded anyway, because it's invariably qualified with a sentence explaining that it's a die shrink or a new architecture. So why bother with the whole tick-tock business?

Because Intel wants it to sound like a clock ticking away the life of its competitors?

Does this mean that after a few more tick-tocks it will end with a great big kaboom?
Intel is probably hoping to hear just a muted whimper and a brief death rattle...

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#39773333)

For people familiar with Intel's Tick-Tock cadence - this should not come as much surprise....

It comes as a great surprise. Normally, the process shrink delivers either or both a clock boost or power efficiency improvement. Normally, also a speedup due to additional superscalar hardware, but Intel explained that one away as "improved graphics". Well, where did the clock boost go then? Power efficiency? OK, all missing in action. So, the big unwritten subtext here is: Intel's 22nm node has got problems. Big problems. Trigate not working out so well?

Re:Let me get this straight... (2)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 2 years ago | (#39774081)

Higher clockspeeds use more power. Intel hasnt gone much above 3.3gHz for years, with 3.7 (i believe) being the top clock rate that they have ever done. You expect them to change that now when the focus is on higher efficiency, more cores, and lower power usage?

It doesnt represent a problem at all, and for the record all of the benchmarks ive seen on hothardware (linky [hothardware.com] ) show it as being faster than sandy bridge, so theres that speedup youre complaining about.

They never said that there would be a clock boost-- id be interested to see what your source is for that statement.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#39774471)

You twisted my words up entirely. Let me put it more simply: I am underwhelmed by the "tock" this time. As is every commentator with a clue. This process node appears to be a fail for Intel.

Re:Let me get this straight... (2)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#39774623)

And, oh yes, I am underwhelmed by the "tick". On the face of it, Intel would have accomplished more with another go around at 28nm.

Now for the Intel fanboys in the thread, let's shed some authoritative light [pcper.com] on the subject.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774629)

Not really failure, I was aware that it will get maybe 5% performance improvement, and i am still going to update because of NOT 5% i could get with overclock but because of 50% power saving (75W VS old 150W for same GHZ/core count) i will save just in electricity more than price of processor ($250 i believe for entry model i usually get) and i will as bonus be able to get 32GB ram instead of 24GB (8 memory slots VS 6 in current generation) in the end i believe this CPU was worth waiting

Re:Let me get this straight... (5, Interesting)

Calos (2281322) | about 2 years ago | (#39774543)

ower efficiency? OK, all missing in action.
Per some of the articles, power consumption is down nearly 20W between the two generations.

So, the big unwritten subtext here is: Intel's 22nm node has got problems. Big problems. Trigate not working out so well?
Far too early to tell. The fact that they introduced a brand new, immensely complex process into manufacturing and it is working so well actually says a lot of good about how the trigate process is fairing. It will, of course, need some tuning and massaging. But it is already performing as well as/slightly better than the previous generation on its first release, at lower power (at least per Anand).

IVB is also farking small, which as the process matures, should mean more parts and lower prices.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

muon-catalyzed (2483394) | about 2 years ago | (#39773373)

Sorry, but lots of us waited for this "Ivy Bridge" for very very long time, seeing the new chip sometimes under-performing the older "Sandy Bridge" is pretty damning to Intel. Maybe it is time to embrace some new silicon, the ARM PCs loaded with Android are very inviting, at least we can put money where some development and progress is actually happening.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773905)

seeing the new chip sometimes under-performing the older "Sandy Bridge" is pretty damning to Intel

Are you talking about the SB-E comparisons, or did you find a benchmark where the normal SB beats it? Just curious because I haven't read (yet!) of any tests where IB doesn't beat its older counterpart.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 2 years ago | (#39774109)

Care to link the benchmarks where the SB outperforms IB? The linked sources seem to agree that it is generally 10-15% faster, with the GPU being substantially faster.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

Glasswire (302197) | about 2 years ago | (#39774201)

under-performing the older "Sandy Bridge" is pretty damning to Intel.

In what category does Ivy Bridge 'under-perform' Sandy Bridge? It exceeds it in every category - esp performance per watt important in Ultrabooks - and is behind NO WHERE. Not living up to someone's expectations about how much better it is than SB is not the same as under-performing.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774843)

oh cool, you'll be all right for angry birds and chrome then.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773437)

The parent is dead on correct. Ivy Bridge is primarily a die shrink; applying a new lithographic process to a known micro-architecture. This scheme has been extremely successful for Intel and Ivy Bridge is a continuation of Intel's publicly acknowledged strategy.

Die shrinks are very important. Lower power consumption and less heat means Ivy Bridge can be used in places Sandy Bridge cannot. Portables will see a dramatic performance increase because they can now adopt more powerful CPUs and stay within their power/heat envelope, so the marketing hype is justified; an Ivy Bridge laptop/tablet/whatever will, in fact, be faster than a Sandy Bridge device at the same price.

The grandparent is just another well trained malcontent, inherently worthy of the usual +5 insightful malcontent circle-jerk.

Re:Intel's Tick-Tock cadence (2)

TaoPhoenix (980487) | about 2 years ago | (#39773453)

Okay, so I have been planning a long term computer strategy since 2006 when I got a decent first gen Quad Core.

So hopefully if I can hold out that long, I should wait for the Tock - Haswell architecture, at the same time waiting for the Post-Win8-Metro consensus, which might just be either a Tock for Microsoft or maybe even a paradigm explosion into Apple and/or Linux if by some Mayan Miracle Microsoft implodes as a company. Or, if there is no "Windows 9", then I'll have to think about what to do then.

Smart way of doing things too (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about 2 years ago | (#39773877)

It avoids a problem many companies have of fighting with a new design and a new process, and having a product that gets delayed, has issues, etc. They either use a new design, on a stable process, or an untested process, with a proven design.

Sometimes a new process can give a moderate sized performance bump due to higher clock speeds, but that doesn't always happen.

It does reduce power consumption though and that is always nice.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773129)

This is typical of the tick-tock release cadence that they have been doing for years. They release a new architecture one year and then a die shrink of the same architecture the next. Ivy bridge is (mostly) a die shrink of sandy bridge. The fact that a die shrink performs similarly while using less power should surprise no one.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39773247)

Yes and no. Power consumption is important to some people. The graphics boost will help the majority of consumers that rely on integrated video. Gamers won't care about either but are interested in the performance increase which is slightly better. At the same price as the previous generation, a potential customer has few reasons to buy Sandy Bridge unless they are more focused on cost.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#39773411)

Power consumption is important to some people.. Gamers won't care about either.../quote.

Wrong. Power consumption determines cooling requirements, which determines fan noise. Power consumption also determines whether your long suffering power supply needs yet another upgrade. We are already in circuit breaking blowing zone on a lot of gaming rigs.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39773537)

I would think a gaming rig being able to blow a breaker would be a source of pride to some gamers. MOAR POWER! Ivy Bridge shaves about 18W TDP for some of the new chips compared to Sandy Bridge equivalents.

Re:Let me get this straight... (2, Insightful)

timeOday (582209) | about 2 years ago | (#39773283)

A 50% GPU improvement [anandtech.com] over Sandy Bridge is VERY significant.

Re:Let me get this straight... (4, Insightful)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#39773475)

A 50% GPU improvement [anandtech.com] over Sandy Bridge is VERY significant.

Not particularly. A 50% faster GPU will still suck for gamers and will be irrelevant to non-gamers.

No, not really (1)

Sycraft-fu (314770) | about 2 years ago | (#39773947)

Intel's onboard GPUs are good enough to play games these days. No you won't be cranking up the graphics detail, but they'll do the trick to play many games. You might notice on the linked page it is running Skyrim in medium detail at a playable framerate. That is a modern game title. The other games tested are similar. None of them are running stellar, but they are doing 30fps at medium quality.

For non-gamers, well more and more is making use of the GPU. All that shiny UI stuff is done on the GPU, and all the major browsers are using GPU acceleration. It doesn't take a ton of GPU power, but it needs some.

Re:No, not really (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#39774011)

Sure, but low resolution and medium quality is of no interest to most gamers. Being able to play a game badly isn't really a big selling point when you can play it well for another $100.

Re:No, not really (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774329)

HD4000 graphics and CPU will use as little as 35W combined. Being able to game on a laptop for 5-6 hours on an ultrabook instead of 45 minutes on a purpose built gaming laptop is very interesting. Especially since most laptops are only 1366x768 anyways.

Re:No, not really (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#39774387)

Laptops are certainly a possible candidate, but do you really believe the average gaming laptop consumes 320W?

If I remember correctly, the power brick on my gaming laptop is only rated for 80W. I've no idea how the graphics performance compares to Ivy Bridge, but I've only recently had to stop running with high-quality graphics settings on most new games.

Re:No, not really (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774677)

I'm typing this on a 1 year old gaming laptop with a 200W brick. Just by touching it (the brick and the laptop) I can tell you it's using a good chunk of that. I would shit myself if they could get similar performance out of 80W, but reasonable performance will make me happy too. Getting decent gaming performance out of something as thin and light as an ultrabook is a great compromise.

Re:No, not really (1)

zlives (2009072) | about 2 years ago | (#39774211)

Not for gaming

"More disheartening is the fact that you have to dial down to 1280x720 and use detail settings that make five-year-old consoles look good."

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 2 years ago | (#39774127)

Intel HD graphics 2000 is sufficient to play Starcraft 2 at reasonable levels, I think 50% improvement over the already 50% faster HD 3000 would be very welcome for gamers.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774275)

To add to this very good point:

I think Intel's reality distortion field is malfunctioning with this on-chip GPU craze. Any serious gamer REQUIRES a discrete GPU, but these GPU-bundled CPUs still cost so much that anyone that doesn't game would do better to buy a decent dual core for less than half the price and then spend about $75 on a basic GPU that will be able to keep up with their desktop rendering and still outperform the crappy on-chip unit that Intel is pushing.

Where is the value in expensive chips with crappy onboard graphics? Who is the target market here? I must be missing something. (For the record, I build systems both for highend gamers and for desktop task intensive net surfers)

Re:Let me get this straight... (2)

ifiwereasculptor (1870574) | about 2 years ago | (#39773517)

Very significant for Intel, not for users. AMD is leading in that segment by far, still being the only relevant option in integrated graphics. And Trinity will only widen that gap. Sandy Bridge was already enough for desktop effects, video playback and legacy gaming, and Ivy is good for exactly the same things. The performance gains, impressive as they are (50% is a major leap) aren't that significant for any of those tasks nor improve serious usage by a lot. And, given that Llano has far superior performance in integrated graphics and is merely acceptable for anything intense, I'd say HD4000 still isn't good enough.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

beelsebob (529313) | about 2 years ago | (#39773681)

Not really true –the HD4000 is fast enough to beat all Llanos except for the top end one. That, and the fact that it's possible to buy a faster intel CPU *and* a discrete radeon 6570 for less than the top end llano with an integrated 6550 llano is pretty much irrelevant.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

ifiwereasculptor (1870574) | about 2 years ago | (#39774105)

That's not my point. My point is that HD4000 isn't significantly better than HD3000 because there's a monstrous leap in needed performance between "casual use" and "serious use". It's especially not enough for an i7, being too bottlenecky. If they make it to the Celerons without too much gimping, though, Intel will pack a reasonable punch in the low end.

Also, Llano won't be competing against Ivy, Trinity will. We will have to see how good of an iGPU it has, but seems like they have achieved the same 50% increase, thus widening the gap and beating the ~570 range of Radeons. Mind you that they also are asymmetric crossfire capable. Depending on price and x86 performance (a "not laughable" rating on both would be good and very much unlike Bulldozer's), AMD might take back the crown for low end price/performance.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774185)

-1, uninformed

HD4000 is competitive compared to Llanos and is actually a good product at a good price point.

Re:Let me get this straight... (2)

Tough Love (215404) | about 2 years ago | (#39774669)

A 50% GPU improvement [anandtech.com] over Sandy Bridge is VERY significant.

Compared to other Intel. But compared to AMD and NVidia it still sucks major donkey poo.

Re:Let me get this straight... (3, Insightful)

Jeremi (14640) | about 2 years ago | (#39773585)

And now that they can't squeeze any more performance out of the designs, they're working on decreasing energy consumption.

Is it really because they can't squeeze out more performance, or is it because decreased energy consumption is primarily what consumers are demanding these days?

I can't remember the last time I heard anyone complaining about their CPU being too slow (barring software problems), but people still wish their laptop/tablet had longer battery life.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

vegge (184413) | about 2 years ago | (#39774009)

Indeed. Lower power consumption has driven my last 3 or 4 CPU purchases. The 45 watt Athlon in my desktop means it can now get by without a CPU fan, slower case fans and a smaller, fanless, power supply. Power consumption is maybe even more important for media center PCs, they're generally on all the time...

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

jedidiah (1196) | about 2 years ago | (#39774875)

An HTPC only needs to be on when you're using it.

Even MythTV supports the idea of putting a backend to sleep when it's not being used. Putting a frontend to sleep is pretty trivial. You hit the off switch.

Intel GPUs continue to be disappointing: something you either try to ingore or work around (by upgrading to AMD or Nvidia).

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

beelsebob (529313) | about 2 years ago | (#39773647)

Right, a company with no competition releasing better products for the same price... That's really unfair on consumers.

Re:Let me get this straight... (3, Informative)

gman003 (1693318) | about 2 years ago | (#39773691)

Yes, IB isn't a massive improvement on SB. But it's also worth stating what Intel did right:
Same price
Compatible with old sockets/motherboards

And who said every generation of processors had to be a significant improvement? Toyota puts out essentially the same car every year for a decade, with only minor, incremental improvements. There's no reason why you can't do the same for processors. The only downside is for people who like to brag about having the very-latest processor.

Personally, I'm going to be grabbing an Ivy Bridge laptop, if only because my old, reliable Core 2 laptop finally died. And I'll probably skip over Haswell, maybe Broadwell too, before upgrading again.

Long story short, if you've got a Sandy Bridge, you don't need to upgrade yet. If you've got a Nehalem and some spare cash, an upgrade may (or may not) be useful. If you're on something before that, IB is the chip to upgrade to.

PS: I'm not really a fanboy for either company (I've used both extensively - the Phenom's were great, and even my old Athlon 900 still sees service now and again), but AMD really doesn't have any attractive higher-end options. The Fusion processors look good compared to Intel's low-power options, though - I seriously considered getting a small Fusion laptop and then building a more powerful SB or IB desktop at home, but decided single-device was better.

Re:Let me get this straight... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773731)

Engineering-wise, this is a significant development - The first consumer silicon at the 22nm node, which is the most difficult node to date. And with all the kinks worked out at this node (hopefully), Intel is now ready to put the next architectural evolution into silicon - the Tock.

This puts Intel another step ahead of AMD. So no, Intel did not sit there, complacent with advantage over AMD, and do nothing. They continued to execute and achieved an engineering milestone with this one.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 2 years ago | (#39773937)

Maybe or you may be seeing just a mature product segment.
Look at airliners. They are not getting any faster for the most part but incrementally more efficient. Every technology reaches a point of maturity when improvements become incremental. The I7 right now is fast enough for the vast majority of users needs, what will be interesting is to see how the i5 and i3 do.

Re:Let me get this straight... (4, Informative)

LordLimecat (1103839) | about 2 years ago | (#39773955)

Except the summary seems wrong by its own sources:

TechSpot

Since late last year Ivy Bridge seems to be the architecture everyone is waiting for. Although Intel is only anticipating a 10–15% processing performance bump when compared to Sandy Bridge,

Which is what they have been saying for about a year now, and what everyone expected. And for the record, 15% speed boost at the same clock with lower power usage is not insignificant, at all.

AnandTech:

Ivy Bridge is a tick+, as we've already established. ... The end result is a reasonable increase in CPU performance (for a tick), a big step in GPU performance, and a decrease in power consumption.

SemiAccurate:

For raw numbers, the top HD 4000 only has 16 shaders, but the underlying architecture is completely new. .....Intel is claiming about 2x the graphics performance from 33% more units. We don't think these claims are out of line for the general case.

Way to go, summary, you successfully implied that the chip was a flop when your sources indicate it hit its target, has substantially better GPU performance, and has a launch price in line with its current lineup. Slashdot truly is master of the art of spin.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | about 2 years ago | (#39774413)

You don't have it straight, apparently. Intel has released a new chip on a more advanced (yet still new) process that is somewhat faster in CPU performance, considerably faster in GPU performance, _and_ uses considerably less power at full use.

What exactly do you expect, Captain High Expectations, a wormhole/laser based CPU that is 10000X faster at 1 millionth the power usage?

Get a grip.

Re:Let me get this straight... (1)

jedidiah (1196) | about 2 years ago | (#39774885)

> What exactly do you expect, Captain High Expectations, a wormhole/laser based CPU that is 10000X faster at 1 millionth the power usage?

Something that would make me consider upgrading any of my machines would be a nice start.

rape (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773073)

Nigger beasts rape white women daily. Protect our aryan princesses now before it's too late! Fight back against the mud races!

Review Roundup (5, Informative)

I.M.O.G. (811163) | about 2 years ago | (#39773075)

A roundup of reviews from the usual major sites as well as others not mentioned in the summary above: Overclockers Review [overclockers.com] , Anandtech Review [anandtech.com] , Anandtech Undervolting/Overclocking [anandtech.com] , HardwareSecrets [hardwaresecrets.com] , Bit-tech [bit-tech.net] , PCPer [pcper.com] , Tweaktown [tweaktown.com] , Hard OCP [hardocp.com] , The Inquirer [theinquirer.net] , Techspot [techspot.com] , Computer Shopper [computershopper.com] , Tom's Hardware [tomshardware.com] , ExtremeTech [extremetech.com] , PC Mag [pcmag.com] , Overclockers Club [overclockersclub.com] , and Guru 3d [guru3d.com]

Re:Review Roundup (2)

crookedvulture (1866146) | about 2 years ago | (#39773233)

The Tech Report has chimed in with its own review [techreport.com] , which contains a unique look at gaming performance with the integrated graphics and discrete GPUs. There's also a dedicated overclocking article [techreport.com] that looks at the experience on four different motherboards.

Re:Review Roundup (1)

I.M.O.G. (811163) | about 2 years ago | (#39773487)

I actually missed TechReport and a couple others I typically read. Thanks for the links.

Re:Review Roundup (1)

A Friendly Troll (1017492) | about 2 years ago | (#39773547)

X-bit Labs [xbitlabs.com] review.

Not much new stuff in there compared to other reviews. I miss the days when they accurately measured CPU and GPU power consumption... Now it's just meaningless "total power".

HD 4000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773137)

Who exactly is going to use the onboard video? How about having an option WITHOUT it and discount the chip?

Also, remember when there was a time that a CPU launch meant you were going to get 50-100% increase?

And now we're wanking off over a whopping *potential* 20%. Disappointing.

Re:HD 4000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773205)

That 20% increase if applied to the processors you got 10 years ago would be more like 2000%. Just sayin'

Re:HD 4000 (4, Interesting)

h4rr4r (612664) | about 2 years ago | (#39773231)

The vast majority of users will use it. Intel integrated has been a good enough solution for most users for a long time now.

It would cost more to fab a chip without it, would you pay extra for that? Since they would be making so few.

This is a normal tick in the Intel tick-tock cycle. You will get that 50%-100% with Haswell.

Re:HD 4000 (1)

SJHillman (1966756) | about 2 years ago | (#39773253)

Every technology that sees huge improvements over short timespans will begin to plateau eventually. There's only so much you can do before you start bumping into major constraints, such as the laws of physics.

Re:HD 4000 (2)

ZankerH (1401751) | about 2 years ago | (#39773307)

My current CPU is a Conroe architecture Core 2 duo E6700. I'm building an new PC with an Ivy Bridge i7 CPU in a couple months, and it'll definitely offer that kind of performance increase. Successive generations of latest and greatest have always offered marginal improvements at best, but it accumulates once you skip a generation or four.

Re:HD 4000 (1)

vivek7006 (585218) | about 2 years ago | (#39774077)

My HTPC is also using the same CPU as yours, and I am also thinking of upgrading to Ivy Bridge and getting rid of the discrete AMD Radeon card. If only Obama could bail me out!

Re:HD 4000 (1)

StikyPad (445176) | about 2 years ago | (#39774897)

Why? If you've waited this long, just hold out for Haswell. Intel has already confirmed they're changing the socket, so really that gives you the best odds of an upgrade path in the future should they decide to keep LGA1150 around for Skylake (the successor to Haswell). At the very least you're stuck with yet another obsoleted socket, but with a likely impressive performance upgrade over Ivy Bridge. By buying in now, you've already lost 1 year on current performance levels going forward... the best time to buy in would have been with Sandy Bridge.

Re:HD 4000 (1)

ZankerH (1401751) | about 2 years ago | (#39773343)

It'd probably cost Intel more to make a separate production line that fabs chips without onboard video, they wouldn't even be able to sell them cheaper than regular CPUs. And if you're not using it the onboard graphics capabilities, it's not drawing any extra power, so no improvement there either.

Re:HD 4000 (2)

Mabhatter (126906) | about 2 years ago | (#39773405)

Well, any machine at retail will. Retail is just to slim margins for the extra cost.

Graphics CAN'T be removed because they are built into the CPU-chipset combo... And nobody else is licensed to make chipsets. Intel is forcing OEMS to go back to "external" chips on the PCI-E bus... Which is 100% more circuitry and super complex firmware to get back to what you got from Nvidia. That adds $100-$200 to the wholesale.

Things like MacBook Air are forced to choose battery/size or performance... Which is why Apple stuck with C2D for so long as it was the last CPU intel allowed third party chipsets with.

What sucks most is that these NEW computers are stuck with OBSOLETE graphics out of the box... Note how Apple's Mountain Lion has to drop all the old Intel Integrated because it just can't perform to iPhone or iPad standards anymore... Ouch!

Re:HD 4000 (3, Informative)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39773433)

Many consumers use onboard video. YouTube and casual gaming are okay on it. The lastest tests show that the 4000 is better or as good as the current generation of budget discrete cards. For the budget conscious consumer, there is no reason to get the budget nVidia or Radeon. Gamers don't care about either option anyways.

Other than the obvious (1)

voss (52565) | about 2 years ago | (#39773801)

"For the budget conscious consumer, there is no reason to get the budget nVidia or Radeon."

Except for the fact that a An AMD llano A8 will blow an ivy bridge out of the water when it comes to games. Plenty of consumers
who buy $500 budget pcs never open the case.

Re:Other than the obvious (2)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | about 2 years ago | (#39774581)

Odd. You seem to be uninformed or lying. Ivy Bridge beats the A8 in games, go look at the benchmarks.

What now?

Re:Other than the obvious (2)

voss (52565) | about 2 years ago | (#39774711)

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5626/ivy-bridge-preview-core-i7-3770k/12 [anandtech.com]

You mean these benchmarks???

"What Ivy Bridge does not appear to do is catch up to AMD's A8-series Llano APU. It narrows the gap, but for systems whose primary purpose is gaming AMD will still likely hold a significant advantage with Trinity. The fact that Ivy Bridge hasn't progressed enough to challenge AMD on the GPU side is good news. The last thing we need is for a single company to dominate on both fronts."

Re:Other than the obvious (1)

jo_ham (604554) | about 2 years ago | (#39774701)

I take it you used the classic "common sense says it must be true, so it is" reasoning there.

Have you actually looked at benchmarks?

Re:Other than the obvious (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39774827)

Since when is a 6550 a budget GPU? The 6350/6450/7350/7450 are easily dusted by the Intel HD 4000. If you want to move to mid-range you'll get more performance for the money but a consumer is better off not spending the extra $50 and sticking with the HD4000.

Re:HD 4000 (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774809)

If you don't use onboard video you can overclock processor more and get more expensive model ($380 instead of $250 one) since integrated GPU is not using juice

also considering CPU area % covered by that "GPU" you are probably looking at 5% discount
lastly you do realize even with "real" GPU like NVidia you will save electricity since NVidia card can be turned off while in windows desktop/not playing game and saved electricity will save you nice sum of money in electricity bill, because TOCK is usually all about reducing power requirement and surface area

Really (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773143)

I'm not sure what this guy is reading or if he's high or what, but Ivy Bridge is a significant improvement from what I've been able to derive. Soon as they are available I'm buying one.

Skipping Sandy Bridge (1)

The Archon V2.0 (782634) | about 2 years ago | (#39773225)

In the end, those desktop users who decided to skip Sandy Bridge to hold out for Ivy Bridge, probably shouldn't have.

Well, that rather depends on how many Ivy Bridge recalls there will be, doesn't it?

CPU for developers? (0)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 2 years ago | (#39773651)

Speaking of which, what's a good CPU for a developer laptop (functioning as a desktop replacement)?

I was thinking I needed to have at least a Core i3 because it supports Intel Virtualization Extensions (VT-x). But then I read that VirtualBox doesn't really use hardware virtualization [virtualbox.org] much. So even a Dual Core B940 should suffice, right?

Of course, in the day, we all had Pentium 4's, and today's processors are all many times faster than that.

(I'm not compiling C++ or even Java most of the time.)

Re:CPU for developers? (1)

TheRaven64 (641858) | about 2 years ago | (#39773751)

(I'm not compiling C++ or even Java most of the time.)

Telling us what you are doing is probably more likely to encourage helpful suggestions than telling us what you aren't doing...

Re:CPU for developers? (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 2 years ago | (#39773909)

Mostly web development (that's where the market is): including frameworks like Symfony, Drupal, etc. which have large codebases. Using Netbeans (Java-based) to step through and debug that code.
Running standard MySQL/Apache, etc.

Running virtual machines to simulate environments. Running MongoDB and Postfix for mail. Running unit tests. Running integration tests (like automated in-browser testing).

In addition, running standard productivity tools (email, office, etc.). Running light graphics tools (Inkscape, Gimp). Running a ton of browser windows and tabs including research and API documentation.

Re:CPU for developers? (1)

willy_me (212994) | about 2 years ago | (#39773819)

I was thinking I needed to have at least a Core i3 because it supports Intel Virtualization Extensions (VT-x). But then I read that VirtualBox doesn't really use hardware virtualization much. So even a Dual Core B940 should suffice, right?

Correct, but it is still a good idea to have hardware virtualization. Virtualbox does use hardware virtualization but it is only required when virtualizing 64bit guests. If you are running 32bit guests, hardware virtualization can still be used and should allow for better performance. Hardware virtualization will also allow you to play around with KVM and other VM software. If you're getting a new machine, why limit yourself?

Re:CPU for developers? (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 2 years ago | (#39773959)

Speaking of 64 vs 32, anybody want to say anything about 64 or 32 being faster?

I.e., if you don't have > 2GB or > 4GB datasets, 32-bit is faster because it doesn't have the overhead? (I.e., 64bit is pushing more data around in every single machine instruction because the addresses specified are longer.)

Re:CPU for developers? (1)

0123456 (636235) | about 2 years ago | (#39774059)

(I.e., 64bit is pushing more data around in every single machine instruction because the addresses specified are longer.)

No, it's not. In fact, you're less likely to require an address in an instruction on an x64 CPU because you have twice as many registers so you're not having to perpetually push values out to RAM and read them back in order to free up registers for other uses.

Re:CPU for developers? (1)

Compaqt (1758360) | about 2 years ago | (#39774225)

Oh, so if you're setting up a virtual machine (either for testing locally or for production on a VPS somewhere like Rackspace), even it's only a 1GB machine, it should be 64 bit? I'm assuming 512MB should be 32bit.

Re:CPU for developers? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39774889)

exactly since smart operating systems and compilers can use those registers when calling functions for parameters and not even touch stack/much faster function calls are great for any type of OO programming

Power to compute ratio (1)

Krneki (1192201) | about 2 years ago | (#39773279)

If we put the cost aside for a moment, the new Intel CPU keeps the Moore's law standard and the power to compute ration is accordingly increased compered to the previous CPU. So I don't get why people complain.

Re:Power to compute ratio (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773991)

They did that. Instead of upping the clock speed. They will work out the kinks of what happened this gen to make the next gen. Where they will up the instruction retire rate (either process improvement or clock increase).

I waited on this one as I want a laptop that has good power usage with the 'sandy bridge' cpu. Any perf increase I will be getting is because I am coming from 3 gens back...

to bad apple will be stuck with shit video thatamd (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773429)

to bad apple will be stuck with shit video that gets beat by amd on cpu video and $60 video cards.

Re:to bad apple will be stuck with shit video that (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | about 2 years ago | (#39774411)

You mean Apple's AMD 6630M, 6750M, 6770M, 6750, 6770, 6970 will be beat by AMD's 6350/6450. I don't see that happening. You can get discrete graphics on Macs if you want. For budget PCs, integrated graphics has always been a cost saver for Mac and PC. The only models that don't offer discrete are MacBook Airs which have been heavily optimized for weight and power savings. Adding a discrete card makes no sense here.

Lies, damn lies, and slashdot postings (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773485)

How is this official intel anything? It's a sack of third party reviews, and an inexhaustive list at that. Feh.

Is it just me (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 2 years ago | (#39773555)

...or are these not that great? I was reading a phoronix article and with march=native even bulldozer holds it's own to these things.

can't wait for pilediver.

Re:Is it just me (0)

RightSaidFred99 (874576) | about 2 years ago | (#39774603)

It's just you. Bulldozer is a joke and barely holds its own with Nehalem class processors.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?