Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [TPU] Ivy Bridge-E Core Processors To Still Pack Six Cores
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[TPU] Ivy Bridge-E Core Processors To Still Pack Six Cores - Page 7

post #61 of 135
The slide showing IVB scaling up to 10 or 12 most likely refers to plans for an IVB-EX model which was skipped in SNB. I'm sure the IVB-E/EP parts will still be limited to 8c/16t.

I'll be fine skipping IVB-E and upgrading to a new platform for HSW-E. That should give me about 3 years of solid use. Never thought I'd hold onto the same platform for so long, but SNB-E has been great.
Archer Vice
(23 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7 3930K P9X79 WS AMD Radeon R9 200 Series AMD Radeon R9 200 Series 
RAMRAMHard DriveCooling
Samsung  Samsung  samsung 1TB 2x 480mm Monsta Rads in P/P 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Swiftech Apogee Drive II Aquacomputer Aqualis 880ml w/fountain Swiftech MCP35X Primoflex Advanced LRT - black 7/16-5/8 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
2x Aquacomputer Kryographics 290X blocks with p... Swiftech lok-seal adapters and elbows + xspc co... Lamptron FC5 20x Swiftech Helix fans 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 HP ZR2740w Cooler Master CMSTORM Trigger Corsair AX1200i 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Case Labs ST10X Corsair Vengeance M65 Razer Scarab BF3 edition 
  hide details  
Reply
Archer Vice
(23 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
Intel Core i7 3930K P9X79 WS AMD Radeon R9 200 Series AMD Radeon R9 200 Series 
RAMRAMHard DriveCooling
Samsung  Samsung  samsung 1TB 2x 480mm Monsta Rads in P/P 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Swiftech Apogee Drive II Aquacomputer Aqualis 880ml w/fountain Swiftech MCP35X Primoflex Advanced LRT - black 7/16-5/8 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
2x Aquacomputer Kryographics 290X blocks with p... Swiftech lok-seal adapters and elbows + xspc co... Lamptron FC5 20x Swiftech Helix fans 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Win 7 HP ZR2740w Cooler Master CMSTORM Trigger Corsair AX1200i 
CaseMouseMouse Pad
Case Labs ST10X Corsair Vengeance M65 Razer Scarab BF3 edition 
  hide details  
Reply
post #62 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nemesis158 View Post

I thought intel had already stated that they would have Fully unlocked IB-E chips with TDP over 130W?
Are they going back on that now?
Maybe there will be chips that have them enabled and chips that dont?
SBE Has more Lanes from the processor, and the PLX chips add latency to the PCIE bus.
Also, Scaling on the 7970s is almost 99% (at least i know it is for two cards, ive seen it myself, not sure about more though, youd have to ask karlitos or TSM)

Quote:
Originally Posted by M3T4LM4N222 View Post

They are not the same! I've explained it too you several times in multiple threads. I've also told you a PLX chip ADDS latency which increases microstudder in multiple GPU setups.
Ivy Bridge-E = LGA 2011 = Quad Channel Memory Controller = No int. Graphics = 22nm process = X79 Chipset = Native 12 Core
Ivy Bridge = LGA 1155 = Dual Channel Memory controller = Int. graphics = 22nm process = Z77 = Native Quad Core
They are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. The architecture is in NO WAY similar. I've had a LGA 1155 Core i7 and a LGA 2011 Core i7 - the chips in size are completely different. Your absolutely ridiculous - please read up on subjects before you post your uninformed non-sense.
A 8 Core chip would be more likely 150W TDP. Intel already has 130W 8 Core processors - all they have too do is raise the clocks above 3.0GHZ and it'll be 150W TDP. Intel already released a LGA 2011 150W TDP processor - they won't hesitate to release more. Enthusiasts don't care much about the TDP.

Our LCD monitors have far more latency when compared to the PLEX 100 nanoseconds, 100 nanoseconds people come-on.
post #63 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsumi View Post

15-20% higher per-core performance cannot beat 50% more cores in highly multithreaded applications. Simple math.

So by that concept, Thuban should decimate Sandy? tongue.gif 15-20% per core boost is HUGE for just an architectural revision. tongue.gif
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-6300HQ Dell Proprietary 4GB Nvidia GTX 960M Samsung 12GB (1x8GB 1x4GB) DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
256GB SanDisk M.2 SSD 1TB HGST 7.2k HDD Custom Cooling by Dell Solutions Windows 10 Home 64-Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
15.6" 1920x1080 IPS Screen Dell 130w PSU Logitech G602 Wireless 
Mouse Pad
Xtrac 'Ripper' Mouse Pad 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-2760QM Toshiba Qosmio X775 Nvidia 1.5GB GTX 560M 8GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
120GB Samsung 830 SSD + 1TB HGST 7200RPM HDD CD/DVD-RW Stock Windows 10 Home 64-Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
17.3" - 1600x900 Standard backlit 180w Power Adapter Logitech G500s 
Audio
Harmon/Kardon Onboard 
  hide details  
Reply
     
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i5-6300HQ Dell Proprietary 4GB Nvidia GTX 960M Samsung 12GB (1x8GB 1x4GB) DDR3L 1600 MHz 
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingOS
256GB SanDisk M.2 SSD 1TB HGST 7.2k HDD Custom Cooling by Dell Solutions Windows 10 Home 64-Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
15.6" 1920x1080 IPS Screen Dell 130w PSU Logitech G602 Wireless 
Mouse Pad
Xtrac 'Ripper' Mouse Pad 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core i7-2760QM Toshiba Qosmio X775 Nvidia 1.5GB GTX 560M 8GB DDR3 1333 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
120GB Samsung 830 SSD + 1TB HGST 7200RPM HDD CD/DVD-RW Stock Windows 10 Home 64-Bit 
MonitorKeyboardPowerMouse
17.3" - 1600x900 Standard backlit 180w Power Adapter Logitech G500s 
Audio
Harmon/Kardon Onboard 
  hide details  
Reply
post #64 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by lordikon View Post

You're the one making the claim, why should he have to find the benches? You may be right, but the last time I checked, benches run on true PCI 3.0 boards, even at very high res, we're only getting a few fps above PCI 2.0 boards.
http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/24.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/11.html
Tests with 680 show that even at 5760x1080 the FPS difference is tiny between 2.0 and 3.0. They only tested with 1 card, but even with 4 cards the bandwidth would likely not be much different as the amount of data wouldn't change much, unless there were heavy post processing effects. The talk about that in the first link.

One GPU on a 16x PCIe 3.0 you won't benefit.

A Dual GPU like the GTX 690 pushing 5760x1080P down a 16x PCIe 3.0 you will see small gains and smoothness. Hence it being the only native PCIe 3.0 GPU from Nvidia this generation. They said themselves it needed it.

But unless you're cramming three to four GPUs down the single 16x PCIe 3.0 lane then no you don't need it (because x8 PCIe 3.0 and x16 PCie 2.0 can handle dual GPU single screen fine), but were talking worst case scenario here (three to five screens) and nobody would spend $1500-2000 on GPUs and the same on monitors to have them all run by a $250 motherboard with one physical x16 PCIe 3.0 lane.

Vega did the benchmarks a long time ago and several others have confirmed it along the way. Physical x16 PCIe 3.0 lanes are needed for 3 and 4-Way GPU set-ups with three to five monitors period. The gains were around 30-40% between 2.0 and 3.0 so there is no arguement.

A X79 motherboard with a PLX chip running x16/x16/x16/x16 PCIe 3.0 you'll see minimal differences because it has 40 physical lanes but a Z77 with a PLX chip running x16/x16/x16/x16 PCIe 3.0 and smashing all that through it's 16 physical lanes, you'll see a enough of a difference.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770k Gigabyte Z87X OC  Gigabyte GTX Titan Gskill Ripjaws 2400mhz 16GB 4x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Corsair Force GS 240GB Western Digital Velociraptor 320GB EK GTX Titan Acetal Copper FC Block with Backplate EK Monarch DIMM Module heatspreaders 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK X3 Reservoir 150 EK Gigabyte Z87 X OC Acetal Copper Block EK Monarch X4 Copper Acetal Block with clean top Windows 8 64-Bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Dell U2412M Dell U2412M Dell U2412M Razer BlackWidow 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX1200i Custome Acetal case CNC Machined from 8mm sheet  Razer Mamba Razer Ironclad 
OtherOtherOtherOther
Corsair Individually Sleeved Cables Koolance 90deg Elbows  Monsoon Compression Fittings Corsair SP120 Quiet Edition PWM Fans 
OtherOtherOtherOther
Koolance OD3 Quick Disconnect Male Compression Koolance OD3 Quick Disconnect Female G1/4 Threaded EK Acetal Clean Supremacy Block XSPC RX360 Radiator 
OtherOtherOther
XSPC Acrylic Tank Reservior/Pump Top XSPC RX360 Radiator  Koolance 450S D5 Pump 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 4770k Gigabyte Z87X OC  Gigabyte GTX Titan Gskill Ripjaws 2400mhz 16GB 4x4GB  
Hard DriveHard DriveCoolingCooling
Corsair Force GS 240GB Western Digital Velociraptor 320GB EK GTX Titan Acetal Copper FC Block with Backplate EK Monarch DIMM Module heatspreaders 
CoolingCoolingCoolingOS
EK X3 Reservoir 150 EK Gigabyte Z87 X OC Acetal Copper Block EK Monarch X4 Copper Acetal Block with clean top Windows 8 64-Bit 
MonitorMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Dell U2412M Dell U2412M Dell U2412M Razer BlackWidow 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Corsair AX1200i Custome Acetal case CNC Machined from 8mm sheet  Razer Mamba Razer Ironclad 
OtherOtherOtherOther
Corsair Individually Sleeved Cables Koolance 90deg Elbows  Monsoon Compression Fittings Corsair SP120 Quiet Edition PWM Fans 
OtherOtherOtherOther
Koolance OD3 Quick Disconnect Male Compression Koolance OD3 Quick Disconnect Female G1/4 Threaded EK Acetal Clean Supremacy Block XSPC RX360 Radiator 
OtherOtherOther
XSPC Acrylic Tank Reservior/Pump Top XSPC RX360 Radiator  Koolance 450S D5 Pump 
  hide details  
Reply
post #65 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imglidinhere View Post

So by that concept, Thuban should decimate Sandy? tongue.gif 15-20% per core boost is HUGE for just an architectural revision. tongue.gif

Why do I need to keep repeating multithreaded applications?

Actually, I think I need to do it again, in bold and underline this time.

50% more cores will always beat 15-20% more per-core performance in highly multithreaded applications. Besides, it was in response to someone asking about the performance difference between the 3930k and 3770k. IB doesn't even have that much of a lead on SB in terms of IPC, it's only something like 7%, and both clock similarly.

Also, SB did not have a 15-20% higher per-core performance than Thuban. SB has something like 30-40% higher IPC (not factoring in clock speed advantages when overclocked). Hyperthreading on the i7 chips add an additional 10-20% performance in highly multithreaded applications. So the i7 2600k will beat a Thuban in virtually everything, and the i5 will only slightly fall behind in multithreaded.
Millenium Falcon
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 4930k MSI Big Bang Xpower II EVGA GTX 690 Patriot Viper II Sector 7 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Deneva 2 Corsair Force 3 Maxtor Western Digital Green 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung BD/DVD-RW Swiftech MCP655 x2 Black Ice GTX 480 Black Ice GTX 280 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool Repack Dual D5 Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 Alphacool GTX 690 fullcover Bitspower Big Bang Xpower II fullcover 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 64-bit Professional 3x Dell S2340 Max Keyboard Durandal CoolerMaster V1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Azza Genesis 9000B Logitech G700 Roccat Alumic Onkyo HT-S9100THX 
  hide details  
Reply
Millenium Falcon
(24 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 4930k MSI Big Bang Xpower II EVGA GTX 690 Patriot Viper II Sector 7 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
OCZ Deneva 2 Corsair Force 3 Maxtor Western Digital Green 
Optical DriveCoolingCoolingCooling
Samsung BD/DVD-RW Swiftech MCP655 x2 Black Ice GTX 480 Black Ice GTX 280 
CoolingCoolingCoolingCooling
Alphacool Repack Dual D5 Watercool Heatkiller 3.0 Alphacool GTX 690 fullcover Bitspower Big Bang Xpower II fullcover 
OSMonitorKeyboardPower
Windows 8.1 64-bit Professional 3x Dell S2340 Max Keyboard Durandal CoolerMaster V1000 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
Azza Genesis 9000B Logitech G700 Roccat Alumic Onkyo HT-S9100THX 
  hide details  
Reply
post #66 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Imglidinhere View Post

So by that concept, Thuban should decimate Sandy? tongue.gif 15-20% per core boost is HUGE for just an architectural revision. tongue.gif

it would work that way if Thuban didn't have severe disadvantage in both architecture design and fab process; the problem is i5 2500K is actually ~30-45% faster clock for clock than the 1100T, (not just 15-20), and can then overclock that much higher because its 32nm vs. 45nm... Forget about with 2600K and up.

Haswell architecture simply isn't going to be that much faster (ie nowhere near 30-45%) and in all likelihood not overclock that much better, and thus even the first 980X chips will be able to best Haswell in the most heavily threaded scenarios.
Edited by bojinglebells - 11/5/12 at 4:59pm
HK47
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930K ASUS Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX780 Samsung Green 4 x 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2 x 256GB Samsung 830 SSD RAID-0 3 x 1.5TB Hitachi 7K3000 RAID-0 2 x 3TB Seagate 7200.14 RAID-0 XSPC Raystorm, EX280, D5 Variant pump 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Update 1 BenQ XL2420T Dell U2711 Filco Majestouch-2 Tenkeyless Cherry MX Red 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic Platinum-1000 Silverstone FT02B-WRI Razer Abyssus Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD 
  hide details  
Reply
HK47
(18 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 3930K ASUS Sabertooth X79 EVGA GTX780 Samsung Green 4 x 4GB DDR3 
Hard DriveHard DriveHard DriveCooling
2 x 256GB Samsung 830 SSD RAID-0 3 x 1.5TB Hitachi 7K3000 RAID-0 2 x 3TB Seagate 7200.14 RAID-0 XSPC Raystorm, EX280, D5 Variant pump 
OSMonitorMonitorKeyboard
Windows 8.1 Pro x64 Update 1 BenQ XL2420T Dell U2711 Filco Majestouch-2 Tenkeyless Cherry MX Red 
PowerCaseMouseMouse Pad
Seasonic Platinum-1000 Silverstone FT02B-WRI Razer Abyssus Razer Goliathus Speed 
Audio
Creative Sound Blaster X-Fi Titanium HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #67 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by thestache View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by lordikon View Post

You're the one making the claim, why should he have to find the benches? You may be right, but the last time I checked, benches run on true PCI 3.0 boards, even at very high res, we're only getting a few fps above PCI 2.0 boards.
http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/24.html
http://www.techpowerup.com/mobile/reviews/Intel/Ivy_Bridge_PCI-Express_Scaling/11.html
Tests with 680 show that even at 5760x1080 the FPS difference is tiny between 2.0 and 3.0. They only tested with 1 card, but even with 4 cards the bandwidth would likely not be much different as the amount of data wouldn't change much, unless there were heavy post processing effects. The talk about that in the first link.

One GPU on a 16x PCIe 3.0 you won't benefit.

A Dual GPU like the GTX 690 pushing 5760x1080P down a 16x PCIe 3.0 you will see small gains and smoothness. Hence it being the only native PCIe 3.0 GPU from Nvidia this generation. They said themselves it needed it.

But unless you're cramming three to four GPUs down the single 16x PCIe 3.0 lane then no you don't need it (because x8 PCIe 3.0 and x16 PCie 2.0 can handle dual GPU single screen fine), but were talking worst case scenario here (three to five screens) and nobody would spend $1500-2000 on GPUs and the same on monitors to have them all run by a $250 motherboard with one physical x16 PCIe 3.0 lane.

Vega did the benchmarks a long time ago and several others have confirmed it along the way. Physical x16 PCIe 3.0 lanes are needed for 3 and 4-Way GPU set-ups with three to five monitors period. The gains were around 30-40% between 2.0 and 3.0 so there is no arguement.

A X79 motherboard with a PLX chip running x16/x16/x16/x16 PCIe 3.0 you'll see minimal differences because it has 40 physical lanes but a Z77 with a PLX chip running x16/x16/x16/x16 PCIe 3.0 and smashing all that through it's 16 physical lanes, you'll see a enough of a difference.

This is what they said about it:
Quote:
Contrary to intuition, the driving factor for PCI-Express bus width and speed for most games is framerate, not resolution. Our benchmarks conclusively show that with higher resolution, the performance difference between PCIe configurations shrinks. This is because the bus transfers a fairly constant amount of scene and texture data - for each frame. The final rendered image never moves across the bus, except in render engines that do post-processing on the CPU, for example Alan Wake. Even in that case, the reduction in FPS from higher resolution is bigger than the increase in pixel data.
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
Foldatron
(17 items)
 
Mat
(10 items)
 
Work iMac
(9 items)
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsGraphics
i7 950 EVGA x58 3-way SLI EVGA GTX 660ti GTX 275 
RAMHard DriveHard DriveHard Drive
3x2GB Corsair Dominator DDR3-1600 80GB Intel X25-M SSD 2TB WD Black 150GB WD Raptor 
Hard DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
2x 150GB WD V-raptor in RAID0 Win7 Home 64-bit OEM 55" LED 120hz 1080p Vizio MS Natural Ergonomic Keyboard 4000 
PowerCase
750W PC P&C Silencer CoolerMaster 690 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i5 2500S AMD 6770M 8GB (2x4GB) at 1333Mhz 1TB, 7200 rpm 
Optical DriveOSMonitorKeyboard
LG 8X Dual-Layer "SuperDrive" OS X Lion 27" iMac screen Mac wireless keyboard 
Mouse
Mac wireless mouse 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
i7-2600K AMD 6970M 1GB 16GB PC3-10600 DDR3 1TB 7200rpm 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
256GB SSD 8x DL "SuperDrive" OS X 10.7 Lion 27" 2560x1440 iMac display 
Monitor
27" Apple thunderbolt display 
  hide details  
Reply
post #68 of 135
sure the z77 boards are good but x79 boards is just the way to go if you want to do anything from gaming to video editing,I would like to see the z77 handle 64 gb ram like most of the x79 mobo's
post #69 of 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tjj226 Angel View Post

I am waiting for the 999999999999999999999999999999X CPU that has 12 billion cores and has a TDP of a nuclear power plant. It will come in handy when I play tetris tongue.gif
I know what you need ! - You need Bulldozer version 1k thumb.gif
post #70 of 135
Goggle brought me here lol


Well if IB-E and Haswell-E are build on the same 22nm process then I see no problem IB-E being a true 8core., Since Haswell-E is suppose to be a 10-12core cpu (again build on same 22nm).


I was seriously thinking about IB-E 8core, but when I saw Haswell LGA1150 spec. over at anadtech I kinda changed my mind, there is just to much new stuff in Haswell.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6355/intels-haswell-architecture/5 (page* 5-11, esp. page 6-9*)

And Haswell-E is still to far away.. meh, Haswell-E 8core would be my perfect dream machine biggrin.gif
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles
Overclock.net › Forums › Industry News › Rumors and Unconfirmed Articles › [TPU] Ivy Bridge-E Core Processors To Still Pack Six Cores