Originally Posted by mybadomen
Is it just me or does this sound like sorta a bummer?
"Before you get too excited, though, bear in mind that Ivy Bridge is not a performance update to Sandy Bridge. Where Sandy Bridge was the tock — new architecture — following Westmere, Ivy Bridge is the tick (die shrink) of Intel’s tick-tock release strategy. That doesn’t mean that IB isn’t faster than SB — some leaked benchmarks show a 2-8% gain — but primarily, Ivy Bridge will consume less power. According to Intel, the Core i7-3770k will have a TDP of just 77 watts, down from 95W on the current top-end i7-2700K."
This is the primary reason I stick with AMD based systems.
First is backwards compatibility. Almost every new CPU they come out with will work in the older model Motherboards, AM2 compatible with 754, AM3 Compatible with AM2 socket, AM3+ compatible with AM3 Socket. They make it where you can do Gradual Upgrades whereas Intel makes different sockets for each generation and do not make it exactly clear which CPU's go in which of the sockets.... If I knew for sure which socket I needed for certain CPU's I might would have jumped onto the Intel Bandwagon this go around.
Second, For every generation CPU Intel releases, they have a Huge speed drop with newer technology. As in the socket 478, they had a Prescott 3.4GHz HT Processor, but did not again achieve 3.4GHz factory in the Next Gen CPU's for another 2 years? Just seems like they rushed new technology. AMD on the other hand, though behind the curve as far as performance, have never released a new platform CPU that they did not match the performance of the best of the older technology with one of their newer technology CPU's. they Wait to make sure the new technology will be viable.
Lastly, AMD makes sure that as Technology comes out, the average person can afford to jump right in there, where as Intel has made it very clear that since they come out with power 1st, they should be able to overcharge for that power. Just cause it came out 1st does not mean it's better, IMO. For instance, What is the average running temps of a Intel Processor vs AMD? AMD Processors at load are made to run up to 20C cooler than Intel Processors. Also, this gicves them a upper hand to be overclocked with higher potential power. But, in the end, AMD CPU's are less stable at higher temps, so that is mute.
Sadly, since there is more market for higher performance Intel CPU's, most Motherboard Companies tend to lean on fine tuning Intel based motherboards, whereas the AMD boards generally do not hold up well. Take for instance, the Motherboard I bought from Asus, the M4A87TD EVO. It is, in my mind equivalent to the P6X58D Premium, but performance wise, lacks the quality of design. There is definately no love for the AMD Enthusiasts out there. My board I have had to RMA due to faulty design of the Northbridge heatsink, only to have similar issues with a replacement board.
On a final thought, Like Mac Owners are to PC's, Intel Processors are to all computer owners. Just because it is the new Intel Processor, people will flock to buy it, Even knowing that it lacks in performance from the older models. Why? Because it's the New Intel Processor. Same reason Apple owners will buy a iPad knowing that any other tablet maker's tablets will run circles around the iPad, because it's the new Apple product. Looking at it in that perspective, Who's gonna buy the new Ivybridge Computers? I know I'm not a trend surfer.