Intel LGA 2011 roadmap : Affordable SNB-E and no LGA 1356

http://tof.canardpc.com/view/910e6bf...d0376163e7.jpg

As you can see, not only on Extreme segment but also P1 and P2.
No word about LGA 1356 though ...

Thanks to Marc from Hardware.fr ;)

Edit 04/19 :

http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/aa4...e48f3a2a6b.jpg

http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/55c...7ebb5df0fb.jpg

http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/062...35b041e6e6.jpg

Special Thanks to sxs112, post #57 and #63 :up:

Edit 05/26 :

http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/27a...6548128b91.jpg

http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/bd2...c3ebe18ed3.jpg

http://cpu.zol.com.cn/231/2310637.html

Thanks :up:

Wonder if people now still cry about socket changes... :p:

Now intel has consolidated its lineup form 5 sockets to 4.

I think, the date launch is behind November 2011 for SB-E

Thanks!

I was planning on replacing my 1366 rig with SB-E, but I guess I can spend my tax refund on a Bulldozer/SB setup in the mean time :)

Dang! I thought IB was this year! Ugh.

Q4 cant get soon enough :p:

we'll get some info about SB-EP for servers tomorrow at IDF

- Next Generation Intel® Server Microarchitecture Codename Sandy Bridge for Intel® Xeon® Processors

Considering what x79 offers, I'll pass. Great CPUs, but the board options itself is not exciting.

So we might see high end/extreme sandybridge 2H 2012? I keep thinking its a long time to wait, then I realize we're in 2011, lol.

Is the 2i7-2600k a shrink (22nm?)?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Synthetickiller

Considering what x79 offers, I'll pass. Great CPUs, but the board options itself is not exciting.

So we might see high end/extreme sandybridge 2H 2012? I keep thinking its a long time to wait, then I realize we're in 2011, lol.

Is the 2i7-2600k a shrink (22nm?)?

---

Its not a "2", its an underlined ">" :) So not a die shrink. The die shrink is coming with Ivy Bridge iirc.

As for the board options for X79, I'd guess board manufacturers will add features just like they did with X58.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuraN

Its not a "2", its an underlined ">" :) So not a die shrink. The die shrink is coming with Ivy Bridge iirc.

As for the board options for X79, I'd guess board manufacturers will add features just like they did with X58.

---

Ha, I need glasses! Thanks.

I wonder if these boards will go through the same evolution as x58 in terms of features. If I've learned anything, I won't be an early adopter for a long time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Synthetickiller

Ha, I need glasses! Thanks.

I wonder if these boards will go through the same evolution as x58 in terms of features. If I've learned anything, I won't be an early adopter for a long time.

---

I think that the evolution you might see with x79 boards will be on the connector side of things (lightpeak, usb3.0, sata6, 10GbE, etc) as those technologies become available with time. Early adopters (and benchers) would typically not be too bothered with that kind of stuff anyway.

Intel had a nice run with its annual tick-tock strategy since 2006. Unfortunately it looks like 2011 is the year that it finally falls off schedule. No Ivy Bridge in 2011 saddens me, but I must congratulate Intel on keeping up such an aggressive schedule for so long. :clap:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andypro1

Intel had a nice run with its annual tick-tock strategy since 2006. Unfortunately it looks like 2011 is the year that it finally falls off schedule. No Ivy Bridge in 2011 saddens me, but I must congratulate Intel on keeping up such an aggressive schedule for so long. :clap:

---

Yea I don't have any result tables to look at apart from the quarterly reports which haven't been too shabby but it certainly feels like Intel's tick-tock strategy is doing well and it's something that AMD seems to have a problem keeping up with, feels like Bulldozer has been in development for like forever now so it better be good once it arrives as Intel highspeed train isn't here to stop anytime soon it seems. What this faster development pace means though that we also are looking forward to smaller performance gain per each new generation, like it currently looks like we're usually around 10~20% increase per generation compared to pre-tick-tock era when we could see much higher gains per generation, with that in mind it's quite logical with the relatively small performance gains as of late. AMD doesn't release new generations that often so it'll also have to have bigger performance increases compared to their previous gen. So it's actually a good thing in the end especially for enthusiasts that simply love to play with new stuff, Intel provides more frequent updates while AMD provides more "longer-lasting" products that are also great at release but may not look that impressive towards the end of their time in before a generation change.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FlanK3r

I think, the date launch is behind November 2011 for SB-E

---

Perhaps Nov 11? :P :yepp:

The whole Sandy Bridge / P67 dabacle/nightmare probably didn't help any schedules at intel.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brahmzy

Dang! I thought IB was this year! Ugh.

---

Sorry, the thought that IB would be out in 2011 was just the nonsensical ramblings of uninformed fanboys... ;)

I think the IB-in-2011 rumors were created by some info that Intel would show (not sell) IB in 2011.

Anyways, this afordable SB-E is the first bit of Intel related news thats been exciting in awhile. With clock generators still on-die we can't expect 920 levels of OC per dollar but oh well :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by antiacid

I think that the evolution you might see with x79 boards will be on the connector side of things (lightpeak, usb3.0, sata6, 10GbE, etc) as those technologies become available with time. Early adopters (and benchers) would typically not be too bothered with that kind of stuff anyway.

---

Good point, although that's 1% of users, right?

I guess it's good I'm holding out. USB 3.0 is really really nice to have (using it now) and sata 6 & thunderbolt will rock.

As for 10Gbe, its so expensive now. It'll drop that much in 2 years (1H 2012)? That would be nice, 1gbps is limiting, but that's another discussion.

intersting intel thinks that the 1366 and 1156 quads are better than the 2600, that seams rather broken in their side. and goodby 1366 i never liked u.

so long waiting for socket 2011

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Russian

Perhaps Nov 11? :P :yepp:

---

think sometime between 10-15.11. ???My tip :)

Consider this topic may be long forgoten, while somthing way better is released in that time when you try to get new hw

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanzabar

intersting intel thinks that the 1366 and 1156 quads are better than the 2600, that seams rather broken in their side. and goodby 1366 i never liked u.

---

SKUs have nothing to do with performance...

no LGA1365 DUH

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trn

I think the IB-in-2011 rumors were created by some info that Intel would show (not sell) IB in 2011.

Anyways, this afordable SB-E is the first bit of Intel related news thats been exciting in awhile. With clock generators still on-die we can't expect 920 levels of OC per dollar but oh well :)

---

Not exciting news, it was obvious Intel would go this way. They only wanted to have a platform with higher margins not a platform that prices itself out of the market. For those higher margins Intel are prepared to make that platform more desirable, as last time (LGA1156) they made the mainstream platform too undesirable.

What I want is a clarification on PCI-E 3.0, the chipset says slides say 8x 2.0 lanes, but says nothing other than how it splits the lanes coming from the CPU (16x on two slots, or 8x on four slots).

Which is nice to know but all previous slides say SB-E is has a PCI-E 3.0 controller with 40 lanes and Intel is being vague about the subject. Does LGA2011 have both, or is it fully 2.0 now, and if so what happened?

What exactly is 2011 about?
Instead of 50x100 I can run 25x200
Maybe a few extra mhz out of the CPU
Memory tweaking
Extra CPU cores
Extra memory channel
Extra pciE lanes
Extra SATA slots

Boards will cost at least 300$ I guess
Cpus will cost at least that much as well...
None of this will notably affect performance for me... ill pass... :/

After Intel making everybody who went for a 1366 highend platform look like an idiot by releasing a mainstream CPU that bests anything available on their current highend platform for 1/3 the cost... I somehow feel reluctant to empty my pockets to buy into their next highend platform...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

What exactly is the point of 2011?

---

more.

Thats the point. More everything vs 1155, coArz! :p:, DIMM slots, PCI, SATA, options.... and i'll have it all :D


*disclaimer, at this point its all speculation anyways. But you can keep your quad cores, thats sooooo 2007 :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by trn

more.

Thats the point. More everything vs 1155, coArz! :p:, DIMM slots, PCI, SATA, options.... and i'll have it all :D


*disclaimer, at this point its all speculation anyways. But you can keep your quad cores, thats sooooo 2007 :)

---

The biggest thing to think about is if you are stuck with an 1155 socket, there are no plans for anything more than quad core.

Considering software dev is heading toward multi core, in a few years a quad core could be as obsolete as a dual core lga775. So the main reason to buy a 2011 socket is octocore cpu's which should remain viable much longer than any Ivy Bridge 1155.

Basically if you buy a motherboard you plan to keep more than a few years I'd say socket 2011 or BD is what you would want. Socket 1155 IB/SB is geared toward mainstream with its low power consumption and on die gpu. Sure you can run an unlocked SB at 5 ghz but I bet the K line is pulled as soon as 2011 is released as the warranty claims on these will be a losing game for Intel.

hope they cann 1356 or just use the same server socket...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glen

The biggest thing to think about is if you are stuck with an 1155 socket, there are no plans for anything more than quad core.

---

How do you know that ?

Quote:

---

Considering software dev is heading toward multi core, in a few years a quad core could be as obsolete as a dual core lga775. So the main reason to buy a 2011 socket is octocore cpu's which should remain viable much longer than any Ivy Bridge 1155.

---

Core i3 dual core is not obsolete, and performs very well against some of AMD quad core. In gaming, i3-2100 can compete with AMD fastest processor on the market. And here we are talking about dual core, not a quad core

Saying that quad core is going to be obsolete in few years is far from the truth, specially when we are talking about fast quad cores like sandy-bridge.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dartaz

How do you know that ?




Core i3 dual core is not obsolete, and performs very well against some of AMD quad core. In gaming, i3-2100 can compete with AMD fastest processor on the market. And here we are talking about dual core, not a quad core

Saying that quad core is going to be obsolete in few years is far from the truth, specially when we are talking about fast quad cores like sandy-bridge.

---

There is no means to fit a hexacore and the bigger igp, yes I have dissected a SB cpu at work and taken measurements (we engineers can't help but take things apart or break things as our boss puts it :D), it just ain't gonna happen even with the die shrink, sorry. Plus you must have missed intels announced plans for IB 1155 being quad only:eek:.

As far as i3 dual core not being obsolete, it has hyperthreading, so by your argument we should all be buying the i2600k over the i2500k if hyperthreading is that good (for future proofing) :confused:. Not only that if you are saying these dual cores compete with AMD's top CPU in games today, then it will surely be a huge bottleneck for big ticket games released in the future. In a year a lot of folks will be gaming on 120hz HD, I just don't see a dual core keeping up. And in 2 years my gut says a quad anything won't be enough. Sotware is using multi threaded programming more and more than people give credit.

hence why I am sticking with a bargain basement SB setup for now, the platform just isn't worth the investment for long term viability. The socket 2011 motherboards will be the ones to pour money and time into. If I was an X58 or even LGA775 owner I would be waiting on socket 2011. JMHO, but if you think investing in a nice P67 MB right now makes sense I would love to hear your reasoning, this is a good discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by glen

<snip>
hence why I am sticking with a bargain basement SB setup for now, the platform just isn't worth the investment for long term viability. The socket 2011 motherboards will be the ones to pour money and time into. If I was an X58 or even LGA775 owner I would be waiting on socket 2011. JMHO, but if you think investing in a nice P67 MB right now makes sense I would love to hear your reasoning, this is a good discussion.

---

That's what I was thinking as well. But another member in this thread was explaining why 1155 will be the better setup. http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...7&postcount=25

Oh well, I guess when Intel finally releases SKT2011 we'll get the real answer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

What exactly is 2011 about?
Instead of 50x100 I can run 25x200
Maybe a few extra mhz out of the CPU
Memory tweaking
Extra CPU cores
Extra memory channel
Extra pciE lanes
Extra SATA slots

Boards will cost at least 300$ I guess
Cpus will cost at least that much as well...
None of this will notably affect performance for me... ill pass... :/

After Intel making everybody who went for a 1366 highend platform look like an idiot by releasing a mainstream CPU that bests anything available on their current highend platform for 1/3 the cost... I somehow feel reluctant to empty my pockets to buy into their next highend platform...

---

I would take exception to that statement.
As nice as the 2600K SB is for pure power it can't touch a 980x or 990x in a decent X58 board.
The SB is an excellent mid priced system but it's a quad and can't match the hex's..:p:
BUT bang for the buck the SB is the winner by far..:D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I would take exception to that statement.
As nice as the 2600K SB is for pure power it can't touch a 980x or 990x in a decent X58 board.
The SB is an excellent mid priced system but it's a quad and can't match the hex's..:p:
BUT bang for the buck the SB is the winner by far..:D

---

i would agree on the xeon 6-core x58 platform but the i7 is targeted to gamers, and for games the 1366 is slower than the 1155 and its also slower than the 1156 clove for clock with a quad. sure u could get a hex core but the cheapest one is $600 and for gaming its still slower than an 1155 or 1156 quad clocked the same.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by zanzabar

i would agree on the xeon 6-core x58 platform but the i7 is targeted to gamers, and for games the 1366 is slower than the 1155 and its also slower than the 1156 clove for clock with a quad. sure u could get a hex core but the cheapest one is $600 and for gaming its still slower than an 1155 or 1156 quad clocked the same.

---

I agree for gamers but notice I said " for pure power"
In WCG my 2600K at 4634MHz does app 41,000PPD
My 80 year old Mothers 990x at 4154MHz does almost 49,000PPD..

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I agree for gamers but notice I said " for pure power"
In WCG my 2600K at 4634MHz does app 41,000PPD
My 80 year old Mothers 990x at 4154MHz does almost 49,000PPD..

---

But you pay 3x times more for CPU alone just to get ~19.5% more :p:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -=DVS=-

But you pay 3x times more for CPU alone just to get ~19.5% more :p:

---

I know, I know, BUT when your 80+ year old Mother wants a better system than the AMD 940( nice system) she had you get her the most powerfull system you can and damn the price!
Oh yea, it's in a GB UD7 board too..:rofl:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I know, I know, BUT when your 80+ year old Mother wants a better system than the AMD 940( nice system) she had you get her the most powerfull system you can and damn the price!
Oh yea, it's in a GB UD7 board too..:rofl:

---

Gramps, we get it we get it no need for the heroic defence.
SB i5's and i7's never aspired as Top of the line, but in most cases they are as fast as the fastest and as cheap as the cheapest [ pun intended ]

Of course in our bussines where we fold or crunch anything with more cores and any GPU with more Steams will be better.

But I think Intel showed that even with a cheap clown you can make a hell of a circus.

I had myself a i7 975 and wen't for if 2500K. I don't weep for the lost performance, I rejoice for the halved power consumption , much lower temps and the same gaming FPS :yepp:

It's the time of the year when companies make CPUs with more cores and is that time of year when Movieman gets a raging urge to OC and crunch the Saint Silicium God out of it.

I wonder why we don't call Sandies the GT 8800's of CPU Industry.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kondik

Gramps, we get it we get it no need for the heroic defence.
SB i5's and i7's never aspired as Top of the line, but in most cases they are as fast as the fastest and as cheap as the cheapest [ pun intended ]

Of course in our bussines where we fold or crunch anything with more cores and any GPU with more Steams will be better.

But I think Intel showed that even with a cheap clown you can make a hell of a circus.

I had myself a i7 975 and wen't for if 2500K. I don't weep for the lost performance, I rejoice for the halved power consumption , much lower temps and the same gaming FPS :yepp:

It's the time of the year when companies make CPUs with more cores and is that time of year when Movieman gets a raging urge to OC and crunch the Saint Silicium God out of it.

I wonder why we don't call Sandies the GT 8800's of CPU Industry.

---

I hear ya and what am I using?:D

Quote:

---

What I want is a clarification on PCI-E 3.0, the chipset says slides say 8x 2.0 lanes, but says nothing other than how it splits the lanes coming from the CPU (16x on two slots, or 8x on four slots).

Which is nice to know but all previous slides say SB-E is has a PCI-E 3.0 controller with 40 lanes and Intel is being vague about the subject. Does LGA2011 have both, or is it fully 2.0 now, and if so what happened?

---

i also want to know this. the same thing is happening with ivy bridge. some slides show only pci-e 2.0 while others show pci-e 3.0

really hope it comes with pci-e 3.0 to help future proof the system a little bit. i have a dual core core 2 duo and a 4870 so i like to ride my system until the proverbial wheels fall off :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andypro1

Intel had a nice run with its annual tick-tock strategy since 2006. Unfortunately it looks like 2011 is the year that it finally falls off schedule. No Ivy Bridge in 2011 saddens me, but I must congratulate Intel on keeping up such an aggressive schedule for so long. :clap:

---

I disagree. Tick-tock is still 'pretty' on schedule. The only reason it got changed is because of the economy and the majority of all the major OEMs had a lot of penryn inventory to clear in spring/summer of '09. The whole 32nm shrink was pushed back 2+ quarters.

Each perspective tick/tock has 1 year life cycles. Sandy bridge has only been out 4 months..don't know why you were expecting Ivy in '11 unless you were looking at old roadmaps/speculating.

Ivy is very early and an aggressive ramp compared to previous ticks.

Conroe was out 1 year before Penryn, Nehalem 1 year after that. Auburndale and Havendale being cancelled, the economy and the Westmere/32nm delay was what threw things off and came out almost 2 years after Nehalem. Sandy-B put things back on track being 1 year after West.

Ivy should be a '12 part..late '11 at best.

If anything, 2011 is the year that put Intel back on track with Tick-Tock.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by phantomferrari

i also want to know this. the same thing is happening with ivy bridge. some slides show only pci-e 2.0 while others show pci-e 3.0

really hope it comes with pci-e 3.0 to help future proof the system a little bit. i have a dual core core 2 duo and a 4870 so i like to ride my system until the proverbial wheels fall off :D

---

I think a lot of the confusion is coming from the fact that the PCI-e 3.0 lanes are coming from the CPU themselves and not the PCH/chipset/whatever they're calling it now.

I don't know if this is on Sandy-E or IvyB, but from what I read the 3.0 lanes come from the CPU.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tenknics

I disagree. Tick-tock is still 'pretty' on schedule. The only reason it got changed is because of the economy and the majority of all the major OEMs had a lot of penryn inventory to clear in spring/summer of '09. The whole 32nm shrink was pushed back 2+ quarters.

---

I also have a feeling that Intel knows exactly what kind of performance AMD is going to bring to the table with Bulldozer, and is not very concerned about it.

For BD to even achieve equal performance to Intel's lineup, the chip would have to make a such a massive leap in power over their current chips that it would make the gains made by the Core 2 Duo seem very tame.

If BD was the monster like many people here claim, they would have stomped Intel with it by now. Long and delays typically result from the product not living up to expectations.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Andrew LB

I also have a feeling that Intel knows exactly what kind of performance AMD is going to bring to the table with Bulldozer, and is not very concerned about it.

For BD to even achieve equal performance to Intel's lineup, the chip would have to make a such a massive leap in power over their current chips that it would make the gains made by the Core 2 Duo seem very tame.

If BD was the monster like many people here claim, they would have stomped Intel with it by now. Long and delays typically result from the product not living up to expectations.

---

when did BD get a delay, it was always h1 11 so they are still on track. and amd dose not care as much about desktops they want per watt servers and apu laptops/low end (aka were the profit is.) and the BD seams interesting with the multi threaded optimization but im guessing in single thread intel will not have anything to worry about but then u cannot oc the sub $300 chips now on intel so they should fear amd since the mass amount of system building on amd will move some people who dont clock to amd as thats waht gamers are using.

I think BD is a going to be a good arch, but AMD is at the mercy of GloFo process tech. AMD need GloFo to get good perf/yield on 32nm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

What exactly is 2011 about?
Instead of 50x100 I can run 25x200
Maybe a few extra mhz out of the CPU
Memory tweaking
Extra CPU cores
Extra memory channel
Extra pciE lanes
Extra SATA slots

Boards will cost at least 300$ I guess
Cpus will cost at least that much as well...
None of this will notably affect performance for me... ill pass... :/

After Intel making everybody who went for a 1366 highend platform look like an idiot by releasing a mainstream CPU that bests anything available on their current highend platform for 1/3 the cost... I somehow feel reluctant to empty my pockets to buy into their next highend platform...

---

Going p55 1156 was the best choice I've ever made. $200 cpu that does 4ghz on air on a $100 mobo and does everything as well for real world use.

2011 doesn't see amazing unless there's another big CPU jump (doubt it). For guys running SLI/Tri-SLI, great you will have full 16x slots, but for guys that can't afford it, p67 is looking better and better from a perfromance standpoint.

I'd rather have a 2600K and a gtx580 than having to dump another $300+ in a system that will maybe increase performance 10% (just guestimating).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by [XC] Synthetickiller

I'd rather have a 2600K and a gtx580 than having to dump another $300+ in a system that will maybe increase performance 10% (just guestimating).

---

Yea, slow steps, too small ones, to pay alot to have 10%

My smart bruther atm as he still got
core 2 duo 6600
ddr2 800 2gb
8600gts

Only thing what he need is good graphics, 560, 580.
:shrug:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nikolasz

Yea, slow steps, too small ones, to pay alot to have 10%

My smart bruther atm as he still got
core 2 duo 6600
ddr2 800 2gb
8600gts

Only thing what he need is good graphics, 560, 580.
:shrug:

---

sorry but i had a e6600 and when i switched to a lousy athlon x4 i got smoother gameplay and of course duble fps. so you need a quad nowwadays.

And a SSD.

We're reaching a point that for gamers and users that really don't want to go that "ballistic" with benchmarking ... the mainstream platforms are delivering more than enough power and specs ...

So if I upgrade to Sandy E at end of this year for $$$, then a couple months later at first of next year a mainstream IVY bridge (2500K equivalent) will be faster for 90+% tasks at a fraction of the cost? Strange marketing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I know, I know, BUT when your 80+ year old Mother wants a better system than the AMD 940( nice system) she had you get her the most powerfull system you can and damn the price!
Oh yea, it's in a GB UD7 board too..:rofl:

---

Quote:

---

I agree for gamers but notice I said " for pure power"
In WCG my 2600K at 4634MHz does app 41,000PPD
My 80 year old Mothers 990x at 4154MHz does almost 49,000PPD..

---

You could have bought her 2 sandy bridge rigs for 82,000ppd. :yepp:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I would take exception to that statement.
As nice as the 2600K SB is for pure power it can't touch a 980x or 990x in a decent X58 board.
The SB is an excellent mid priced system but it's a quad and can't match the hex's..:p:
BUT bang for the buck the SB is the winner by far..:D

---

pure power? thats a new term for WCG is it? ;)
so yeah, for 1% of the market a 980/990 IS faster than a 2600k... :P

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -=DVS=-

But you pay 3x times more for CPU alone just to get ~19.5% more :p:

---

and what about power consumption? :D

oh and that roadmap is cracking me up everytime i see it :rofl::ROTF:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olivon

http://tof.canardpc.com/view/910e6bf...d0376163e7.jpg

As you can see, not only on Extreme segment but also P1 and P2.
No word about LGA 1356 though ...

Thanks to Marc from Hardware.fr ;)

---

man that roadmap is hilarious...
980 and 880 ABOVE 2600K... and 990 is 2 whooping levels above the 2600k... which is at the same level as a 960... :confused2 say what? :D

excellent positioning there intel...
whats next? intel atom XE for 30$ positioned as a smartphone/tablet chip faster than a 2500K? :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by saaya

man that roadmap is hilarious...
980 and 880 ABOVE 2600K... and 990 is 2 whooping levels above the 2600k... which is at the same level as a 960... :confused2 say what? :D

excellent positioning there intel...
whats next? intel atom XE for 30$ positioned as a smartphone/tablet chip faster than a 2500K? :lol:

---

It's not faster, it's arranged by price range. The 880 is still being sold by Intel and they've not placed a socket 1155 chip in that price range. The 960 is in the same price range as the 2600k and the 980x is in the extreme bracket price range.

Intel to bundle Liquid Cooling with Retail Sandy Bridge-E Processors ? - BSN*

http://tof.canardpc.com/preview2/529...cb5eb36d63.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olivon

Intel to bundle Liquid Cooling with Retail Sandy Bridge-E Processors ? - BSN*

---

I sure hope not. Don't add anything to the cost please...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tool_462

I sure hope not. Don't add anything to the cost please...

---

Well if they want to sell the CPU's in several packages...

1st in a Hambag
2nd with the sad&tiny Sandy Bridge CPU cooler
3rd the so called Extreme Edition Tower Cooler
4th the Kelpie Intel Edition

That could be considered interesting

But if they only want to make the Dolphin edition then is a bad marketing move. However I don't belive Intel will be this daft.

http://pic.xfastest.com/sxs112/any/1.png

Thanks for posting the detailed roadmap sxs112!
Now that we have core count and clockspeed,we can see in the end intel was limited by TDP on 32nm. They are not realising 8 core version since the clockspeed would probably go down so much that it would effectively be slower than 6 core variant due to nature of workloads on desktop. Desktop workloads are not as parallel as server ones so ie. 8 core 2.5-2.8Ghz part would end up being slower than 3.3-3.6Ghz six core part. Also since intel upped the L3 cache on SB-E it probably affected the end TDPs somewhat.
In the end,these parts should be faster than 990x by similar margin the 2600K is faster than i7-975. It will probably be the fastest chip on the market,even after Zambezi launches.I expect that Zambezi will somewhat close the performance gap and that both chips will do great in certain workloads.

Now that's strange... two 6-core models with different L3 cache size?

And that 15MB L3 for the Extreme class doesn't cut it right, unless SNB-E now spots 2.5MB L3 per core?!

Remember the L3 cache is in a single block and each core can access as much of it as it needs until they run out of space. So Intel can put in as much cache as is viable without dividing it into neat blocks.

But saying that 15MB is a strange number, I imagine 1MB is disabled for yields.

Thanks sxs112 :up:

First post updated.

What limited unlocked means ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Thanks for posting the detailed roadmap sxs112!
Now that we have core count and clockspeed,we can see in the end intel was limited by TDP on 32nm. They are not realising 8 core version since the clockspeed would probably go down so much that it would effectively be slower than 6 core variant due to nature of workloads on desktop. Desktop workloads are not as parallel as server ones so ie. 8 core 2.5-2.8Ghz part would end up being slower than 3.3-3.6Ghz six core part. Also since intel upped the L3 cache on SB-E it probably affected the end TDPs somewhat.
In the end,these parts should be faster than 990x by similar margin the 2600K is faster than i7-975. It will probably be the fastest chip on the market,even after Zambezi launches.I expect that Zambezi will somewhat close the performance gap and that both chips will do great in certain workloads.

---

Six Panther Point Chip(Z77 Z75 H77 Q77 Q75 B75):D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olivon

Thanks sxs112 :up:

First post updated.

What limited unlocked means ?

---

Update
http://www.xfastest.com/attachments/....png.thumb.jpg

http://www.xfastest.com/attachments/....png.thumb.jpg

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by informal

Thanks for posting the detailed roadmap sxs112!
Now that we have core count and clockspeed,we can see in the end intel was limited by TDP on 32nm. They are not realising 8 core version since the clockspeed would probably go down so much that it would effectively be slower than 6 core variant due to nature of workloads on desktop. Desktop workloads are not as parallel as server ones so ie. 8 core 2.5-2.8Ghz part would end up being slower than 3.3-3.6Ghz six core part. Also since intel upped the L3 cache on SB-E it probably affected the end TDPs somewhat.
In the end,these parts should be faster than 990x by similar margin the 2600K is faster than i7-975. It will probably be the fastest chip on the market,even after Zambezi launches.I expect that Zambezi will somewhat close the performance gap and that both chips will do great in certain workloads.

---

if they got westmere-EX with 10 cores (30mb l3) to run at 2.4ghz, a ~3ghz SB-EP (20mb l3) with 8 cores wouldnt be impossible (we'll have to wait and see the LGA2011 xeon clockspeeds)... maybe the higher clocked 6C version is enough to maintain the performance crown on desktops (fitting their nature of worloads better, as you said) and well... they want higher margins (smaller die size).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olivon

Thanks sxs112 :up:

First post updated.

What limited unlocked means ?

---

I'm guessing it'll be like the current i7 900's where the bus is unlocked and the multiplier is locked, or some variation of the theme. While all the six cores will have unlocked Multi and bus clocks. There had to be something to make a buy push up to the more expensive chip, I hope that's all the difference because if I find out some have PCI-E 3.0 and others have 2.0 I'll be seriously pissed.

Any price range guesstimates for:

XE -
P2 -
P1 -
MS2 -

...and how many processor variants per the above ie; P1 - i7920, 930, 950, 960

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

I agree for gamers but notice I said " for pure power"
In WCG my 2600K at 4634MHz does app 41,000PPD
My 80 year old Mothers 990x at 4154MHz does almost 49,000PPD..

---

Lucky 80 year old mother, why does she need that much pure power?

Reminded me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GR5_X1CfUA

:p:

Uhm, guys, when i look at this updated roadmap one thing stands up.
You have a XE chips with 15M cache ,~1000$ probably
Then you have still unlocked but 12Mb chips ~500-800$ probably
And 4C chips below that.So no 6C chips below 500$.
I estimate prices on the way Intel puts on there chips sold ATM.
That essentially means a price hike (again) on the high end chips.No 920/930 like love for us.
Well back to looking at BD then i guess...

When looking at those latest roadmaps it makes me think Intel wants to lower the relative performance of the 1155 platform.
Not surprising tho, consumers love the 2600K, but I'm not sure Intel feels the same way when they have lots of SKU's priced higher but performs worse.

For most people, a 2500k or an I5 750 are completely fine instead of a 2600k or I7 920, but for some reason a lot of people still want to pick the latter, even though HT doesnt do anything for them.

Its also funny how the 2500k and 2600k can perform better than the I7 970, and for the same price you can get both the CPU and Mobo :(

But intel still keep X58 CPUs priced really high, even when the sandybridge CPUs are outperforming them.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by XRL8

Uhm, guys, when i look at this updated roadmap one thing stands up.
You have a XE chips with 15M cache ,~1000$ probably
Then you have still unlocked but 12Mb chips ~500-800$ probably
And 4C chips below that.So no 6C chips below 500$.
I estimate prices on the way Intel puts on there chips sold ATM.
That essentially means a price hike (again) on the high end chips.No 920/930 like love for us.
Well back to looking at BD then i guess...

---

Actually I think the quads will cost about the same as a 2600k, however the motherboards won't be cheap, even basic ones will be accommodating quad channel ram and will have to meet high tolerances.

I will admit, I was hoping for 6C chips to be the base model and 8C chips to be high end, it looks like that won't happen unless Bulldozer is very strong.

@Bhavv: Intel do this to maintain a price level to chips so there will be no shock when they announce SB-E prices, Socket 1366 chips are in a price bracket until they are replaced, not surpassed.

nice update, thx man.

Disappointed if true. I was hoping for <=500$ 8 core Sandy Bridge E, like initial leaks were suggesting. With such roadmap it would make no sense to upgrade from 6 core Westmere - I mean updating whole platform to get what? 20% performance tops ? I don't think we will see more performance gap with same core count. Maybe in some very limited scenarios. Lets wait and see what Bulldozer will bring to the table. If it won't put pressure on new SB E, then I guess no upgrade this year for me :(
Yeah I know I could just get some 2600k and be done with it, but I really wanted a bit more future-proof platform with PCIE-3, USB 3 and lots of SATA 6 Gbps ports(thats only confirmed feature of new mobos).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bhavv

Lucky 80 year old mother, why does she need that much pure power?

Reminded me of this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_GR5_X1CfUA

:p:

---

Cute one and she wanted a more powerfull machine for WCG

Was holding out and hoping for around $350-400 6core chip. Time to get a 2500/2600k now. Microcenter + Z68 combo = win

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kadozer

Was holding out and hoping for around $350-400 6core chip. Time to get a 2500/2600k now. Microcenter + Z68 combo = win

---

is it even out yet? z68?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by vitaminc

is it even out yet? z68?

---

In a few weeks sure. MSI first week of May. Combo at MC pretty much inevitable.





Really disappointing if the 6 core pricing is above $500. Ahh well when does Haswell get here ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Movieman

Cute one and she wanted a more powerfull machine for WCG

---

and what Interlagos Movieman?:) Maybe it will be better choice:D

>i7 960 for ~u$300 in Q3...

http://www.techpowerup.com/img/11-04-20/127a.jpg

could that be the affordable i7 970 we've been looking for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Sweeper_

>i7 960 for ~u$300 in Q3...

http://www.techpowerup.com/img/11-04-20/127a.jpg

could that be the affordable i7 970 we've been looking for?

---

The i7 960 already exists mate, its a Bloomfield :) I doubt there will be any cheaper 6 cores than the i7 970 in Q3, considering LGA2011 is released in Q4.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DuraN

The i7 960 already exists mate, its a Bloomfield :) I doubt there will be any cheaper 6 cores than the i7 970 in Q3, considering LGA2011 is released in Q4.

---

you got it wrong

the roadmap says i7 960 will be replaced in q3, it could another quad-core or a more affordable i7 970 (along with i7 990 u$580, i7 995X u$999)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by -Sweeper_

you got it wrong

the roadmap says i7 960 will be replaced in q3, it could another quad-core or a more affordable i7 970 (along with i7 990 u$580, i7 995X u$999)

---

The latter is more likely (pushing down from 995X), which would make the 970 its replacement. I doubt theres a new Bloomfield coming though... And that would also make my statement true. No cheaper 6 cores than the i7 970 :)

thanks for the update!

So Sandy Bridge E will support PCI Express 3.0 or not? Asking because... none of the roadmap mention it... and it's supposed to be released with Sandy Bridge E, right?

Yes, Sandy Bridge-E supports PCI Express 3.0, 40 lanes worth of it, although only 32 lanes will be for graphics as 4 lanes will be for the 8 SAS/SATA ports and I dunno if the other four lanes will be used or not on the consumer version.

As for new CPUs in Q3, well the roadmap is only reserving the option for Intel to launch new models, it doesn't say the company will launch new models for certain...

Quote:

---

well the roadmap is only reserving the option for Intel to launch new models, it doesn't say the company will launch new models for certain...

---

i know it is frustrating so much is left to conjecture. give me the damn E series already and be done with it.

anyone have thoughts on the longevity of the 2011 socket? think it will be even close to the 1366 reign of dominance?

It seems like Intel is considering bundling SNB-E processors with water cooling systems such as the Corsair H50.

Read the last line from the presentation slide.

http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/...-Systems-3.jpg

Source

EDIT

Quote:

---

Repost, previous page ...

---

Sorry, don't know how i missed that...

I think, this "49" slide is fake. But we will see :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DjKlax

It seems like Intel is considering bundling SNB-E processors with water cooling systems such as the Corsair H50.

Read the last line from the presentation slide.

[/IMG]http://i1-news.softpedia-static.com/images/news2/Intel-Considers-Bundling-the-Sandy-Bridge-E-Processors-with-Liquid-Cooling-Systems-3.jpg[/IMG]

Source

---

Repost, previous page ...

I highly doubt that Intel will include a watercooling kit system bundled with their CPU's, but we'll see. And I rather use third party cooling systems, when it comes to Intel's stock cooling... no thanks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono Detector

I highly doubt that Intel will include a watercooling kit system bundled with their CPU's, but we'll see. And I rather use third party cooling systems, when it comes to Intel's stock cooling... no thanks.

---

Have you tried H50 Corsair cooling solution ?

Quite a good cooling solution ... ;)

Far away from crappy Intel's rad stock :yepp:

^^ Yes, I own a Corsair H50 and it works great on my i7, and yes Intel's stock coolers are trash.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Chrono Detector

^^ Yes, I own a Corsair H50 and it works great on my i7, and yes Intel's stock coolers are trash.

---

Hmm... And what is the point in bashing stock coolers for "an inability to cool overclocked cpus"? After all these are low cost solutions designed to keep cpu from overheating when it operates with stock clocks/volts. They actually does theirs jobs. Now if it is true that Intel will release "enthusiast cooling solution", then it worth wait and see what it will bring to the table before starting a pointless bashing based on "trash stock coolers".

Makers To Demo Intel X79 Boards at COMPUTEX 2011 - VRZone

http://tof.canardpc.com/view/322e6fc...d38c7b9000.jpg

Quote:

---

Intel X79 boards will be ready as early as August and Sandy Bridge-E processor about a month after.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olivon

Makers To Demo Intel X79 Boards at COMPUTEX 2011 - VRZone

http://tof.canardpc.com/view/322e6fc...d38c7b9000.jpg

---

i guess that they want to steal some PR from AMD ;)

hmm pcie 3.0 for storage traffic? am i reading this right>?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hornet331

Wonder if people now still cry about socket changes... :p:

Now intel has consolidated its lineup form 5 sockets to 4.

---

I would.

AMD consolidated its line up to 1 and a half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Computurd

hmm pcie 3.0 for storage traffic? am i reading this right>?

---

Yeah, thats what it says...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeepBeep2

I would.

AMD consolidated its line up to 1 and a half.

---

What... you got AM3+, FM1, C32 and G32... for intel its S775, S1156, S2011, S1567... they are on par on that generation when it comes to socket for desktop/server.

So youd better start crying about amd also.

Sweclockers says that Sandy Bridge E is 66% faster than a Core i7 2600K, but no other details are available like the benchmarks used and this sort of things...

Source (Google translated)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DjKlax

Sweclockers says that Sandy Bridge E is 66% faster than a Core i7 2600K, but no other details are available like the benchmarks used and this sort of things...

Source (Google translated)

---

Additional Details on Sandy Bridge-E Processors, X79, and LGA2011 - Anandtech

Quote:

---

Memory support will move up to quad-channel DDR3-1333, so where the current Bloomfield can provide up to 25.6GB/s of bandwidth at the specified tri-channel DDR3-1066, LGA2011 kicks that figure up to 42.7GB/s—a 66% increase.

---

Quote:

---

As with other i7 processors, all the new chips support Hyper-Threading, and while the hex-core chips will be fully multiplier unlocked the quad-core offering will be a “limited unlock”. The roadmap states that the limited unlock will allow up to six bins of overclocking above the maximum Turbo frequencies, which means that even that chip should be able to hit up to 4.5GHz (with appropriate cooling, motherboard, etc.)

---

http://tof.canardpc.com/view/b38730f...47f97a45ef.jpg