Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition vs. i7-990X Extreme Edition Benches Revealed

[..::ABSOLUT::..]

Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition vs. i7-990X Extreme Edition










Source: http://www.donanimhaber.com/tm.asp?m=50950237

This time it seems very legit to me.

[Hondacity]

wow that is crazy

[Florinmocanu]

Who the hell does those benchmarks at Intel? Cinebench (which uses the render engine from Cinema 4D) and Povray are both raytracing engines... Both the engine in cinebench and the one in povray are raytracing engines. Marketing guys always create these funny situations which reveal just how little they understand what they are writing there. That applies for any company.

But a good increase, 12-13% extra performance for the same core count is pretty solid in my book . In rendering, which is my main interest when buying a CPU. Gaming seems even more, but that's not that interesting for me.

[generics_user]

700 pins more, a gigantic package, 25% more cache and one extra memory channel for a mere 15% performance increase?

i wouldn't call this impressive at all...

they should've sticked to 1366 - i bet that the end result would've been the same (+-2%)

[SubZero.it]

700 pins more, a gigantic package, 25% more cache and one extra memory channel for a mere 15% performance increase?

i wouldn't call this impressive at all...

they should've sticked to 1366 - i bet that the end result would've been the same (+-2%)

Must agree here

[Hondacity]

i wonder what the differences are when its @ 3.46ghz

[-Sweeper_]

Who the hell does those benchmarks at Intel? Cinebench (which uses the render engine from Cinema 4D) and Povray are both raytracing engines... Both the engine in cinebench and the one in povray are raytracing engines. Marketing guys always create these funny situations which reveal just how little they understand what they are writing there. That applies for any company.

But a good increase, 12-13% extra performance for the same core count is pretty solid in my book . In rendering, which is my main interest when buying a CPU. Gaming seems even more, but that's not that interesting for me.

pretty solid imo too, 3960X runs at a lower base clock (and probably turbo boosts 100MHz w/ all cores active) vs 990X's 3.6ghz under turbo...

those babies probably OC better than gulfys too

[RPGWiZaRD]

Yea concidering how the clocks were compared the results are quite interesting. But more interesting would be to see how it overclocks concidering the die shrink.

[kl0012]

700 pins more, a gigantic package, 25% more cache and one extra memory channel for a mere 15% performance increase?

i wouldn't call this impressive at all...

they should've sticked to 1366 - i bet that the end result would've been the same (+-2%)

You don't expect linear performance increase from more cache and additional mem channel in apps which are less sensitive to mem bandwidth, do you? At least up to 65% perf. increase in specfp_rate is somewhat more impressive then mere "up to 35%" perf. increase which AMD now claims for Interlagos.

[Florinmocanu]

Stop derailing threads kl0012, there is no need for this

[BeepBeep2]

i wonder what the differences are when its @ 3.46ghz

About 4% more.

700 pins more, a gigantic package, 25% more cache and one extra memory channel for a mere 15% performance increase?

i wouldn't call this impressive at all...

they should've sticked to 1366 - i bet that the end result would've been the same (+-2%)

I must agree...and just think about what the platform price will be...motherboard with extra channels, premium features I would guess $300-500+ for those extreme motherboards like the UD7 to UD9...CPU's from $800 to $1200...3930K might be in $400 range, I'm not sure.

The whole platform price vs performance gain doesn't make any sense.

[undone]

I just wondering those non-server-use processor are necessary to run specINT/FP, btw those tests are memory bandwidth sensitive.

i wonder what the differences are when its @ 3.46ghz

You may take turbo into account, 3960X have up to 3.9GHz turbo frequency while 990x have only 3.7GHz.

official 990x spec: http://ark.intel.com/products/52585

[Etihtsarom]

Didn't Intel say something like 30 or 40% increase with IB? With 3D gates right?

[-Sweeper_]

I just wondering those non-server-use processor are necessary to run specINT/FP, btw those tests are memory bandwidth sensitive.



You may take turbo into account, 3960X have up to 3.9GHz turbo frequency while 990x have only 3.7GHz.

official 990x spec: http://ark.intel.com/products/52585

thats with 1 active core and all of those tests are multi-threaded

[kl0012]

I must agree...and just think about what the platform price will be...motherboard with extra channels, premium features I would guess $300-500+ for those extreme motherboards like the UD7 to UD9...CPU's from $800 to $1200...3930K might be in $400 range, I'm not sure.
The whole platform price vs performance gain doesn't make any sense.

And do we know the whole platform price? And why should we assume that an additional mem channel would cost $100? Well, may be in the beginning x79 motherboards will costs more then x58 variants (as usual for a new hardware), but I guess soon enough we will see something much cheaper from Asrock and Co.

[kl0012]

Didn't Intel say something like 30 or 40% increase with IB? With 3D gates right?

This is not IB. And no, Intel didn't say that.

[FlanK3r]

Looks like about 10.3b in Cinebench R11.5, great performance (1.13x better than 990x).

[Tenknics]

I hope by seeing benchmarks, these are close to being launched.

I'm pretty sure that rumor about it being delayed to 2012 is 100% BS. I posted in another thread where Otenilli said Romley was on time, which should be the desktop parts should be on time as well.

[Hornet331]

ble still can't belive it that the call it i7-3xxx... y marketing strikes again... What they call IB then.. 4xxx and s2011 IB 5xxx.. god damit...

[K404]

Given that SB is ~ 10% more efficient than Gulftown, clock to clock, in single-threaded apps, this makes the new chips a hexcore version of SB.

So far, i'm not all that impressed TBH

All we can hope is that the silicon is more consistent and scales with cold

[Tenknics]

They can call it "GIANT SHINY NEW CHIP 2011" and I still wouldn't care as long as it performs as its supposed to. You're getting bent out of shape over a model number you thought would be used for a product that is unreleased and so far out...

Some decent benches were just shown and you're complaining about model #s? I dont get it? But I guess if you're really looking for something to complain/bash Intel for, there ya go.

I cant believe that's even an issue..wow

[kl0012]

I hope by seeing benchmarks, these are close to being launched.

I'm pretty sure that rumor about it being delayed to 2012 is 100% BS. I posted in another thread where Otenilli said Romley was on time, which should be the desktop parts should be on time as well.

Actually, vr-zone has already denied its own rumor about "SB-E being delayed". Now they claim that SB-E is not delayed but will skip some features (no PCI-e 3.0 and less SATA 6Gb/s ports), which I guess BS too.

[Janus67]

Not bad but I want to see a platform price/performance scale as well. And of course some benching but on ambient and subzero.

[xdan]

Didn't Intel say something like 30 or 40% increase with IB? With 3D gates right?

Intel said 20% performance increase for SB.
30-40% more power efficient and may be die size performance increase to 30-40%.
All in all a IB quad will be much better choice for money.
SB-E is specially designed for workstations and servers.
With quad channel memory and big cache it will rock in these.
Still if the 6 core 12mb cache will be at 600$ it will be an interesting choice.

[Tenknics]

Actually, vr-zone has already denied its own rumor about "SB-E being delayed". Now they claim that SB-E is not delayed but will skip some features (no PCI-e 3.0 and less SATA 6Gb/s ports), which I guess BS too.

Cool beans. I also read that they'd be cutting some features out of the platform to make it out on time this year. The biggest one I read was the PCI-E 3.0 direct link to CPU for dedicated storage/raid? And yea a few less SATA 6 ports. I also read theyd launch it and try to add it on later...Unless its just physically disabled, I dont get how they can add that later..Unless you replace your motherboard..