Last edited by dengyong; 04-17-2011 at 08:30 AM.
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
and what about power consumption?
oh and that roadmap is cracking me up everytime i see it
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... say what?
excellent positioning there intel...
whats next? intel atom XE for 30$ positioned as a smartphone/tablet chip faster than a 2500K?
Last edited by saaya; 04-17-2011 at 09:23 AM.
i5 2500K @ 4.9GHz+ 8GB G-Skill RipJaws DDR3-2000 @1600Mhz CAS 6 Asus P8P67 Pro CrossFire 6970's @ 950/1450
Xeon X5677 @ 4.5Ghz 6GB G-Skill RipJaws DDR3-2000 @1600Mhz CAS 7 Gigabyte EX58-UD5 4870x2
i7-880 @ 4.2Ghz+ (still playing) 4GB G-Skill RipJaws DDR3-2000 @2300Mhz CAS 9 Asus Maximus III Formula MSI Hawk 5770
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.
Sony PS3 | Nintendo Wii + Nintendo Wii Fit
By Mercedes - Adventure Trips around Middle Europe in a Youngtimer | https://www.facebook.com/S.Mercedesem - Like Us, if you Like us that is
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?!
Last edited by fellix_bg; 04-19-2011 at 04:09 AM.
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
First post updated.
What limited unlocked means ?
Last edited by Olivon; 04-19-2011 at 04:22 AM.
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).
Last edited by -Sweeper_; 04-19-2011 at 06:30 AM.
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
Last edited by glide 1; 04-19-2011 at 08:58 AM.
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
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.
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.
Last edited by Iconyu; 04-19-2011 at 10:31 AM.
nice update, thx man.
ROG Power PCs - Intel and AMD
CPUs:i9-7900X, i9-9900K, i7-6950X, i7-5960X, i7-8086K, i7-8700K, 4x i7-7700K, i3-7350K, 2x i7-6700K, i5-6600K, R7-2700X, 4x R5 2600X, R5 2400G, R3 1200, R7-1800X, R7-1700X, 3x AMD FX-9590, 1x AMD FX-9370, 4x AMD FX-8350,1x AMD FX-8320,1x AMD FX-8300, 2x AMD FX-6300,2x AMD FX-4300, 3x AMD FX-8150, 2x AMD FX-8120 125 and 95W, AMD X2 555 BE, AMD x4 965 BE C2 and C3, AMD X4 970 BE, AMD x4 975 BE, AMD x4 980 BE, AMD X6 1090T BE, AMD X6 1100T BE, A10-7870K, Athlon 845, Athlon 860K,AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-6800K, A8-6600K, 2x AMD A10-5800K, AMD A10-5600K, AMD A8-3850, AMD A8-3870K, 2x AMD A64 3000+, AMD 64+ X2 4600+ EE, Intel i7-980X, Intel i7-2600K, Intel i7-3770K,2x i7-4770K, Intel i7-3930KAMD Cinebench R10 challenge AMD Cinebench R15 thread Intel Cinebench R15 thread
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).
Xeon E5 2697 V2, Asus P9X79 Deluxe, 4x 8 GB LoVo 1600Mhz 9-9-9 RAM, GTX 680
Crunch with us, the XS WCG team
The XS WCG team needs your support.
A good project with good goals.
Come join us,get that warm fuzzy feeling that you've done something good for mankind.
Was holding out and hoping for around $350-400 6core chip. Time to get a 2500/2600k now. Microcenter + Z68 combo = win
Last edited by kadozer; 04-19-2011 at 11:50 PM.
Bookmarks