Coolaler has an Ivy Bridge CPU

[OCGuy]

It must be difficult for intel loyalists to reconcile how to idolize ivy bridge without improved IPC and higher clock speed, while critisizing bulldozer with improved IPC and higher clock speed. (according to current rumors)

Just the fact that there are Ivys in the wild must make living as an AMD loyalist very difficult.

I really hope they can survive this onslaught of innovation by Intel....

 

[lol123]

We need a large increase in IPC more than frequencies.

It doesn't really matter whether performance comes from higher frequency or increased IPC as long as power efficiency and temperatures are kept in check. IPC has been raised to such an extent lately that there is a probably an issue of diminishing returns by now, and if anything I believe that there has been an exaggerated focus on IPC in the last years (maybe to overcompensate for the reverse situation during the megahertz wars and the NetBurst days).

 

[exar333]

I'll bet we have more solid performance numbers from IB before BD.

 

[exar333]

Just the fact that there are Ivys in the wild must make living as an AMD loyalist very difficult.

I really hope they can survive this onslaught of innovation by Intel....

AMD has made Intel look really good by just sitting idly by for years. AMD's CPU division reminds me of NV's GPU division after the 8800 series. 'Let's milk this for as long as we can without really doing anything new...'

 

[iCyborg]

AMD has made Intel look really good by just sitting idly by for years. AMD's CPU division reminds me of NV's GPU division after the 8800 series. 'Let's milk this for as long as we can without really doing anything new...'

Idling? Intel has 20x the market cap and 10x the workforce compared to AMD, better marketing and sales channels etc. It was practically embarrassing that they were behind for years. It's more like Intel got its act together than AMD idling:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43209189/ns/business-motley_fool/t/heres-how-amd-innovates/

AMD spends significantly more than Intel does on R&D as a percent of total sales in its attempts to keep up with the 800-pound gorilla of processors. However, Intel's huge size means that in absolute terms, its R&D spend is 4.8 times higher than AMD's. This need to pour such an outsized amount of revenues into R&D is part of what makes it so difficult for AMD to stay profitable. In 2008, for example, its R&D expense as a percentage of sales was double Intel's.

AMD's R&D averaged ~27% of total sales in the last 5 years, and Intel a very constant 15-16%. It's quite unreasonable to expect that AMD just has to "not-idle" and be on equal footing with Intel at all times...

 

[piesquared]

Just the fact that there are Ivys in the wild must make living as an AMD loyalist very difficult.

I really hope they can survive this onslaught of unimproved IPC and abysmal graphics by Intel....

fixed it for ya

 

[greenhawk]

SB-E LGA2011 launched Jan '12. IB LGA1155 launched Feb '12. IB LGA2011 launched Mar '12.

Pinch me I'm dreaming!

if that was the case, why bother with sb-e, just wait for ib-e instead.

 

[bridito]

if that was the case, why bother with sb-e, just wait for ib-e instead.

Because the way things are going with all these delays on top of delays, by the time IB-E is launched I'll be too old to see my computer monitor.

 

[exar333]

Idling? Intel has 20x the market cap and 10x the workforce compared to AMD, better marketing and sales channels etc. It was practically embarrassing that they were behind for years. It's more like Intel got its act together than AMD idling:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/43209189/ns/business-motley_fool/t/heres-how-amd-innovates/



AMD's R&D averaged ~27% of total sales in the last 5 years, and Intel a very constant 15-16%. It's quite unreasonable to expect that AMD just has to "not-idle" and be on equal footing with Intel at all times...

They have marginally better performance than the A64 x2 in current dual cores. That is in 6 years.

That's why AMD enthusiasts are jumping ship left and right to build SB machines. I don't blame them (I was one of them when Nehalem launched).

The jury is out on BD, but you are delusional if you think that AMD has done much of anything in the last 5-6 years in actually bringing new CPU products to market.

 

[OCGuy]

AMD has made Intel look really good by just sitting idly by for years. AMD's CPU division reminds me of NV's GPU division after the 8800 series. 'Let's milk this for as long as we can without really doing anything new...'

Well nV still has the fastest GPU, so I dont think that analogy quite works.

 

[OCGuy]

fixed it for ya

I really hope you get to have a victory party when BD actually launches, but something tells me that isn't happening. Sorry.

 

[exar333]

Well nV still has the fastest GPU, so I dont think that analogy quite works.

Um yeah...

I was talking about using the 8800-9800 series for years and years before releasing a new architecture. They spent a lot of time milking old products and fell behind with energy usage and performance/cost while just re-branding with new names.

 

[iCyborg]

They have marginally better performance than the A64 x2 in current dual cores. That is in 6 years.

That's why AMD enthusiasts are jumping ship left and right to build SB machines. I don't blame them (I was one of them when Nehalem launched).

The jury is out on BD, but you are delusional if you think that AMD has done much of anything in the last 5-6 years in actually bringing new CPU products to market.

Look at the difference between Conroe and what AMD had back then. Now look at the difference between SB and Thuban. Not much different. So what's Intel been doing all this time? It's quite belittling to say bringing 6 cores for less money in the same TDP is idling...

Enthusiasts buy the best/high end. There's no doubt that since Conroe, Intel has been on the top. Heck, I bought Nehalem a month after it was released. Almost 3 years later I still see no need to replace it any time soon, and i7 965 is even more "marginally" behind the best (Intel) CPU out there now. Idling?

 

[KamiXkaze]

SB-E LGA2011 launched Jan '12. IB LGA1155 launched Feb '12. IB LGA2011 launched Mar '12.

Pinch me I'm dreaming!

I hope not Intel would be shooting themselves in the foot.

kXk

 

[dali71]

Gotta love Google translate: "To move the sofa, take chicken and stinky test"

 

[ydnas7]

as Coolaler did his Sandybridge review about the same time last year, its looking like the Ivybridge would be track for launch Jan 6th if Intel wanted to.

But after the Sandybridge chipset fiasco, they probably have added additional 3 months of validation.

also IB has major graphics and SSE update, so it's more than a tick

the speed suggests to me, that next year, in general IB won't add any additional speed, but will run at half the energy use. (but the 'k' series, will have even more headroom, perhaps 20% more)

 

[jaguare]

Surely, Intel cannot think that a majority of their market is more concerned about power than speed, given the speeds and power consumption that SB already gives.

Are you kidding me? Well the answer is no. So who are you kidding?

You realize all of us tech enthusiasts don't matter. No we don't matter!

The mainstream consumer matters, the mainstream consumer wants 10+ hours battery life on a mobile device. The mainstream consumer wins.

 

[bridito]

I hope not Intel would be shooting themselves in the foot.

IDC makes a very good point about Intel needing to sell upgrade path chips to the enterprise. But as for shooting in the foot... That would be in the presence of a competitor to SB-E and IB from AMD. Are we 100% certain that there is going to be one? (Again I'm sending my nightly prayers to BD but I'm losing hope by the day).

as Coolaler did his Sandybridge review about the same time last year, its looking like the Ivybridge would be track for launch Jan 6th if Intel wanted to.

But after the Sandybridge chipset fiasco, they probably have added additional 3 months of validation.

Let me throw this (completely illusory) scenario around: Jan '12 SB-E LGA2011 and IB LGA1155 at the same time. The two platforms are for very different uses with the big socket going to workstation/superenthusiasts, and the smaller to more mainstream. Even with the IB's TriGate, etc would SB-Es on the more capable socket still outperform them? Who knows?

The alternative scenario is too depressing to consider. Q1 '12 SB-E, Q2 (or maybe even Q3 the way things are going) IB LGA1155, with IB LGA2011 sliding to end of '12 or even (gasp!) into '13. :'(

 

[jaguare]

Normally I would say the second situation would happen because all signs point to Bulldozer/trinity not being competitive enough with Sandy Bridge.

But Ivy Bridge has to happen for 1 reason, and that's the mobile market, which Intel desperately needs to enter. 22 nm would allow them to potentially beat ARM and other rivals on tablet devices + ultrabooks and the faster they advance that technology the faster they can get a foothold.

 

[bridito]

Normally I would say the second situation would happen because all signs point to Bulldozer/trinity not being competitive enough with Sandy Bridge.

But Ivy Bridge has to happen for 1 reason, and that's the mobile market, which Intel desperately needs to enter. 22 nm would allow them to potentially beat ARM and other rivals on tablet devices + ultrabooks and the faster they advance that technology the faster they can get a foothold.

I tend to agree with you on both those points. From my own strictly personal standpoint, I have a laptop that hasn't moved from the desk in over a year, I'm in front of my desktop computer some days over 12 hours a day, I don't have a tablet, a netbook, an ultrabook, or even a smartphone. I have the cheapest possible cell phone which I use for emergencies only or if I forgot something on the shopping list. The last time I texted anything was at least a couple of years ago and I have never accessed the internet on any mobile device (other than my laptop in a hotel room when I had to travel on biz... again more than a year ago). I'm stating all this just to make my perspective very clear on mobile devices and the CPUs they require. I have far more interest in nude pinups of both Mike & Molly than I do about any mobile CPUs. I want ultimate (affordable) power and speed in a desktop PC, I couldn't care less if it sucks up 10W or 150W, and anything that isn't right at the top end in the benchmark dept. has zero relevance... to me anyway! I can also assure you that I'm not alone. IMHO there are a lot of people that are going to start asking themselves why they're toting around an iPad when they go to have a cup of coffee or buy veggies. Yes... I'm going to say it... It's a fad. There, I've said it!

 

[jaguare]

Yeah the ipad is a fad IMO. It's just torn between being a laptop which it fails at and being as smartphone which it is less portable than.

But ultrabooks aren't. People need to move and have uncompromised computing power at their disposal.

I have a 5 lbs laptop 15" w/ Core 2 Duo. It works fine but the one thing I have always wanted to change was to make it lighter and smaller.

Likewise smartphones aren't a fad. They combine everythign you need - a phone, a web browser, a camera, maybe a credit card in the future - into something you can put in your pocket. It is in Intel's best interest to ultimately enter smartphones.

 

[RussianSensation]

if that was the case, why bother with sb-e, just wait for ib-e instead.

Yup. That's why Intel is probably going to delay IB on 1155 deep into Q1 2012. It doesn't make a lot of sense to launch $250 SB-E motherboard, quad-channel ram platform when within months IB will outperform it for most users who only need 4 fast cores. The only reason 1366 even made sense was because it was released way in advance of 1156 and had no competitors. I really don't see much point in SB-E unless you must have a 6-core + processor with 12 threads.

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

Are you kidding me? Well the answer is no. So who are you kidding?

You realize all of us tech enthusiasts don't matter. No we don't matter!

The mainstream consumer matters, the mainstream consumer wants 10+ hours battery life on a mobile device. The mainstream consumer wins.

Yes you do matter, but don't expect all of our processors to be designed for the enthusiast space. Right now in the desktop space we have processors that have a TDP from 130w all the way down to 35w. We have shown that we can produce processors that can fit a wide range of needs.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team

 

[exar333]

Look at the difference between Conroe and what AMD had back then. Now look at the difference between SB and Thuban. Not much different. So what's Intel been doing all this time? It's quite belittling to say bringing 6 cores for less money in the same TDP is idling...

Enthusiasts buy the best/high end. There's no doubt that since Conroe, Intel has been on the top. Heck, I bought Nehalem a month after it was released. Almost 3 years later I still see no need to replace it any time soon, and i7 965 is even more "marginally" behind the best (Intel) CPU out there now. Idling?

I am looking at this difference. Have you seen benchmarks? Dual-core i3's beat most quad-core PhIIs in many, MANY benchmarks. Intel quads generally smoke higher-clocked 6-core AMD CPUs.

Sound's pretty solid to me. This isn't AMD Zone, sorry.

 

[bridito]

Our good friend Fud is at it again:

http://fudzilla.com/processors/item/23351-intel-kills-off-year-old-chips

"By the end of 1H 2012 Intel will already have released the LGA2011 desktop, to replace the LGA1366."

I hope that this is just poor wording (what a surprise!) indicating that LGA1366 will be retired by "the end of 1H 2012" rather than LGA2011 is debuting at that time. I'd better see LGA2011 PCs shipping no later than Jan. '12 or I'm going to go Charlie-Sheen-Bonkers!

I really don't see much point in SB-E unless you must have a 6-core + processor with 12 threads.

RAM, my friend. LGA2011's 8 slots don't take no for an answer! That's reason #1 why I'm not looking at LGA1155 at all.

Yes you do matter, but don't expect all of our processors to be designed for the enthusiast space. Right now in the desktop space we have processors that have a TDP from 130w all the way down to 35w. We have shown that we can produce processors that can fit a wide range of needs.

Hi! Glad to see you here! Could you please produce a PC platform just for me? 500w TDP & 12 RAM slots... hey a guy can dream can't he? Actually IMHO the necessary requirement for CPU manufacturers to address server and consumer needs in what is essentially the same architecture has skewed the market for enthusiasts. Of course TDP and perf/watt is critical for the enterprise, but they are criteria which are effectively peripheral to enthusiasts.