They are the low power version, hence the lower TDP.So, I'm familiar with the K notation at the end of the model number, but who do the S and T mean? Sorry if this is a stupid question.
So a Core i5 3470T is a dual core with HT but a Core i5 3450 (lower number) is a quad core? That makes no sense....
Apart from that, nice prices!
Good post....
Wow soo cheap!!! 300 bucks for a quad with 8 threads. I wonder how these OC,,but ya amazing how Intel doesnt have a 1k desktop chip no more....
Maybe Haswell will be the 800 dollar chip the top of the line one in 2013 no or notch ?
Those with a T or S suffix are not overclockable unlike those with the K suffix. The T or S are like those without a suffix just that they have a lower TDP.So, which chip suffix is best for performance? T, S, K? Confused... Lower power would mean more O/Cing headroom, yes?
Or is the "lower power" 3770T lower because it's a GHz clock slower?
What happened to 980x 6 core 12 threads. I rather have that chip then a Sandy, but I have to pay 800 dollars to get it ,, wtf ,,
Sad no hexacore Ivy,,,, I guess technology has shutdown when it comes to cores,, most they can do on a desktop is 4 cores 8 threads,,, sad ,, tech has not come a long way since 2007 when I got my rig,,,
What happened to 980x 6 core 12 threads. I rather have that chip then a Sandy, but I have to pay 800 dollars to get it ,, wtf ,,
Sad no hexacore Ivy,,,, I guess technology has shutdown when it comes to cores,, most they can do on a desktop is 4 cores 8 threads,,, sad ,, tech has not come a long way since 2007 when I got my rig,,,
They could have done that, if they wanted to kill SandyBridge-E before it's even really launched, and piss off a lot of people who invested into it already.Well, nice to see that the prices are basically the same. It would have been bad if they had raised the price, because the CPU performance is only slightly improved. I guess overall it is a pretty good deal, since you get an improved IGP and slightly better CPU performance. Still, I would have liked to see some higher clocked chips or a mainstream 300-400 dollar hex core.
Edit: If you look at the 3450 for 184.00 with a 77 watt TDP, could they not have make a six core version at 110 watts for 350.00? That would be almost double the price and only 50% more cores. I think they are waiting to come out with the E series at 500.00 plus. Kind of gouging for a hex core, but otherwise the prices are very good.
Intel's to do list for Ivy Bridge.
1. Shrink to 22nm
2. Tri-gate
3. Increase GPU performance
4. Target ARM or mobile in general
Adding 2 extra cores would seem like a great idea but I doubt we'll be seeing an IB release by April if they do. Even if they managed to do so, I would doubt it would benefit them in the form of getting the most out of their customers. SB-E boxes will be collecting dust and those who did purchase SB-E previously will be pissed.
Not too keen to see Intel going with the moar cores path that AMD took and it turned out to be a bummer. I'd rather have a healthy bump in IPC with every generation rather than more cores.
[/B]
I agree with you about favoring better IPC over more cores. Unfortunately with Ivy, we see neither more cores nor a significant increase in IPC. And not even as much power savings as I expected. As impressed as I was with Sandy Bridge, Ivy is kind of a disappointment.
Intel's to do list for Ivy Bridge.
1. Shrink to 22nm
2. Tri-gate
3. Increase GPU performance
4. Target ARM or mobile in general
they already do thatNot bad, better IGP, lower TDP, slightly better performance, all at basically the same prices as Sandy. AMD is in real trouble, Intel is gonna be out performing their 125W parts with half the power consumption while including integrated graphics.
