• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

[CPU World] Prices of Ivy Bridge desktop processors

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
IntelEnthusiast said:
The "S" on the back of the processor model # generally means that the TDP for the processor is about 2/3 of the normal model so on the Intel Core i5-2500 (3.3GHz) which has a TDP of 95w the Intel Core i5-2500S (2.7GHz) is at 65w and comes with a normal HSF (heatsink/fan). The Intel Core i5-2500T (2.3GHz) runs at 45w TDP and comes with a low profile HSF to fit into a small form factor case for something like HTPC systems.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthisiast Team
Click to expand...

Thanks for the great info 🙂
Looks like that Core i5-3470T would likely be great for a small quiet HTPC - only 35 watts!!
 
Ajay said:
Thanks for the great info 🙂
Looks like that Core i5-3470T would likely be great for a small quiet HTPC - only 35 watts!!
Click to expand...

Difference is all his examples are for quad cores. The Core i5 3470T is a dual core... No wonder it has 35W 😉 The 'S' model (Core i5 3450S) is a quad core in the leak above.

Good info nonetheless.
 
Too bad there doesn't seem an IVB variant that is low power, uses HD4000 IGP, and costs <$200. Would be perfect for HTPC. I guess a downclocked 3570K can be used for that, which should be cheaper than near $300 IVB variants that have HD4000. Or maybe i5-3475S can be the one, but there is no pricing info on it yet.
 
All the high powered CPU's can be just like the low powered ones, undervolt + underclock and bam theres your 45w TDP processor.
 
toyota said:
they already do that
Click to expand...

Technically correct, and even the previous generation I believe. I think what he really meant was integrated graphics close to those offered by AMD, at least the current generation.

If AMD could come up with Trinity with improved graphics and HD4000 could reach close to current higher end Llano levels we could have a couple of attractive choices, depending on the users needs.

Trinity with really nice IGP. CPU performance still lower than Intel.
or
Ivy with better CPU performance and IGP approaching previous generation Llano.
 
Very nice prices, seems like Intel is basically freezing their pricing scheme like this until (if ever) AMD chooses to release a competitive product.

$1000 for super high end 6-8c
$300-320 for highest clocked quad core with HT
$220 for highest clocked unlocked quadcore w/o HT.

These prices look basically identical to SB on release, and after a few rounds of $5 price decreases will be the same price as current SB. To be honest, I'm guessing Intel has realized that they have nothing to compete again, otherwise the stock clocks would be quite a bit higher, I'd actually say 3.6-3.8 GHz stock for the high end quad cores would be expected had AMD been competitive as of now. Also, Intel probably has a ton of room to lower these prices if needed, after they cover their costs for switching node, these chips will likely make quite a bit more profit than their SB counterparts, seeing as how they likely are cheaper to make, and will sell at a slightly higher or equivalent cost.

I'm glad Intel has realized despite the fact they could charge basically as much as the market can bare seeing as how their 3 generation old dual cores are about as fast as the fastest AMD CPU (which I'm still not sure if its BD or past generation), they will make quite a bit more money selling these at this price range rather than $1000. It's actually as if lack of competition has driven prices down more than strong competition? I for one accept our new Intel overlords now, always prefered AMD before BD, but my X4 955 was a good deal, now AMD has nothing to offer as far as CPU's go.
 
So if the Ivy chips are coming out at about the present prices for Sandy, how much are the Sandy chips going to drop?
 
gevorg said:
Yep, just wished they wouldn't cost near $300, since even 2C/4T would be sufficient for HTPC.
Click to expand...
Intel CPUs don't have locked multipliers, they have partially locked multipliers.
You can buy a non-K CPU and then set the multiplier lower, you just can't buy a non-K CPU and then start massively overclocking by raising the multiplier.
I have a Pentium G620T and it's quite happy running with a reduced multiplier (below the already low mulitiplier it has as stock).
 
JimS said:
So if the Ivy chips are coming out at about the present prices for Sandy, how much are the Sandy chips going to drop?
Click to expand...

They won't drop much, maybe a bin or two, and start to get phased out. The Pentium etc processors don't seem to have been replaced by any IB based CPUs, so the low end will presumably stay as-is for a while.

Intel is nothing if not predictable when it comes to new CPU launches. They have done new CPU lines many times, and there's an easy pattern which they follow pretty much every time.

When they launch a new high end CPU, they typically drop everything down 1 pricing bin, and have two CPUs at the low end with the same price, then next CPU introduction, they drop the slowest one and move everything down again (although they haven't been doing that much recently since they release a full lineup and then just completely replace it a year or so later).

When they introduce an entire new CPU lineup, they just slot them in at the same price points as the previous CPU line was (give or take a few $), and slowly phase out the old CPU line, but don't massively discount it or anything.
 
Ajay said:
Intel is not targeting ARM or tablets with IB.
Click to expand...
With Windows 8 coming out next year and its point of attraction is the x86 tablets, I'm pretty sure some OEM will produce a x86 tablet with IB in it. Although Intel wants to promote the Ultrabook form factor, it isn't touch friendly yet and Intel should at least have 1 tablet with IB next year.
 
dma0991 said:
With Windows 8 coming out next year and its point of attraction is the x86 tablets, I'm pretty sure some OEM will produce a x86 tablet with IB in it. Although Intel wants to promote the Ultrabook form factor, it isn't touch friendly yet and Intel should at least have 1 tablet with IB next year.
Click to expand...

Well, I should have qualified that with 'not' iPad class tablets (though an x86 tablet may cost about the same). I was test driving a decently well powered x86 notebook/tablet convertible back in '08 - so, sure there will be some straight touch based x86 tablets out there. And while I don't want Metro on my desktop - it will likely be a good solution for a touch only x86 tablet running Win8.

[/OT] I wish MS would give DIYers and Businesses to opportunity to choose a full out Win7 UI or Metro at installation. Few Enthusiasts seem to want it and I'm sure businesses don't want to have to do any training on the new UI. Win7 is fine, but there are a number of refinement to the core OS in Win8 that would be nice to have without Metro [/OT]
 
Just for clarification - I may not be 100&#37; correct, but I think that the watts in the chart are only max wattage. Meaning possibly integrated graphics and CPU working on full load at the same time. I remember a discussion about Sandy Bridge processors with a conclusion that some processors are never at such a high wattage that they have written for them. Intel is simply being careful. Someone please correct me with more factual information, thank you.
 
Kristijonas said:
Just for clarification - I may not be 100% correct, but I think that the watts in the chart are only max wattage. Meaning possibly integrated graphics and CPU working on full load at the same time. I remember a discussion about Sandy Bridge processors with a conclusion that some processors are never at such a high wattage that they have written for them. Intel is simply being careful. Someone please correct me with more factual information, thank you.
Click to expand...
yes the TDP rating includes graphics.
 
Caveman said:
So, which chip suffix is best for performance? T, S, K? Confused...
Click to expand...

does not matter. IIRC the main difference is the power and that is done with the onboard power / temperature control system.

But then, IIRC, the T and S are not on offer to the main stream. It is for OEM's. (well, at least in this country)
 
Red Hawk said:
Hopefully, if Intel sticks with LGA 1155 for the time being.
Click to expand...

the socket is only s1155 for Ivy Bridge. No indication has been given for the next cpu generation. That being said, it might have the same socket, but need a different chipset, so makes no difference being the same socket.
 
Pretty excited about these price points if it holds true. It means I can still afford an IVB system.
I could have bought a 2600K system but it's so close, I might as well wait for the 3770K and the next chipset.

On an unrelated note, I think greenhawk needs to try the multiquote feature.
 
Avalon said:
Isn't limited BCLK overclocking supposed to be back with IB? If so, that would be nice.
Click to expand...

I didn't hear anything about bclk overclocking until people found out that 2011 has a few straps (125, 166, 200, maybe one or two others). I think that intel will use that as just one more way to differentiate 2011 from other sockets.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top