• 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.

Gaming CPU

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Ivy bridge's main problem is that its cores are just so damn small. Take the graph below. At 5Ghz a 3570K uses 44w less then a 5ghz 2500K.

pc2.png


What do you think is going to happen with haswell? You think its magically going to go back to how sandy bridge overclocked?

cpus.png


Cpu coolers need to be radically redesigned.
 
Don Karnage said:
Ivy bridge's main problem is that its cores are just so damn small. Take the graph below. At 5Ghz a 3570K uses 44w less then a 5ghz 2500K.

pc2.png


What do you think is going to happen with haswell? You think its magically going to go back to how sandy bridge overclocked?

cpus.png


Cpu coolers need to be radically redesigned.
Click to expand...

I thought Ivy ran hot from thermal paste being used instead of solder. What happened to that bit of info or was it total BS? I don't buy this smaller die = hotter crap.
 
I just think people need to lower their expectations. Either they need to understand that the new CPUs, being more efficient don't need as much clock speed (or just stop trying to hit 5Ghz for 24/7), and/or that if you overclock past a certain level you have to expect the temps to rise higher than old CPU designs. Unless you're on custom water. Too many people are expecting 4.8Ghz at 75c which is unrealistic.

That's what I think.
 
Last edited:
cmdrdredd said:
I just think people need to lower their expectations. Either they need to understand that the new CPUs, being more efficient don't need as much clock speed (or just stop trying to hit 5Ghz for 24/7), and/or that if you overclock past a certain level you have to expect the temps to rise higher than old CPU designs. Unless you're on custom water. Too many people are expecting 4.8Ghz at 75c which is unrealistic.

That's what I think.
Click to expand...

The newer batch's are overclocking a lot better. 5Ghz on air

Linx5050_.jpg
 
moonbogg said:
I thought Ivy ran hot from thermal paste being used instead of solder. What happened to that bit of info or was it total BS? I don't buy this smaller die = hotter crap.
Click to expand...

I agree. And so do others.

http://www.techpowerup.com/165882/TIM-is-Behind-Ivy-Bridge-Temperatures-After-All.html

Because in other generation die shrinks - temps went down with reductions in watts, not up. Penryn ran notably cooler than Conroe chips clocked the same - one of the reasons they overclocked so well.
 
Don, that's a 3770k which I know clocks a little better than most 3570k chips. I see people on lower voltage than I had were getting higher clocks. I wonder if there is some binning going on for the i7s?
 
cmdrdredd said:
Don, that's a 3770k which I know clocks a little better than most 3570k chips. I see people on lower voltage than I had were getting higher clocks. I wonder if there is some binning going on for the i7s?
Click to expand...

Best stop yourself from thinking too much, or you're gonna get an upgrade bug.. 😀.. am I too late to warn? D:
 
boxleitnerb said:
Do you guys think Haswell will be better in terms of heat and OC? I'm hoping 5GHz at 1.25V without too much of a hassle.
Click to expand...

Hoping for 5Ghz is kinda silly when you dont know the IPC changes yet.

Another case is we dont know how the integrated VRM impacts yet, good or bad. Not to mention Core/GPU sizes and stock clocks.
 
cmdrdredd said:
I just think people need to lower their expectations. Either they need to understand that the new CPUs, being more efficient don't need as much clock speed (or just stop trying to hit 5Ghz for 24/7), and/or that if you overclock past a certain level you have to expect the temps to rise higher than old CPU designs. Unless you're on custom water. Too many people are expecting 4.8Ghz at 75c which is unrealistic.

That's what I think.
Click to expand...

I think people need to read more. Ivy offers almost zero clock for clock gains in well over half the tests it was subjected to in contrast to Sandy and douche nozzles around here were dumb enough to scream " OH YEAH ITS GOT TEH 200 MHZ ADVANTAGE DERP ", total idiots. Its a poorly engineered chip from a cooling standpoint so if you want a better overclocker you go sandy, if you want better integrated video you go Ivy. If you already have sandy and you've made the switch you're not someone anybody should listen to on technical advice.
 
all the future games from(included bf3 and other big games...max 3 ,ecc..) now uses a quad...
if you buy now is better buy a i5 ivy....
 
BD231 said:
I think people need to read more. Ivy offers almost zero clock for clock gains in well over half the tests it was subjected to in contrast to Sandy and douche nozzles around here were dumb enough to scream " OH YEAH ITS GOT TEH 200 MHZ ADVANTAGE DERP ", total idiots. Its a poorly engineered chip from a cooling standpoint so if you want a better overclocker you go sandy, if you want better integrated video you go Ivy. If you already have sandy and you've made the switch you're not someone anybody should listen to on technical advice.
Click to expand...

It doesn't offer any clock for clock gains? 🙄

sandyivy48-1.jpg.jpeg

sandyivy48-2.jpg.jpeg

sandyivy48-3.jpg.jpeg
 
Don, IPC difference is very negligible. If it hadn't been for lower power consumption, PCI-E 3.0 support and HD 4000, it would have been a very tough recommendation. But for the similar price, today... newer tech is preferable.
 
Magic Carpet said:
Don, IPC difference is very negligible. If it hadn't been for lower power consumption, PCI-E 3.0 support and HD 4000, it would have been a very tough recommendation. But for the similar price, today... newer tech is preferable.
Click to expand...

Ivy is a die shrink. Not sure why everyone was expecting the world from it. Was westmere a lot different then nehalem?
 
borisvodofsky said:
Best stop yourself from thinking too much, or you're gonna get an upgrade bug.. 😀.. am I too late to warn? D:
Click to expand...

Nah, I'm alright with this. I came from a Q9550 I built back late 08 early 09.

If I were to upgrade again and I could actually afford to do so, I'd skip Z77 and go to X79.
 
cmdrdredd said:
Nah, I'm alright with this. I came from a Q9550 I built back late 08 early 09.

If I were to upgrade again and I could actually afford to do so, I'd skip Z77 and go to X79.
Click to expand...

I maintain x79 is silly. Because the only cool thing it has is quad channel memory, and We can't even utilize it because apps arn't threaded highly enough for it to kick in.

I am actually pissed off about this because I was going to buy x79, but then for some reason, intel did this whole memory bandwidth depends on app threaded thing...... 😱
 
Don Karnage said:
Ivy is a die shrink. Not sure why everyone was expecting the world from it. Was westmere a lot different then nehalem?
Click to expand...

They charge $50 more ~25% more than sandy, so I'd expect 25% improvement. That's not what you get. You get between 0-15% 😱, and overclocking hassle.

Let's say you pay even more money for better cooling. that's +$100 easily for the amount of heat ivy is generating.

So, if I were to buy an IVY and get to the 4.8-5 ghz promised land and fully attain my 0-15% boost, It'd actually cost me $150 more than Sandy.

THAT is why Sandy is a better buy. 😀
 
borisvodofsky said:
They charge $50 more ~25% more than sandy, so I'd expect 25% improvement. That's not what you get. You get between 0-15% 😱, and overclocking hassle.

Let's say you pay even more money for better cooling. that's +$100 easily for the amount of heat ivy is generating.

So, if I were to buy an IVY and get to the 4.8-5 ghz promised land and fully attain my 0-15% boost, It'd actually cost me $150 more than Sandy.

THAT is why Sandy is a better buy. 😀
Click to expand...

2500K - 219.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...5072&Tpk=2500K

2550K - 242.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...5230&Tpk=2550K

3570K - 229.99
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...6504&Tpk=3570K

10 dollar difference
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top