Is IB worth it over SB for a $1000 gamin rig?

[SickBeast]

I admit I've been out of the loop on the latest CPU technology, but (assuming equal coolers) how is it physically possible for a chip to operate more efficiently and consume less power than its predecessor, while more heat?

I was wondering the same thing; I know it does not make sense.

People are saying that the heat is consolidated in a small space and it's very hard for the heatspreader and heatsink to dissipate it.

Intel appears to be hitting a frequency wall and a heat wall as they shrink their chips smaller and smaller.

 

[Stochastic]

I admit I've been out of the loop on the latest CPU technology, but (assuming equal coolers) how is it physically possible for a chip to operate more efficiently and consume less power than its predecessor, while more heat?

Here's one idea: http://www.overclockers.com/ivy-bridge-temperatures

 

[CPUarchitect]

That's fair, but I guess my point is that there is no use in generating all that heat for the sake of an extra 200mhz on the core. Just keep the thing at 4500mhz and be happy.

Agreed. Better safe than sorry.

One thing I failed to mention above is that the chip is designed to handle TjMax 24/7 only at its default voltage! High temperature and high voltage will shorten the lifetime.

 

[SickBeast]

Agreed. Better safe than sorry.

One thing I failed to mention above is that the chip is designed to handle TjMax 24/7 only at its default voltage! High temperature and high voltage will shorten the lifetime.

Yep. 80C+ overvolted is the death zone IMO. People are pumping 1.3-1.4v through the things to get there as well. I don't even go beyond 1.4v with my Sandy chip, let alone Ivy.

 

[CPUarchitect]

Wrong. Tjmax is the warning level, so that you back off. To last 5+ years you will need to be like half of Tjmax

It greatly depends on the voltage. It should have no problem lasting 5 years at TjMax when running stock voltage. With higher voltages you have to aim for lower temperature to keep the life expectancy and stability reasonable.

 

[CPUarchitect]

I admit I've been out of the loop on the latest CPU technology, but (assuming equal coolers) how is it physically possible for a chip to operate more efficiently and consume less power than its predecessor, while more heat?

You're confusing heat and temperature, which are not the same thing. You can stick your finger in a candle flame and get burnt in an instant, but if you hold it under a pot of water you can leave your hand in it for eternity. Same heat, different temperature!

Ivy Bridge generates less heat as a whole, but gets warmer because it's harder to cool down the smaller chip.

 

[Don Karnage]

Ivy Bridge doesn't create more heat. Ivy bridge's cores are just packed closer together so dissipating the core temps isn't as efficient as sandy bridge.

 

[Puppies04]

I admit I've been out of the loop on the latest CPU technology, but (assuming equal coolers) how is it physically possible for a chip to operate more efficiently and consume less power than its predecessor, while more heat?

It isn't producing more heat, the cores in IB are smaller due to the smaller manufacturing process (22nm compared to 32nm in SB). There is less heat overal but as that heat is concentrated into a smaller space it results in higher temperatures.

Think of it this way if you are struggling to understand the difference between temperature and heat....

Light 2 candles, place one a couple of inches under a 12" saucepan filled with water, place the other under a bottlecap with a teaspoon of water in. Wait 5 mins and the bottlecap will have boiled dry while the water in the saucepan will be barely warm to the touch. Both candles gave out the same amount of heat but the heat from the candle under the bottlecap was concentrated into a much smaller area.

edit.
Sorry I didn't see the second page with the other explanations, my point stands though....

 

[SHAQ]

Didn't they give it 5C more? That's not much at all. So now it's 105C instead of 100C, right?

If you're hitting 85C under load you're within 20C of the TJMax. That's not safe IMO.

With my Sandy Bridge 2500K I'm barely hitting 58C under full load at 4.5ghz which is a good 40C below the TJMax.

Don't mix up stability testing with normal use. It is perfectly fine to be 10C under TJMax while testing. Most games are 20C below stability testing temps.

 

[Don Karnage]

Don't mix up stability testing with normal use. It is perfectly fine to be 10C under TJMax while testing. Most games are 20C below stability testing temps.

This. Like i said before. Don't be scared of the temps

 

[chelos]

Ivy Bridge has the same micro-architecture as Sandy Bridge (except for a few very minor tweaks). But it's on a smaller semiconductor process, which is aimed at lowering the power consumption at modest clock frequencies.

So for a desktop system, if you're not using the integrated GPU, there's no significant reason to pick Ivy Bridge over Sandy Bridge. Just go for the one that you can get the cheapest.

It's the next generation, Haswell, which will have major new micro-architectural features, and will require a new motherboard.

Haswell should help with the latter because it has twice the vector processing power (AVX2) and more efficient multi-core communication (TSX). Depending on your current system, you might not see much of an improvement with Ivy Bridge. So consider waiting for Haswell instead.

If that is the case, then it seems to me that I'm better off going with Sandy Bridge now, which will be cheaper, and upgrading to Haswell later.

FYI, my current system is >5 years old, so anything will be a massive improvement.

 

[infoiltrator]

The Z77 motherboards are desireable.
For overclockers and gamers it appears the IB does not overclock as well and (outside of Microcenter) costs more and overclocks will greater heat without extreme cooling.