Is IntEl's 22nm and ivy bridge a colossal failure?

piesquared

Golden Member
Oct 16, 2006
1,651
473
136
Wow, where's the beef intel? Performance has basically flatlined, while heat goes through the roof. Keep fire extinguisher handy with your awesome new heater.


4663_43_asrock_z77_extreme6_intel_z77_with_ivy_bridge_motherboard_review.png


http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/46...th_ivy_bridge_motherboard_review/index11.html

We can see that temperatures are higher than our other platforms at both idle and load and you can see load temperatures really sky rocket when overclocked.



This isn't bad contact or anything either, we've seen this out of multiple Ivy Bridge based processors on multiple boards. Talking to partners as well, we see the results are consistent.
 

anikhtos

Senior member
May 1, 2011
289
1
0
Wow, where's the beef intel? Performance has basically flatlined, while heat goes through the roof. Keep fire extinguisher handy with your awesome new heater.


4663_43_asrock_z77_extreme6_intel_z77_with_ivy_bridge_motherboard_review.png


http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/46...th_ivy_bridge_motherboard_review/index11.html
well it may has to do with the indrodution of tri gate technology
this is the first implementation
and maybe that caused the highter temps
frankly highter temps are a disapoiding
and what is all about that the chips are 95 watt not 77?!?!??!?!
same watt with a die shrink????
if that applies then tri gate spoiled everythign from this die shrink
maybe tri gate is needed for future die shrinks but this one went for nothing
 

Ferzerp

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,438
107
106
I don't think you understand the difference between temperature and heat, but anyway.

We can expect higher temperature, less heat, and potentially poor overclocking (which won't make the product a commercial failure because that is all about stock performance).

Your graph is missing units. What does the 8150 have 8 of at idle? I know it's not degrees C because that's only 46 degrees F. Is it elephants? Iguanas? Excel databases?

edit: I do anticipate due to the poor heat dissipation that we may see people start to get creative with removed heat spreaders though. That all depends on how well the thing handles high temperatures though. The idea of removing a heat spreader seems too risky to me. I remember the first coppermines which were 180nm and had an exposed die. You had to really make sure that you didn't apply any uneven heatsink force or you would chip them.
 
Last edited:

Vesku

Diamond Member
Aug 25, 2005
3,743
28
86
I am all for the toning down of the "it fails if it doesn't meet my enthusiast needs" to just "it's not an enthusiast product or let's wait for the next revision". Perhaps if this IB info turns out to be true we will see some movement towards such a change.
 
Aug 11, 2008
10,451
642
126
A bit premature with an inflammatory post aren't you? We have no hard numbers from reliable reviewers yet. Granted the preliminary results look disappointing from the enthusiast point of view, especially overclocking. But the lower power and better IGP could make it a success in the mainstream segment, especially laptops.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,509
3,849
136
www.teamjuchems.com
I am all for the toning down of the "it fails if it doesn't meet my enthusiast needs" to just "it's not an enthusiast product or let's wait for the next revision". Perhaps if this IB info turns out to be true we will see some movement towards such a change.

Right.

If it does what it is supposed to do at it base clocks and turbo frequencies, then Intel has done their job for the vast vast vast majority of their customers.

Aside from that, things aren't looking to rosy for IVB-E if this is true... which is supposed to be an enthusiast platform.

Maybe more cache will let Intel spread the heat around over more die area...

:thumbsup: on the sure to get many comments thread title :awe:
 
Last edited:

eternalone

Golden Member
Sep 10, 2008
1,500
2
81
The only failure of a CPU is AMD's BD. Intel has improved on the SB cpu increasing speed and power consumption from 95w to 77w with improved IPC. Where is the failure??? There is none, now look at AMD's offering now that is failure. Even AMD uses Intel CPU's to show the performance of their own Video Cards, so even AMD wouldnt use or recommend AMD cpus. That is the definition of failure.
 

Ferzerp

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,438
107
106
The only failure of a CPU is AMD's BD. Intel has improved on the SB cpu increasing speed and power consumption from 95w to 77w with improved IPC. Where is the failure??? There is none, now look at AMD's offering now that is failure. Even AMD uses Intel CPU's to show the performance of their own Video Cards, so even AMD wouldnt use or recommend AMD cpus. That is the definition of failure.


Lacking any AMD competition, IVB will however be pretty much a failure if it doesn't improve enough over SB to warrant upgrades. This is what people mean when they say "Intel competes with itself". The success or failure of IVB at this point is totally unrelated to anything AMD may or may not do. PCs at this point last until newer hardware offers a compelling reason to upgrade. If IVB isn't fast enough to warrant an upgrade over what most people have, Intel will suffer for it.
 

pelov

Diamond Member
Dec 6, 2011
3,510
6
0
I'd wait until IVB gets released before buying SB but it's definitely looking like a pass for anyone with an OC'd Sandy. Get the 2500K. The 2550K is a chip without features that somehow costs more...

I don't understand why people were expecting IVB to be a significant upgrade over SB chips. We've known that IVB was about PCIE 3.0, HD4000, 22nm maturation and the mobile market/ultrabooks. A 100mhz increase and single-digit IPC bump never looked like an upgrade.
 

Phynaz

Lifer
Mar 13, 2006
10,140
819
126
Wow, almost two months since you could find anything in a an attempt to discredit Intel.
 

frostedflakes

Diamond Member
Mar 1, 2005
7,925
1
81
Depends on how you define failure. For mobile it will probably be quite good and that seems to be what Intel is most concerned about, competing with ARM in a "post-PC" world. Definitely disappointed by the heat and overclocking from an enthusiast perspective, though. It's by no means a bad chip, just not much/any better than SB for enthusiasts from what we've seen so far.
 

AtenRa

Lifer
Feb 2, 2009
14,003
3,362
136
Well, there are millions of people using pre-Nehalem CPUs. Even if we enthusiasts and Overclockers won't upgrade, IB will not be a fail.

Especially in the Mobile segment where lower power consumption is more critical than raw performance or Overclocability ;)
 
Last edited:

Maximilian

Lifer
Feb 8, 2004
12,604
15
81
Meh it looks like its going to be a disappointment thats for sure.

I wouldn't say its a colossal failure though.
 

meloz

Senior member
Jul 8, 2008
320
0
76
For IVB Intel focused on performance / watt. In this respect, IVB is one of the biggest leaps we have seen in recent processors, although your typical troll is too ignorant to appreciate this boost. As CPU was not the bottleneck for most mainstream consumers anyway (IO is, thus the craze for SSDs), I appreciate Intel taking this road.

The temperature is mostly a function of the stock heatsink + fan Intel are using. If you find the numbers too high you can always buy aftermarket solutions, although for stock systems they are unnecessary.

So far it looks 22nm and IVB are going to be every bit as successful as Sandy Bridge.

If this was an attempt to paint Intel, the 22nm process and IVB as 'failure', it just backfired. I would also like to know your opinion about AMD's recent efforts.
 
Last edited:

rgallant

Golden Member
Apr 14, 2007
1,361
11
81
just rambling

I see it more of a new chip for non sb owners ,that passed on sb for a one reason or another.
-z77 boards seem strong and tweaked for ib not sb.
tweaktown = the 4.7 ib to sb 5.0, so how many sb user's run 5.0 7\24 if they can even hit the 5.0 with how many millions of samples in the wild.
-most run sb @ 4.5-4.6 7\24 so ib only has to run @ 4.3-4.4 .

-http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?280277-Keep-your-Sandy-Bridge!/page2
- see post 45 his ib = sb if not better.[got his from intel] per a ocn post'

-all retails are not equal as why people follow batch # , and where are these retails coming from anyways? not from intel so from who? and why do they have them.
a 5 month old batch ?from the same es batch?

-and why do people fall off the grid ,if they start benching ib\z77 max. air\h2o clock's
-or only post 3000 mhz memory screens shots ,like who the F cares.?

I'll wait for the real good review sites to post ,give it to may , but if some one gave me a sb\z68 I would not install it.[no pci-e 3.0] .
 
Last edited:

Boulard83

Member
Apr 13, 2012
82
0
0
Ill wait untill 23th april to make my final choice. Some "real retail" chip reviews may change my mind.
 

Ferzerp

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,438
107
106
Sorry but no. That's far, far below ambient in any normal environment, so it obviously isn't. As I said before, that's 46F.

Maybe it's a joke on how un-hot of a product it is? (It's so cold that it is below ambient!)
 

Tempered81

Diamond Member
Jan 29, 2007
6,374
1
81
Maybe it's supposed to have a 1 before the 8? Either way, it's only a struggle to point out where the tester made an error to discredit his Ivy temps...