Ivy Bridge 3570K Testing, Opinions, Results, New Bios, 4.5Ghz At 1.236v

Page 20 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,123
3,057
136
www.teamjuchems.com
And we can assume the 3770K will be even hotter with HT enabled.

Yikes.

Hearing comments like "and H80 isn't cutting it" sounds a bit disconcerting, I guess, but I suppose that is because we were generally fighting instability and trying to keep voltage in check with SB right? Temps alone weren't the issue?

It seems like this is more like the OC'ing of old (or current AMD :p ) if that is the case...
 

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
Based on what I have read and seen so far, I am a little happier I went for x79 instead of waiting for IB.
 

Diogenes2

Platinum Member
Jul 26, 2001
2,151
0
0
damn i was looking forward to ivy bridge as well.. Its looking intel is testing water with its new technology for haswell...

I don't think there was ever any basis for believing IB would be an upgrade from SB.. Particularly for Overclockers..
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,123
3,057
136
www.teamjuchems.com
Based on what I have read and seen so far, I am a little happier I went for x79 instead of waiting for IB.

At this point, it seems to me that it would preferable for Intel to simply refresh X79 to include the goodies that Z77 brings to the table, plus the SAS support, and then move right to Haswell-E. IMHO.

It appears that SB-E is going to easily be the premium platform of choice until Haswell, at a minimum.

This is a bit of a contrast when comparing SB vs LGA 1366, where it felt like the compromise was more significant. (ie, SB was simply better for gaming and most users)

I suppose that is unsurprising, if we look back and CPUs like the i5-760 hand been unable to OC, the way that played out may have been much different. (1366 vs 1156 die-shrink)
 

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
At this point, it seems to me that it would preferable for Intel to simply refresh X79 to include the goodies that Z77 brings to the table, plus the SAS support, and then move right to Haswell-E. IMHO.

What goodies does Z77 bring that X79 does not? Other than USB 3.0 included in the chipset, because I really dont care what chip the UB 3.0 comes from just as long as it is present. SAS support would be nice however, no arguement there. I am happy with my US3 board (having already accepted the fact they nerfed X79), and it is much more stable than my old P67 board.

Haswell-E will have a new socket and new chipset. My guess is that it will be what X79 should have been from the start.
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,123
3,057
136
www.teamjuchems.com
What goodies does Z77 bring that X79 does not? Other than USB 3.0 included in the chipset, because I really dont care what chip the UB 3.0 comes from just as long as it is present. SAS support would be nice however, no arguement there. I am happy with my US3 board (having already accepted the fact they nerfed X79), and it is much more stable than my old P67 board.

Haswell-E will have a new socket and new chipset. My guess is that it will be what X79 should have been from the start.

I was just thinking about PCIe 3 (did that get all straightened out?), all of Intels RST features (including SRT), etc. Personally, SRT is a must-have feature in my next main rig, which is the only one I am going to spend the money required for a premium chipset.

Additionally, I am not trying to get on a soapbox about X79 being deficient, so please don't take it that way.

Yes, I concede it is short list, but it would be nice to have a halo platform without compromise, given the premium exacted for it - and at this juncture, a chipset update that is not dependent on IVB-E existence (and its ability to actually out perform SB-E in enthusiast applications) appears to be more appealing.

This is especially true given that the 3820 is in an excellent place to be a very attractive chip in the meantime until Haswell if: SB stock dries up and IVB is indeed a disappointing chip w/regards to OC'ing.

I realize that is off topic and completely an opinion stance. The business drivers are likely not there.

Like you said, hopefully Haswell-E will be the platform we want it to be.
 
Last edited:

Puppies04

Diamond Member
Apr 25, 2011
5,909
17
76
I don't think there was ever any basis for believing IB would be an upgrade from SB.. Particularly for Overclockers..

You never would have thought it looking at this forum a couple of months ago. Plenty of people claiming all IB chips would be 5ghz stable on 1.3v :D.
 

JonBlack

Member
Apr 11, 2012
89
0
0
You never would have thought it looking at this forum a couple of months ago. Plenty of people claiming all IB chips would be 5ghz stable on 1.3v :D.

That's so true! There were tons of posters who were saying that 5ghz+ would be a piece of cake on IB. I bought into the hype and waited months on my two builds.

When TweakTown released their initial test results and I saw those temps I started to get concerned. Then I started reading similar things from folks who had ES chips. Of course, many people kept saying. "Oh these aren't retail chips. Retail will be shiznit." meh

I said forget it and I bought a i7-2600k and i5-2400 for the two PC's I needed to get going on. I'll wait and see if Haswell is a game-changer and decide whether I'm getting on the Haswell-train.
 

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
I was just thinking about PCIe 3 (did that get all straightened out?), all of Intels RST features (including SRT), etc. Personally, SRT is a must-have feature in my next main rig, which is the only one I am going to spend the money required for a premium chipset.

PCIe 3.0 on X79 is support by AMD drivers, always has been. Nvidia has yet to do so (I heard one driver version did before it was removed). It will happen as X79 supports it, but was never certified due to the fact that it came out before any card was available to test/certify.

X79 supports all of Intel RST features except SRT. Intel ver. 11 RST drivers work on X79 now and improved speed on SSDs. In my opinion, SRT is meant for lower end systems and I unserstand why it is not included on X79. If you go full SSDs, there is no need for SRT at all. And with prices of SSD dropping (See Intel 330 series), there is even less of a need for SRT.

If you have a 240GB SSD as your boot/application drive, and a second HDD for data storage, there really is no need for SRT.
 
Last edited:

Imouto

Golden Member
Jul 6, 2011
1,241
2
81
That's not platform specific but rather something that's bundled with Z77. Also I think I'm not the only one who still hasn't seen the benefits this offers...

Lucid MVP is junk. It doesn't work in most games without extreme corruption, and the virtual vsync lowers performance by a good margin.

You should read again the question.
 

n0x1ous

Platinum Member
Sep 9, 2010
2,572
248
106
PCIe 3.0 on X79 is support by AMD drivers, always has been. Nvidia has yet to do so (I heard one driver version did before it was removed). It will happen as X79 supports it, but was never certified due to the fact that it came out before any card was available to test/certify.

X79 supports all of Intel RST features except SRT. Intel ver. 11 RST drivers work on X79 now and improved speed on SSDs. In my opinion, SRT is meant for lower end systems and I unserstand why it is not included on X79. If you go full SSDs, there is no need for SRT at all. And with prices of SSD dropping (See Intel 330 series), there is even less of a need for SRT.

If you have a 240GB SSD as your boot/application drive, and a second HDD for data storage, there really is no need for SRT.

Yeah, X79 has everything an enthusiast would need. With SSD prices now, they are affordable for boot drives. My new Z77 board has an mSata port built in for SRT but it will never be used.

I would have preferred X79 but only with 3930k which i didnt want to spend 600 on the cpu....Great platform though.
 

Ferzerp

Diamond Member
Oct 12, 1999
6,438
107
106
Yikes.

Hearing comments like "and H80 isn't cutting it" sounds a bit disconcerting, I guess, but I suppose that is because we were generally fighting instability and trying to keep voltage in check with SB right? Temps alone weren't the issue?

It seems like this is more like the OC'ing of old (or current AMD :p ) if that is the case...


It isn't a matter of cooling capacity. It's all about the heat transfer from the CPU to the cooler. The H80 has plenty of cooling capacity for this thing, the problem is you can't get the heat off the CPU as fast as it is generating it until the temperature delta that is created from near 100C temps on the CPU happens.

This means you have a few options.

A) Improve the heat transfer (lap the CPU and cooler, remove the heat spreader, etc)

B) Increase the temperature delta from the CPU to the cooler by actively cooling the cooler (chilled water cooling, phase change cooling, or ever, ugh, peltier units).
 

blckgrffn

Diamond Member
May 1, 2003
9,123
3,057
136
www.teamjuchems.com
It isn't a matter of cooling capacity. It's all about the heat transfer from the CPU to the cooler. The H80 has plenty of cooling capacity for this thing, the problem is you can't get the heat off the CPU as fast as it is generating it until the temperature delta that is created from near 100C temps on the CPU happens.

This means you have a few options.

A) Improve the heat transfer (lap the CPU and cooler, remove the heat spreader, etc)

B) Increase the temperature delta from the CPU to the cooler by actively cooling the cooler (chilled water cooling, phase change cooling, or ever, ugh, peltier units).

Ah, I see. That makes perfect sense.

And about SRT - I want to accelerate a big spinning drive. Ideally everything would be SSD, but that is just not feasible. I have ~200GB of VMs and ~200GB of Steam Games (yep) and I am not buying an SSD that big. But I would use my existing boot drive/WD black for that data and buy a 128GB drive for my main OS/Applications. I think that is perfectly reasonable application of the technology. To blow a bunch of money on a big ssd for that type of data seems silly to me when there is basically a free option right there, you just have to not use Intel's most premium desktop chip set. Just the next one (now two+?) down. Hah.

To say that is low end is pretty funny, it's pretty advanced tech that costs you a lot (and is a premium feature!) out in the real world of storage. Intel must think it is somewhat premium too, otherwise all of their low end parts would have it. Instead, it is stuck in the uncomfortable middle ground.

Glad to hear that PCIe 3.0 is in full force on x79.

In the end, it doesn't really matter. Obviously we have our ideas on it, they just happen to differ :) Let's wait and see what they grace Haswell-E with, feature wise.
 
Last edited:

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
But I would use my existing boot drive/WD black for that data and buy a 128GB drive for my main OS/Applications. I think that is perfectly reasonable application of the technology.

Exactly, and you don't use/need SRT for that. ;)

SRT only allows you to use a small (40GB) SSD as a type of cache for a large HDD. You do not see the SSD as a drive on your system as it only speeds up your HDD.

Having a regular SSD (128GB) drive as a boot/application drive is much faster than SRT. And much more common. I use a 128GB for my boot/application drive and I have a 1TB HDD for all my pictures and data. I recently put in a Intel G2 SSD as well for my game drive. No SRT required or wanted.
 
Last edited:

frozencopper

Junior Member
Apr 11, 2012
8
0
0
screenshot034kb.jpg
 

frozencopper

Junior Member
Apr 11, 2012
8
0
0
Its pretty warm ambient temp. here in NYC:)

screenshot026fk.jpg


MRC fast boot disabled, transmitter slew @ 5 and receiver slew @ 6 in memory settings bios

screenshot024rs.jpg
 
Last edited: