ivy bridge i3 review ?

[The Alias]

hey guys have you seen an ivy bridge i3 review ? I wanted to compare it's performance with the 5800k seen here : http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/a10-5800k-a8-5600k-trinity-apu,3241.html
thanks guys 🙂

 

[dma0991]

IB i3 is merely a shrink of SB i3's and probably a better IGP get thrown into it. Certainly there would be an improvement from SB in terms of performance but not an improvement that is groundbreaking.

 

[piesquared]

Hmm, well that doesn't sound very good. :|

 

[The Alias]

if that's the case it seems trinity is a more powerful processor than the IB i3 ...

 

[Phynaz]

Depends. There are many cases where an I3 would beat a Trinity CPU, even with half the cores.

 

[Yuriman]

Now that I think about it, an i3 probably isn't as good a value as an FX-4xxx. It can't be overclocked, and although it'll definitely win some and lose some stock vs stock, ramp up the clocks on a BD and you have a chip that is at least fairly close in single-threaded tasks but with twice as many cores.

EDIT: Let's say an i3 has around 50% better IPC, give or take. I'm not sure how close this number is to the actual but I'm just roughly approximating. 2 core i3 vs "quad" core FX-4100, you have the i3 at stock running about the same in single threaded tasks as a 4.8ghz BD chip. You can probably get the better part of that back overclocking an FX-4100, as it isn't nearly so power hungry as BD FX-8's. Let's say 4.5ghz. That's would theoretically give around a 10% lead for the i3 in 2 threaded tasks.

Move up to 4 threaded tasks, you have your BD cores only performing about 80% due to shared resources, and the i3 gets, let's say 15% from hyperthreading. BD would have in the area of a 25% lead in things like encoding and rendering that fully utilizes all 4 cores.

Stock vs stock, an FX-4100 should be roughly similar to an i3 Ivy in heavily threaded tasks and should get slaughtered in things like games, but the ability to overclock is the great equalizer.

 

[Phynaz]

Now that I think about it, an i3 probably isn't as good a value as an FX-4xxx. It can't be overclocked, and although it'll definitely win some and lose some stock vs stock, ramp up the clocks on a BD and you have a chip that is at least fairly close in single-threaded tasks but with twice as many cores.

Actually there are boards that can overclock non-k processors. Asrock just added the capability to the Z77 boards.

 

[Yuriman]

Actually there are boards that can overclock non-k processors. Asrock just added the capability to the Z77 boards.

Well, bclock yeah. But you won't get very far with just bclock. Since i3's don't have turbo you don't even get the extra 4 bins you could add with an i5 or i7.

 

[Phynaz]

Well, bclock yeah. But you won't get very far with just bclock. Since i3's don't have turbo you don't even get the extra 4 bins you could add with an i5 or i7.

I don't know how it works, is that all no-k overclock is? Just the standard 4 bins?

 

[Yuriman]

As far as I know, 4 bins plus bclock yeah. Bclock is worth another 200-300mhz conservatively.

Edit: actually they might have implemented a 1.25 strap for Ivy but I've read nothing about it and don't have it on my Asrock z77. Are i3's unlocked down? Using a 1.25 strap would give a overclock.

 

[386DX]

Now that I think about it, an i3 probably isn't as good a value as an FX-4xxx. It can't be overclocked, and although it'll definitely win some and lose some stock vs stock, ramp up the clocks on a BD and you have a chip that is at least fairly close in single-threaded tasks but with twice as many cores.

EDIT: Let's say an i3 has around 50% better IPC, give or take. I'm not sure how close this number is to the actual but I'm just roughly approximating. 2 core i3 vs "quad" core FX-4100, you have the i3 at stock running about the same in single threaded tasks as a 4.8ghz BD chip. You can probably get the better part of that back overclocking an FX-4100, as it isn't nearly so power hungry as BD FX-8's. Let's say 4.5ghz. That's would theoretically give around a 10% lead for the i3 in 2 threaded tasks.

Move up to 4 threaded tasks, you have your BD cores only performing about 80% due to shared resources, and the i3 gets, let's say 15% from hyperthreading. BD would have in the area of a 25% lead in things like encoding and rendering that fully utilizes all 4 cores.

Stock vs stock, an FX-4100 should be roughly similar to an i3 Ivy in heavily threaded tasks and should get slaughtered in things like games, but the ability to overclock is the great equalizer.

The FX-4100 is probably the worst value CPU you can get. At stock speeds it loses to the i3-2100 in single threaded and about even in multi-threaded. This is with 2 more physical cores, 95W vs 65W power, and running at a higher frequency 3.6/3.8 GHz vs 3.1 GHz. Sure you can overclock it to approx 4.4-4.6Ghz with the stock cooler (which is fairly large) which should give you about a 25% performance boost, but you're also raising the heat output and power draw probably to about 150W. To get higher then 4.6 GHz you're gonna need a replacement cooler which then defeats the value proposition since you can get a quad core intel i5 for about the same money as FX-4100 and high end air/Water cooler.

So assuming you are willing to get the 25% performance from overclocking the FX-4100, yes it'll probably be faster then the i3-2100 but we're not trying to compare Sandy we want to compare it against Ivy. The Ivy i3-3240 runs at 3.4 GHz, that's about 10% faster then the i3-2100. Ivy is also slightly quicker per clock then Sandy between 5-10%, we'll use 7% on average. So taking both of those into consideration the i3-3240 should be about 17% faster then the i3-2100 that was already beating FX-4100 at stock. So even at stock the i3-3240 should be competitive with the FX-4100 overclocked to 4.4-4.6 GHz. Doing so at about 1/3 the power consumption 55W vs 150W. An i3 Ivy is also considerably more flexible then an overclocked FX-4100. The lower power and small heatsink makes it useable in other form factors like itx instead of just huge towers. The integrated video is also a plus even if you don't need it, it can be used for HTPC or a backup when switching video cards. The other intangible factors that favor an Ivy i3 are you can get away with a lower powered PSU (which saves a bit of $$$) and lower noise and heat output. Often times those things are more of a factor then purely absolute performance.

 

[daveybrat]

I still can't understand Intel. IF they actually sold an i3 K chip with unlocked multiplier for let's say $10 more than a normal one these things would be flying off the shelf with enthusiasts.

And do they really think it's going to affect sales of their i5 and i7 parts?

Just seems like they'd make a lot of money by simply unlocking these and charging a premium for it.

 

[nemesismk2]

I still can't understand Intel. IF they actually sold an i3 K chip with unlocked multiplier for let's say $10 more than a normal one these things would be flying off the shelf with enthusiasts.

And do they really think it's going to affect sales of their i5 and i7 parts?

Just seems like they'd make a lot of money by simply unlocking these and charging a premium for it.

The i3 has never been able to overclock (as far as i know) because i3 is a budget cpu for people who can't afford a better processor.

 

[dma0991]

I still can't understand Intel. IF they actually sold an i3 K chip with unlocked multiplier for let's say $10 more than a normal one these things would be flying off the shelf with enthusiasts.

And do they really think it's going to affect sales of their i5 and i7 parts?

Just seems like they'd make a lot of money by simply unlocking these and charging a premium for it.

Not many enthusiasts out there, only mainstream users who will never fully utilize the potential of their overclockable i3. Even so, try convincing with mainstream users that they need an expensive motherboard, appropriate sized case and an extra heatsink to go with their budget i3 xxxxK setup.

 

[StrangerGuy]

IMO desktops i3 aren't worth buying at all unless it is part of those killer prebuilt OEM PCs like from Dell etc.

 

[Yuriman]

I imagine if Intel were to unlock an i3, they would probably do so by adding turbo to it which would make it a dual core i7 like you find in laptops. Seems to me that regardless of core count, i3 =HT + no turbo, i5 = turbo + no HT, and i7 = turbo + HT.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

The Core i3 cannot and will not be able to overclock via multiplier because it does not support Turbo Boost.

 

[Charles Kozierok]

Just seems like they'd make a lot of money by simply unlocking these and charging a premium for it.

They'd have to charge a premium high enough that people wouldn't buy them over higher-end chips. If not, then yes, it would cut into those sales.

 

[Puppies04]

I still can't understand Intel. IF they actually sold an i3 K chip with unlocked multiplier for let's say $10 more than a normal one these things would be flying off the shelf with enthusiasts.

And do they really think it's going to affect sales of their i5 and i7 parts?

Just seems like they'd make a lot of money by simply unlocking these and charging a premium for it.

This point hasd been answered about 14 gazillion times on this forum alone...

 

[piasabird]

In a way they use turbo for the graphics.

 

[piasabird]

For all we know the i-3 processors may be i-5's that had defects, but were not bad enough to throw away.

 

[Coup27]

because i3 is a budget cpu for people who can't afford a better processor.

Yeah that's obviously it. Nothing to do with people who need computers to perform basic Office and internet duties or business' who need good machines to run at stock and be cool and fault free.

There's a reason why there are CPUs from Pentium up to Extreme and it's not all down to cost.

 

[lehtv]

For all we know the i-3 processors may be i-5's that had defects, but were not bad enough to throw away become Pentiums and Celerons

FTFY

 

[ShintaiDK]

For all we know the i-3 processors may be i-5's that had defects, but were not bad enough to throw away.

No.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

For all we know the i-3 processors may be i-5's that had defects, but were not bad enough to throw away.

The i3 uses a different die from the i5.