Ivy to be 7-25% faster than Sandy plus 3x GPU performance

[Olikan]

Basically I'm all for cheap graphics performance, but I'm not at all against dedicated graphics. The performance advantage they present versus even Llano is way too valuable to me to just see them get rendered obsolete, and to be honest it scares me to think that APUs could kill the dedicated graphics market, but I don't think it will with the huge advantage that the middle and high still enjoy. 60 GB/s bandwidth on an APU? Not anytime soon.

sooner than you think.
you know, back in time, cpus used to get memory limited, that's why there is the cache system nowadays.
GCN is going to have a very big cache system. And ddr4 is like 2 years from now

 

[Idontcare]

Hmm, initial pricing was actually pretty sweet for the Llano when I checked. HP had A8 with 6750 dedicated for $650 in BB at launch, IIRC. However, Intel quickly made some sort of price compromise with OEMs because it didn't take long for i5-2430M notebooks solo or with Geforce 5xx series graphics to drop into the same price brackets as Llano and Llano + gpu. Some of that is supply constraints on Llano, that's why Llano prices haven't dropped to maintain a 15+% lead on price. However, part of it is that Intel has a lot more pull with manufacturers and I'm saying this outside the "monopoly practices" subject that Intel paid back a small amount of profit to make go away. They have the staff and the money to maintain business relationships on a level AMD can not. The ultrabook rollout is a good example of this. Also Intel pushing pin costs to motherboard makers. That's just business at work and in the case of the notebook market I think it's been good for consumers this cycle.

Yeah, that was the thing. A Dell Inspiron N7110, 17.3" LCD, i5-2410, 6GB ram, GT525M for just $715.

Trying to get anything remotely close to those specs but with AMD was consistently coming in at around $850-$900. Simply a non-starter.

 

[Blitzvogel]

sooner than you think.
you know, back in time, cpus used to get memory limited, that's why there is the cache system nowadays.
GCN is going to have a very big cache system. And ddr4 is like 2 years from now

The heavy hitting GCN models will probably need an ***load of bandwidth in order to stay nicely fed if they are to be a decent bit more powerful than the Southern Islands. And how will all that extra cache affect power consumption and cost of the actual GPU (I'm talking dedicated graphics here)? Sure it may keep the memory system in regards to it cheap, but it's possibly just spreading the cost somewhere else for no tangible benefit. It's completely possible I could be wrong here, but until we see GCN for realz.....

Now, thinking about it, GCN might be very beneficial for APUs, and I honestly do see graphics design swinging more towards APU implementation, but at the moment and for the short term, b/w is not up to speed with the APUs, and not even with the GPUs themselves.

*Waits patiently*

 

[Kevmanw430]

Yeah, that was the thing. A Dell Inspiron N7110, 17.3" LCD, i5-2410, 6GB ram, GT525M for just $715.

Trying to get anything remotely close to those specs but with AMD was consistently coming in at around $850-$900. Simply a non-starter.

You can get a refurbed Dv6z w/ A8 and 6750M on Newegg for ~$520. Overclocked, people have broken 2200 3DMark 11, which is ~400pts higher than a 2630QM/560M. I think thats unbeatable. (Granted, its a refurb, so, you never know.)

On another note, I really hope that the IVB IGP, at least the previously quoted GT3 core in the ULV chips, can break at least 6k 3DMark06. That would make the ultrabooks viable for some light gaming.

 

[sm625]

troll troll troll your boat gently down the stream merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream .

Lets lok at who cause the least amount of crashes

Are you saying intel gpus dont artifact like crazy? If I load league of legends onto my new ib notebook, will it play max settings without a whole slew of artifacts and tearing and god knows what else? In theory if its 2x sb then it should be powerful enough to drive LoL at max settings at 1080p.

I must point out that llano desktop A4 at 2.5GHz is not strong enough to play LoL at max settings. I have to reduce shadows to medium to get playable framerates.

edit: I noticed one of the slides says increased performance due to larger cache... but then on the same slide it says they both have 8M cache.

Also, it says the i7-2600 has HD 2000 graphics, and it says that the HD 4000 is 200% faster. So what about the HD3000? This is really shady stuff here.

 

[Idontcare]

You can get a refurbed Dv6z w/ A8 and 6750M on Newegg for ~$520. Overclocked, people have broken 2200 3DMark 11, which is ~400pts higher than a 2630QM/560M. I think thats unbeatable. (Granted, its a refurb, so, you never know.)

On another note, I really hope that the IVB IGP, at least the previously quoted GT3 core in the ULV chips, can break at least 6k 3DMark06. That would make the ultrabooks viable for some light gaming.

Well if you go that route (refurbed and OC'ed) then I've no doubt I can get an equally proficient refurbed Intel+Nvidia that OC's.

And Dv6z is 15", not 17". I like my screen real-estate even if the resolution is still 16x9.

Not saying the Dv6z isn't a good deal, my point was that I was really expecting Llano to bring me superior performance at comparable or lower pricepoints, instead its the exact opposite in both counts - lower performance and higher cost - when I actually shopped around for deals on new equipment (not refurbed) and no interest in OC'ing.

There is a big difference IMO when you have to seek out the niche cases of refurbed gear with smaller screens and OC them just to compete with the price/performance of a standard commodity available new system right off the frontpage of DELL.

This is a huge problem for AMD IMO. Anyone who read my posts pissing and moaning about my Intel IGP laptop from last year knows how much I was against getting another one, but really the pricing made my decision for me. I'm just happy that it turn out with optimus the decision was not one that came with tradeoffs.

I took a gamble and it paid off, but AMD has a real pricing issue IMO. It may well be that they have a serious supply issue and they are selling all they have on hand even at the higher pricepoint, more power to them then. It was just a dealbreaker for me.

 

[Denithor]

What is all this extra GPU power with IB going to do for QuickSync?

 

[Olikan]

What is all this extra GPU power with IB going to do for QuickSync?

nothing. QuickSync and GPU are diferent things.
But, it's rumoured that Quicksync is getting updated

 

[Arkaign]

You can get a refurbed Dv6z w/ A8 and 6750M on Newegg for ~$520. Overclocked, people have broken 2200 3DMark 11, which is ~400pts higher than a 2630QM/560M. I think thats unbeatable. (Granted, its a refurb, so, you never know.)

On another note, I really hope that the IVB IGP, at least the previously quoted GT3 core in the ULV chips, can break at least 6k 3DMark06. That would make the ultrabooks viable for some light gaming.

That DV6 is fairly good stock, I never_ever recommend overclocking them though, they run hot out of the box when gaming, overclocking them is just asking for pain.

 

[pm]

The article mentions that the built-in HD Graphics improvements of Ivy Bridge are meant to compete with "entry-level" discrete graphics cards - does this mean if you buy Ivy Bridge with an H67 board, you don't need a graphics card for a HTPC?

Next to my TV right now, I have a Sandybridge (i5-2500) in an H67 board and I don't need a graphics card for my HTPC. It's been working fine for me.

 

[Khato]

Present-gen Intel integrated doesn't properly support 23.976FPS media streams, which makes it unsuitable for HTPC use. If it did, it would certainly be good enough.

Eh, I know that for my setup (duplicating display to both a LG CF181D projector through Emotiva UMC-1 processor and a cheap 1080p dell monitor for when I don't want to start up the projector) the Sandybridge graphics work better than the NVIDIA GT430. The primary complaint with the GT 430 being that it doesn't appear to properly synchronize the refresh rate, resulting in occasionally visible horizontal tearing (as in the display buffer has a portion of one frame and a portion of another.) There are no such problems when running with Sandybridge graphics.

I often wonder how many that complain of the 23.976 FPS 'issue' with Intel integrated graphics (it's very close now, but still there) actually have such enabled on their current HTPC. It's not necessarily default as a large number of devices don't exactly have great frame interpolation anyway, and in those cases it's typically better to allow the HTPC to do the work anyway.

 

[pm]

Eh, I know that for my setup (duplicating display to both a LG CF181D projector through Emotiva UMC-1 processor and a cheap 1080p dell monitor for when I don't want to start up the projector) the Sandybridge graphics work better than the NVIDIA GT430. The primary complaint with the GT 430 being that it doesn't appear to properly synchronize the refresh rate, resulting in occasionally visible horizontal tearing (as in the display buffer has a portion of one frame and a portion of another.) There are no such problems when running with Sandybridge graphics.

I often wonder how many that complain of the 23.976 FPS 'issue' with Intel integrated graphics (it's very close now, but still there) actually have such enabled on their current HTPC. It's not necessarily default as a large number of devices don't exactly have great frame interpolation anyway, and in those cases it's typically better to allow the HTPC to do the work anyway.

Huh. I have had a SNB in my HTPC and I didn't know anything about this 23.976 issue until just now. I read Anand's review back in Jan, but I must have skipped over that part to get to the benchmarks or something because I don't remember anything about it at all. If it's an issue with my content and my TV, then I must just be ignoring it or something because I don't see anything with jittery frames. At least not that I've ever noticed.

 

[Vesku]

So does the 23.976 issue mean there is a missing frame every minute or two or does it mean audio will be ever so slightly shifted from the video due to that .024 fps accumulation?

 

[exar333]

So does the 23.976 issue mean there is a missing frame every minute or two or does it mean audio will be ever so slightly shifted from the video due to that .024 fps accumulation?

Your really only missing out if your TV supports native 24P resolution. 24P is more 'cinematic' because it doesn't have any repeated frames that can give the film motion a strange look compared to seeing it in native 24P.

 

[pm]

So does the 23.976 issue mean there is a missing frame every minute or two or does it mean audio will be ever so slightly shifted from the video due to that .024 fps accumulation?

After someone up above mentioned it, I googled it and got Anand's SNB review:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/7

What happens when you try to play 23.976 fps content on a display that refreshes itself 24.000 times per second? You get a repeated frame approximately every 40 seconds to synchronize the source frame rate with the display frame rate. That repeated frame appears to your eyes as judder in motion, particularly evident in scenes involving a panning camera.

How big of an issue this is depends on the user. Some can just ignore the judder, others will attempt to smooth it out by setting their display to 60Hz, while others will be driven absolutely insane by it.

My wife and I have been using our HTPC pretty much daily since I switched it to a Core i5-2500 back in July ish, and I hadn't noticed anything funny in the playback. I'm not obsessive about content quality, but I notice when voice and video synching goes out of alignment by even a bit in Netflix videos. I'd think I'd notice it dropping 1 in 40 frames. Maybe it's the content that we play isn't 23.976, or maybe I'm less obsessive about this stuff than I think that I am. I have never noticed anything weird in the playback of anything.

Your really only missing out if your TV supports native 24P resolution. 24P is more 'cinematic' because it doesn't have any repeated frames that can give the film motion a strange look compared to seeing it in native 24P.

Ah. I bet that our TV - which is a cheap Olevia LCD - doesn't support 24P.


I feel like I've taken this thread off on a tangent, but ironically I gave a presentation here yesterday at Intel to Intel employees about using a SNB as a HTPC. Based on a request from one of my co-workers, I brought in my HTPC into the big conference room here and gave an hour long talk and demonstration. There was great turn-out and people seemed pretty impressed, and now I'm concerned that I need to go back and change my slides to mention this 23.976 issue. I'd never heard of it.

 

[Khato]

So does the 23.976 issue mean there is a missing frame every minute or two or does it mean audio will be ever so slightly shifted from the video due to that .024 fps accumulation?

Actually it's not even that bad - with the current driver Sandybridge will output 23.973 fps. Now sure that's still 0.003 fps off the ideal, but it's not like either ATI or NVIDIA are any better - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/archive/index.php/t-1333324.html In other words, if Intel manages to precisely hit 23.976 fps with Ivybridge they'll be better than either ATI or NVIDIA implementations.

 

[exar333]

Actually it's not even that bad - with the current driver Sandybridge will output 23.973 fps. Now sure that's still 0.003 fps off the ideal, but it's not like either ATI or NVIDIA are any better - http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/archive/index.php/t-1333324.html In other words, if Intel manages to precisely hit 23.976 fps with Ivybridge they'll be better than either ATI or NVIDIA implementations.

It will be a bigger deal when 120hz TVs (actual, not interpolated) are the standard. 24 divides cleanly into 120hz, so it would be a non-issue at that point to display 24P signals.

 

[Khato]

It will be a bigger deal when 120hz TVs (actual, not interpolated) are the standard. 24 divides cleanly into 120hz, so it would be a non-issue at that point to display 24P signals.

True, but again that's not the stupid film 23.976 fps! What's really amusing about it is the fact that the 'issue' is one of some people wanting their home theater experience to be the same as a actual movie theater... complete with that slow 23.976 fps that results in easily visible transitions between frames on fast motion. It's by no means a nice flowing picture, but that's the way it was in theater so that's what some people want to see in their home theater.

Once you get into not running the display at 23.976 Hz, then the imperfect support doesn't matter in the least. If you're running at the standard 60 Hz on your display, then you're doing CFI in order to output 60 fps from your 23.976 fps source anyway and this 'issue' doesn't apply - I'd expect that that's how the majority of htpc are setup.

 

[bryanW1995]

Its an interesting bias that gets built into the stigma surrounding mini-vans. If there were no bias then there would be no stigma, and if there were no stigma then there would be no bias.

I needed the minivan, our family had simply grown to exceed the accommodations of our 4-dr accord...but I resisted the purchase far longer than I should have for no other reason than I wanted to avoid inviting the stigma that comes with reaching that milestone life. Now when I think about it I realize just how much of an anti-minivan fanboy I was.

Somewhere in there I think I just subtly equated Zambezi to a minivan, roomy enough for 8, terrible gas mileage, not a top-performer speed-wise, but in the end she gets the job done and who doesn't want the comfort of knowing their kids are protected by side-curtain airbags the size of a mattress?

I took a loaded out minivan from san Antonio to Taos ladt year with my wife, mom, and 4 yr old and 2 1/2 yr old daughters. The minivan terrified me at speeds over 90, but when we were stuck for 5 hrs in the dead of night just outside Albuquerque the double rear DVD screens kept the girls happy.

I think I agree with you, maybe BD is the familymobile and intel is the BMW. Regardless, I just wish that the "BMW" wasnt the only game in town for us speed demons.

 

[tweakboy]

6 core ? How about a 8 core or 16 core desktop. Or else time to look at the server line,

AMD has a 12 core server,,, weird,, they cant add more cores,, just make the speed NOT NOTICABLE faster then Sandy Bridge OCed. gl

 

[exar333]

I took a loaded out minivan from san Antonio to Taos ladt year with my wife, mom, and 4 yr old and 2 1/2 yr old daughters. The minivan terrified me at speeds over 90, but when we were stuck for 5 hrs in the dead of night just outside Albuquerque the double rear DVD screens kept the girls happy.

I think I agree with you, maybe BD is the familymobile and intel is the BMW. Regardless, I just wish that the "BMW" wasnt the only game in town for us speed demons.

You can still get the AMD 'speed demon'. It's the 2001 Honda minivan with the huge spolier, red flames painted on it, with 22 inch wheels!

 

[tweakboy]

I wonder how much that 6 core Ivy will cost at places like amazon.com and oldegg.com

As if they couldn't make that a 8 core, Sad , gotta go to server line...

25 percent faster is not worth a upgrade from a Sandy Bridge mofu, So Sandy people wait,, wait and enjoy your CPU ,,,,,,

Also the GPU is 3x faster,, who cares doesnt that get disabled in the BIOS ? Hmmm I think by 2012 2013 AMD can steal the performance crown,, maybe,, imo,, thx gl,

 

[Ben90]

It will be a bigger deal when 120hz TVs (actual, not interpolated) are the standard. 24 divides cleanly into 120hz, so it would be a non-issue at that point to display 24P signals.

As refresh rates go up, I believe the 23/24fps issue gets smaller and smaller.

A repeated frame with the panel running at 24hz lasts 41ms. That same frame will only last 8ms when the panel is running at 120hz. Granted they will appear a lot more, but the effects of each individual frame wont be noticeable to most people.

 

[Denithor]

nothing. QuickSync and GPU are diferent things.
But, it's rumoured that Quicksync is getting updated

Are you smoking crack?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4083/...-core-i7-2600k-i5-2500k-core-i3-2100-tested/9

Quick Sync is the GPU decoding your movie files to accelerate the whole encoding process.

More GPU power should equal further enhanced Quick Sync processing.

And now DVDFab supports Quick Sync. Would love to see a refreshed review using their software...

 

[IntelUser2000]

It's pretty well known that AMDs per-transistor performance is a good deal better than Nvidia's when it comes to games,

Despite all the claims by SA that how Geforce 480 was so inefficient, it performed better than the competition, justifying the increased power usage. Then on the 580/69xx generation, Nvidia improved power efficiency while improving performance while AMD took a step backwards.

Net result=0

On the 6990 vs 590 while the former might use 15% less transistors, it hardly uses less power. Not really "efficient". 6990 typically performs better on newer games and 590 on the older ones.

Seen those demonstration of Deus Ex and Dirt 3 running awesome on trinity? Well, the APU after trinity is what IvB has to compete with.

Ivy Bridge is coming in 2012, not 2013, to compete with Trinity. No doubt Trinity will be faster in graphics, but no one is contesting that.