PCgameshardware : Bulldozer? Please. Intel Confirms 8 Core SB-E For Q3

[Castiel]

Uh, the 8-core version is server only.

2011 is the server socket so i'm not sure why one couldn't buy an 8 core and slap it into a X68 board

 

[pjkenned]

The Xeon L5630 2.14 4C does 323 Queries pr sec, costs=560$ (newegg)

Opteron 4170 2.1 6c does 299 Queries pr sec, costs= 203$ (amazon)
(Opteron 4170 was sold out on newegg, so couldnt see a price there)


The Xeon is about 8% faster in this benchmark, it costs about 270% more.
The Xeon uses more power than the opteron.

I wouldnt say that Intel walks all over amd, when it comes to servers, but your right that they use less cores, and give more performance (in this benchmark).

I just built a dual E5606 (the 32nm AES-NI enabled updates to the E5506 in the Anandtech piece that came out mid-Feb 2011) rig this week.

Benchmarks for the Xeon E3-1230 will post on Monday morning. Interestingly enough the dual E5606's and E3-1230 are a close match in a lot of cases. Price wise a single E5606 is almost as much as a E3-1230.

Now the other half of the story, and why one probably wants the E5606 and the big-iron CPUs is memory and PCIe lanes. One can see the Dual IOH36 motherboard above has an integrated 8-port LSI SAS 2 6.0gbps controller, seven PCIe x8 in x16 slots (all native not using NF200 chips), and support for up to 48GB using UDIMMs or 192GB using registered ecc DIMMs.

As one can imagine, these platforms are meant to have a ton of supporting hardware so talking about them in a desktop scenario is somewhat crazy. The difference in $300/ CPU purchase price is almost moot to a business deploying such systems.

 

[Edrick]

Uh, the 8-core version is server only.

Desktop: 8 core BD, 6 core SB
Server: 16 core BD, 8 core SB and 10 core Westmere

Amazing how you know that now since nothing has been released. You must work for Intel or AMD.

 

[SolidSnake42]

It said it was part of a dual socket for the 8-core, which means it's server and enterprise bound. Why would you want one yourself? Bulldozer is more geared towards the individual and will probably be at a price more geared for the individual as well. The speed may be there, but what do you want to hear more, how fast the CPU is or hear your wallet scream at the cost of the CPUs? God knows how much the dual socket mobo will be for it.

 

[gevorg]

8 core on 32nm CPU will likely be over 100w TDP. Way too much heat/noise for me. I'll wait for 22nm tech before getting an 8 core.

 

[Edrick]

It said it was part of a dual socket for the 8-core, which means it's server and enterprise bound. Why would you want one yourself? Bulldozer is more geared towards the individual and will probably be at a price more geared for the individual as well. The speed may be there, but what do you want to hear more, how fast the CPU is or hear your wallet scream at the cost of the CPUs? God knows how much the dual socket mobo will be for it.

Intel has 4 and 6 core CPUs for dual socket today.
Intel has 4 and 6 core CPUs for single socket today.

Intel will have SB 4, 6, 8 core CPUs for dual socket this year. (unless they forget about 4 core)
Intel will most likely have 4, 6, 8 core CPUs for single socket this year. (speculation)

The only thing in question really is if they carry the Xeon label. And if so, sure it will cost more. But even CPUs made for dual socket can be used in a single socket if they share the same socket (s2011).

Only the EX lines (quad socket) were independent of the other single and dual socket lines. (Westmere-EX 10 core for example). They had a different socket.

 

[Edrick]

8 core on 32nm CPU will likely be over 100w TDP. Way too much heat/noise for me. I'll wait for 22nm tech before getting an 8 core.

Agreed. I will be going with a fast 6 core SB-E and then go 8 core when Haswell comes around. I really don't need 16 threads today.

 

[aigomorla]

It said it was part of a dual socket for the 8-core, which means it's server and enterprise bound.

Or upper tier enthusiast like the SR-2.

but in serious note, its LGA2011 people... of course enterprise is going to see it first, and then us upper tier Enthusiast.

Why would you want one yourself?

because its the only upgrade i have available at my level???
And i like to be kept up to date, oh which makes me a die hard enthusiast.

 

[IntelUser2000]

For the users who need those benefits however, there is a version of Sandy Bridge for you. It’s codenamed Sandy Bridge-E and it’ll debut in Q4 2011. The chips will be available in both 4 and 6 core versions with a large L3 cache (Intel isn’t being specific at this point).

Anand knows what he's talking about. Been very reliable so far.

 

[bryanW1995]

intels 8 core will probably be packing 1.9 or 2.4billion transistors it will destroy BD.
We shall call it...... {The Destroyer Of Worlds} or {The 8 Cores Of Doom}

how about 16 threads of whoop ass? whoops, I'm confusing my tech company generals now...

 

[bryanW1995]

and for those of us who can't afford $300 motherboards and $700 processors?

I guess you could always buy a dell.

Anand knows what he's talking about. Been very reliable so far.

not true. What about OCZ-gate?

 

[Idontcare]

not true. What about OCZ-gate?

c'mon dude, really? One correction on one number in one graph from one review?

IntelUser didn't say "Anand is perfect in every way", he said "very reliable" and I think you'd be hard-pressed to show me a more prolific hardware reviewer with as many industry contacts as Anand who is more reliable than Anand.

 

[Dadofamunky]

Guys over at XS are speculating there will be no Quad core 2011 processors. The 2011 lineup will feature only 6 and 8 core processors. Hmm... Would make perfect sense.

1155 for Quad's and dual's
2011 for 6, 8 and 10 core's

That makes sense. It's almost the only way to differentiate them, since the 1155 K chips are such good performers.

Or upper tier enthusiast like the SR-2.

but in serious note, its LGA2011 people... of course enterprise is going to see it first, and then us upper tier Enthusiast.

because its the only upgrade i have available at my level???
And i like to be kept up to date, oh which makes me a die hard enthusiast.

{***consumed with jealousy***}

 

[aigomorla]

{***consumed with jealousy***}

lulz..

dont be..

its called not married, and no kids.. ;P

 

[JFAMD]

most definitely...

But intel showed AMD, sometimes more isnt better in this nice article :whiste:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4193/cheap-and-low-power-server-cpus-compared

And yes here's crossing my fingers on a 8c16t 20meg cache x 2 Twin Big sisters of dear ol sandy!
Twins are always better!

This is a stupid comparison.

Intel L5630 @ $551
AMD Opteron 4170 HE @ $174

8% faster. 216% more expensive.

That is the best you can you can do? Logic fail.

You are 100% correct, however that more isn't better; more price is not better. And anyone buying servers definitely would not fall for your logic. Hell, you could practically buy a complete server for the cost of the intel processors alond.

 

[RavenSEAL]

While intel continues to rape people's wallets, AMD continues to give the best performance/price ratio.

AMD gets the win :thumbsup:

 

[Accord99]

This is a stupid comparison.

Intel L5630 @ $551
AMD Opteron 4170 HE @ $174

AMD Opteron 4162 EE @ $370
AMD Opteron 4164 EE @ $817

Based on the power usage for workload, the EEs are the more valid comparison.

 

[aigomorla]

That is the best you can you can do? Logic fail.

You are 100% correct, however that more isn't better;

wait did i ever say financial wise?

The question was in a race for cores AMD has 12...
I replied in that race more isnt better...

And showed a 4 core beating the 6 cores...


LOL if you guys have a problem with the article then blame editor.

 

[JFAMD]

AMD Opteron 4162 EE @ $370
AMD Opteron 4164 EE @ $817

Based on the power usage for workload, the EEs are the more valid comparison.

Except that his statement was about performance, not power.

 

[Accord99]

Except that his statement was about performance, not power.

The L designation makes the Xeon more expensive, much like the EE designation.

 

[Arkadrel]

The L designation makes the Xeon more expensive, much like the EE designation.

Aha! its the "L"'s fault!

JFAMD hope your takeing notes!

all you need to sell them for more is add a "L"

AMD L Opteron EE ULTRA FX BLACK EDITION (more fancy stuff sounds good)

(Im just jokeing )

 

[Phynaz]

This is a stupid comparison.

Intel L5630 @ $551
AMD Opteron 4170 HE @ $174

8% faster. 216% more expensive.

That is the best you can you can do? Logic fail.

Price difference when placed in $15K server.

8% Faster 2.5% more expensive

Doesn't look so stupid to me.

 

[Nemesis 1]

Considering we know nothing of how well Bulldozer chips actually perform or what they will cost, it's just a little bit silly to compare unreleased Intel parts to unreleased AMD parts.

Unless Bulldozer is miraculously good, an eight-core Sandy Bridge CPU will probably outperform it. But at what price? If it's as costly as the 980X and 990X, it's clearly aiming for the the top of the top. The performance crown is all well and good, but if it commends a king's ransom it's not terribly useful to most of us.

Regardless of how well AMD does with their Bulldozer release, they won't be able to rest on any laurels. Intel may have been ruthless in their business practices, but it seems they've transitioned that aggression to their chip design.

Just stop with the nonsense Intel will have 1 SKu for the extreme chip . The rest will be priced to keep AMD in check . Just as they been doing since 06

 

[JFAMD]

Price difference when placed in $15K server.

8% Faster 2.5% more expensive

Doesn't look so stupid to me.

Where is this mythical $15K server?

Dell R410 with 2 L5630's and 32GB is $4,355
Dell R415 with 2 4170 HE's and 32GB is $3,769

That means 15% more expensive, 8% more performance.

 

[nyker96]

Intel: 1

AMD : 0

more like Intel 10 AMD 0 so far. ok llano can count as 1.