• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Sandy Bridge-E benchmarks on Techpowerup.com

MacLeod1592

MacLeod1592

Member
Techpowerup.com

Looks kinda disappointing if theyre legit. Could be a good thing though. Now you dont have to lose sleep trying to figure out how many liquor stores you have to knock over to come up with the $1000 to buy one of these things. 😀
 
How is the gaming performance "disappointing"? What else are people expecting? Of course it won't do better than the i5-2500K in gaming since the vast majority of games either only support up to four cores or by the time they get to the i5-2400 are GPU bound.

I seriously don't know what else people are expecting. This is based on the Sandy Bridge architecture, which means in anything using up to four cores or less the 2500K is gonna be just as fast. The reason why you go for something like the i7-3930K instead of the 2500K/2600K is the vastly superior multi-threaded performance. In highly multi-threaded applications a 3930K would be 35-50% faster than a 2600K.
 
Yup, about what you'd expect. Like the i7-990X and other high-end LGA1366 chips, it doesn't make much sense for gaming, much worse value than a 2500K or even 2600K. Should be a beast for heavily threaded workstation tasks, though.
 
we already had a review a while back on Toms that showed the 3960k would be no better than a 2600k for gaming. anyone with common sense that is just looking for a basic gaming pc will get a 2500k and the fastest single gpu they can afford. Sandy Bridge E will look even sillier in a few months when Ivy Bridge comes out for 1155.
 
MacLeod1592 said:
Techpowerup.com

Looks kinda disappointing if theyre legit. Could be a good thing though. Now you dont have to lose sleep trying to figure out how many liquor stores you have to knock over to come up with the $1000 to buy one of these things. 😀
Click to expand...

i hate sites that say things like this to get hits,Its the same exact arch as a sandy with more cores.

Its going to score about the same clock for clock and maybe 1% less in gaming because of the added latency from the more cache the core got.

intel went to 1600 official spec ram to make up for it.

Please op tell me what is disappointing about this?Did you think somehow a game thats at its max because the gpu is maxed is going to somehow get more fps on a sandy e?
 
Yeah I bet this thing will shred at folding. I wish they would "leak" some productivity benchmarks and things that can better use all those cores. I cant wait to see how this thing does at those type tasks.
 
May be right. Theyre probably throwing all their emphasis on Ivy Bridge which should hopefully be out in around 6 months or so from the rumors Ive heard anyways. Really cant wait to see what that does. Itll also be interesting to see what that does to AMD. If Bulldozer cant really compete with Sandy Bridge, I wonder what will happen to the market when Ivy Bridge comes out assuming its a pretty big step forward in performance.
 
grkM3 said:
i hate sites that say things like this to get hits,Its the same exact arch as a sandy with more cores.

Its going to score about the same clock for clock and maybe 1% less in gaming because of the added latency from the more cache the core got.

intel went to 1600 official spec ram to make up for it.

Please op tell me what is disappointing about this?Did you think somehow a game thats at its max because the gpu is maxed is going to somehow get more fps on a sandy e?
Click to expand...

Latency is higher because of the 2 extra stops on the ring bus
 
I called my local Micro Center earlier this afternoon to get info on what would be available tomorrow. The somewhat clueless sales guy stated that they have two 3960Xs and a few 3930Ks. He also said there would be two motherboards available. Both by Asus. He said "the pro and the ultra". I'm guessing he ment the P9X79 Pro and the P9X79 Deluxe.

I ran through a bunch of benchmarks on my 980X today and took several screenshots. I'm ready for another Benchmarkapalooza!
 
AdamK47 said:
Kyle keeps complaining about the heat and the 130W TDP. It's the same rating as the first gen i7s.
Click to expand...
but at stock speeds its using a whopping 70 watts more. that is literally like adding a 2600k to the 920 i7. 130 watt tdp rating obviously means very little. yes the 920 was clocked lower but the Sandy Bridge is using 32nm. when both are overclocked, the Sandy Bridge does not look too bad though.
 
Last edited:
What word is there on if Ivy Bridge-E 22nm is going to be plug 'n play with X79 motherboards ?

After using X58 for years already waiting for a real upgrade, I am getting a little weary now to pick up my 3930K and motherboard if I have to buy another motherboard and CPU in four months to use the 22nm version.
 
Grooveriding said:
What word is there on if Ivy Bridge-E 22nm is going to be plug 'n play with X79 motherboards ?

After using X58 for years already waiting for a real upgrade, I am getting a little weary now to pick up my 3930K and motherboard if I have to buy another motherboard and CPU in four months to use the 22nm version.
Click to expand...
yes any 2011 mobo should be able to take Ivy Bridge.


I think thats just the 1155 Ivy Bridge cpus coming out in 4 or 5 months though and 2011 versions will not be out until well after that. honestly I would just wait until Ivy Bridge comes out instead of going Sandy Bridge E.


nearly 4 years later and overclocked i7 920 users really do not have anything worthwhile to upgrade to.
 
Last edited:
3960x looks good and power consumption is not bad.

Im wondering if the other 2 cores could be unlocked or are they permanently disabled?
 
ShadowVVL said:
3960x looks good and power consumption is not bad.

Im wondering if the other 2 cores could be unlocked or are they permanently disabled?
Click to expand...

Rifterut said:
No it isnt, at least not from the AT review, havent had a chance to read the rest yet.
Click to expand...
um what the hell? in the Hard review its using 153 watts more than a 2600k. for a cpu that only has a 35 watt higher tpd that is pretty massive. a 2600k cpu by itself only uses about 65-70 watts so you could power a single system with THREE 2600k cpus with the wattage used in just ONE 3960 equipped system. so to you guys that's not a lot of power?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top