Sandy Bridge-E benchmarks on Techpowerup.com

[bunnyfubbles]

what X79 was supposed to be would have justified a s2011 rig regardless of a placeholder SB-E (until IB-E at least), but with the nerfing of X79 to basically be no better than Z68 (if not worse considering lack of quicksync, etc), I can't bring myself to endorse such an abortion of a platform.

Without a CPU to truly distance itself from 1366 or a chipset to distance itself from 1155, I have to hold off until a second revision chipset for s2011 and/or Ivy

It's worth it if you've got the money and you love top end hardware.

Sandy Bridge E, thank you for not disappointing. YOU ROCK.

again, its disappointing relative to what it could have been as a total platform, I have no idea how Intel is justifying the cost of X79, its such a ripoff compared to X58 when it first came out or now Z68 for 1155. At least the 3930K is a significant step in the right direction.

 

[Idontcare]

And thus I feel like an idiot. Thanks for clarifying that, Toyota.

And now that I realize what you're talking about, I'm a bit at a loss for what HardOCP did. Power consumption at idle should not be increasing like that unless Kyle has turned off all the power saving features. Similarly I'd have to question his SNB-E stock power consumption at load. Intel's TDPs are never precise, but 334W doesn't make any sense in the context of his other numbers.

ViRGE, I come to the same conclusion. For all the tests I did with my 2600K up to 5GHz OC'ing, the idle power usage was spot-on the same across the entire range.

Idle power for the 2600K at 4.8GHz should have been the same as idle power for the stock 2600K unless the power saving features were disabled.

(in which case, yeah, of course power is higher when you disable the things that were designed to reduce power )

 

[BTRY B 529th FA BN]

This makes it harder to resist upgrading to a 2500K, for a gaming rig, ARRRGH

 

[classy]

Not worth the Cost for 95% (+) of people.

Yea pretty much. It will only show its true power in a few select cases over say the 2600K. But this chip will be 2-3 times more . Great chip though.

 

[zlejedi]

This makes it harder to resist upgrading to a 2500K, for a gaming rig, ARRRGH

Think about Ivy Bridge Surely you can wait those few months on that "Slow" rig of yours

 

[ViRGE]

This i agree with, i think it would have been alot more appealing to people if they had stuck with the original plan of PCIe 3 at launch, and stuck with 10 SATA 6/SAS ports and 4 SATA 2 ports and native USB3.

Well to be fair, it technically has PCIe 3. The problem is that there's nothing to validate it against, which means Intel has to be careful on what they claim it can do. Assuming NVIDIA and AMD don't go crazy, you should be able to drop in a PCIe 3 video card in the future and it will hum right along.

The extra SATA ports would have been nice though. But was USB 3 ever a confirmed feature?

 

[RussianSensation]

The Intel Core i7-3930K is actually not bad. For $555 you get better performance than a $1000 990X. So technically on the high-end, if you don't care for 'bragging rights', then an overclocked 3930K will still be very fast for less $. For gamers, definitely not worth it. But this is primarily a powerhouse/workstation platform for someone who actually needs a fast 6-core CPU. For that type of user, the $555 asking price isn't that bad. This power user might be running raided PCIe SSDs, and 2-3 high-end GPUs, in which case the PCIe lanes on the 1155 may be insufficient.

I think the most disappointment part here is that Intel should have released LGA2011 in January of 2011 along-side with the 1155 socket. Being almost 1 year late is disappointing. 3820 delayed until February? Well, there is literally no point to that CPU given that IVB will be out very soon from that point.

 

[MacLeod1592]

I kinda think its a little disappointing. It does perform better than the 2600k but not by a whole lot and certainly not enough to justify its $600-1000 price tag.

I think if you need a rig now, stick with the 2600 or 2500 but if you can wait, hold out til spring when Ivy Bridge comes calling. Don't get me wrong, its not Bulldozer by any means cause it still outperforms, just not enough to justify its price tag.

 

[grkM3]

Its best to wait untill ivy e with a more mature chipset with more features on this platform,it will rull all once they add a few things.

I dont know how intel can take out things that are on the older 1155 chipset and charge almost double for the boards(not intels fault)but the boards are still up there.

If anyone has a solid 1155 board like an asus mive there is no reason to even think about going 2011 and its a no brainer to just wait untill 1155 ivys come out.

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Awesome platform and chip. The problem is software available to utilize 6 cores is not there at the moment for desktop enthusiasts. I could see 2011 being like the x-58 where early adopters have had many years of having a top end pc.

 

[imaheadcase]

Sigh, when will people learn to stop bitching about power consumption..ON A PERFORMANCE RIG.

Do you drive a Porsche and complain that the engine is to big?

 

[grkM3]

Sigh, when will people learn to stop bitching about power consumption..ON A PERFORMANCE RIG.

Do you drive a Porsche and complain that the engine is to big?

bad comparison

a gt3rs makes 500hp with a 4.0 flat 6 cylinder...thats 125hp/L and its N/A no turbo or blower.

If intel was like porche there sandy e's would consume 50w tdp lol

P cars are very efficient

you should of said the zo6 vette with its HUGE v8 to make the same power as the P car

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

You guys do realize now that intel has no competition other than itself we won't see ivy bridge til next holiday season.
They aren't going to kill off these 6 core chips by releasing ivy bridge 6 months later

 

[grkM3]

You guys do realize now that intel has no competition other than itself we won't see ivy bridge til next holiday season.
They aren't going to kill off these 6 core chips by releasing ivy bridge 6 months later

yes we will because ivy birdge will make intel more money,they will get a heck of alot more chips/waffer

Ivy b was set to come out sometime in 2012 from the get go so dont worry,intel will launch it and ill bet anything we will se an 8 core ivy E on socket 2011

 

[Idontcare]

I don't get why anyone would buy the $1k 3960X when they can save ~$450 and get the $555 3930K?

Does the 3MB cache make any discernible difference whatsoever?

 

[imaheadcase]

bad comparison

a gt3rs makes 500hp with a 4.0 flat 6 cylinder...thats 125hp/L and its N/A no turbo or blower.

If intel was like porche there sandy e's would consume 50w tdp lol

P cars are very efficient

you should of said the zo6 vette with its HUGE v8 to make the same power as the P car

Whatever you get the idea. So it worked.

 

[jacktesterson]

This makes it harder to resist upgrading to a 2500K, for a gaming rig, ARRRGH

Why do you need an upgrade? Not being smart, Just wondering.

You have an i7 920 pushing a 5770 and another @ 4.2 with a 480.

I see no reason to upgrade (Gaming)

 

[OILFIELDTRASH]

Why do you need an upgrade? Not being smart, Just wondering.

You have an i7 920 pushing a 5770 and another @ 4.2 with a 480.

I see no reason to upgrade (Gaming)

I have a very similar rig. 3.8ghz i7 930 gtx 480 120hz monitor and I want to upgrade as well. For me the reason is that newer games are becoming CPU bottlenecked. Look at some of the benchmarks. You might see a game gets 80fps with a 4ghz i7 but 87fps with a 4.8ghz 2500k. Most people are like well I see no difference in 80 to 87fps cause they are on 60hz monitors. To me I have a 120hz monitor and nvidia 3d kit. So 80fps to 87 makes a difference to me especially in 3D where your fps are cut in half. That could be the difference in being unplayable or playable in 3D.

 

[ViRGE]

I don't get why anyone would buy the $1k 3960X when they can save ~$450 and get the $555 3930K?

Does the 3MB cache make any discernible difference whatsoever?

I have to imagine it makes the most sense when you have money to burn, you need top performance, and you won't overclock. I.E. you're buying very expensive OEM systems.

 

[TheUnk]

Well this is a let down..

I've been wanting to upgrade my i7-930. It actually bottlenecks my 3x580s in BF3 and I can't get it stable over 4.2GHz.

Tempted to go for a 2700K now...

 

[AtenRa]

This platform is only suited for people requiring a 6 core 12 threads CPU's and gamers with triple CrossFire/SLI.

I would consider the quad core 3820 but the time it will be launch is very close to IB and that spoils it.

 

[jacktesterson]

Well this is a let down..

I've been wanting to upgrade my i7-930. It actually bottlenecks my 3x580s in BF3 and I can't get it stable over 4.2GHz.

Tempted to go for a 2700K now...

Don't.

Get a 2500k if your gaming.

You won't much of a difference and save money.

If your sold on HT, go with the 2600k. The 2700k isn't worth the premium.

 

[TheUnk]

This platform is only suited for people requiring a 6 core 12 threads CPU's and gamers with triple CrossFire/SLI.

I would consider the quad core 3820 but the time it will be launch is very close to IB and that spoils it.

How is it worth it for triple SLI? I thought the current difference between 16x and 8x is like 1% so I must be missing something here.

 

[BlahBlahYouToo]

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?

what about the extra memory bw?

 

[Idontcare]

I have to imagine it makes the most sense when you have money to burn, you need top performance, and you won't overclock. I.E. you're buying very expensive OEM systems.

Ah, that makes sense, hadn't considered the non-OC'ers out there and the whole professional desktop space.