• 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 delayed to Q1 2012

QuantumPion said:
GTFO! This has been the longest wait between performance parts ever. 3 years since Nehalem was released.
Click to expand...

Well that is not entirely accurate. The current Sandy Bridge lineup is faster than Nehalem in applications that the general public actually uses.


For some reason I would like a more reliable source than the one in the OP, however.


What Intel marks as "Mainstream" or "Performance" in their slides is just pure marketing. It's how they perform that matters.

And seeing how they are the fastest chips on the market, I think you can call the 2500/2600k "performace" 🙂
 
OCGuy said:
Well that is not entirely accurate. The current Sandy Bridge lineup is faster than Nehalem in applications that the general public actually uses.


For some reason I would like a more reliable source than the one in the OP, however.


What Intel marks as "Mainstream" or "Performance" in their slides is just pure marketing. It's how they perform that matters.

And seeing how they are the fastest chips on the market, I think you can call the 2500/2600k "performace" 🙂
Click to expand...

This is true but most of us know the current version of SB is not a replacement for 1366 so you both have valid points.
 
It's not a huge delay. I didn't think it was supposed to come out until at least November. I hope we still get new video cards this fall at at least.
 
OCGuy said:
Well that is not entirely accurate. The current Sandy Bridge lineup is faster than Nehalem in applications that the general public actually uses.


For some reason I would like a more reliable source than the one in the OP, however.


What Intel marks as "Mainstream" or "Performance" in their slides is just pure marketing. It's how they perform that matters.

And seeing how they are the fastest chips on the market, I think you can call the 2500/2600k "performace" 🙂
Click to expand...

IMO its just as much about the X79 platform than just the SB-E CPUs

Quad channel memory, 2*16x or 4*8x PCI-e lanes for graphics, up to 8 GB/s of bandwidth for Intel's SATA controller - up to 10 SATA6 ports + 4 SATA3 ports - with SAS capability, with Intel Gigabit Ethernet as a bonus

compare that to dual channel, 2*8x PCI-e graphics and only 2 SATA6 and 4 SATA3 ports

So while SandyBridge on 1155 is more than enough for most users, and particularly gamers, it really comes up short as a workstation platform despite having enough CPU performance.
 
OCGuy said:
Well that is not entirely accurate. The current Sandy Bridge lineup is faster than Nehalem in applications that the general public actually uses.


For some reason I would like a more reliable source than the one in the OP, however.


What Intel marks as "Mainstream" or "Performance" in their slides is just pure marketing. It's how they perform that matters.

And seeing how they are the fastest chips on the market, I think you can call the 2500/2600k "performace" 🙂
Click to expand...

But Intel DOES have them in the Performance market in their roadmap. I don't get what you're arguing about.
 
gevorg said:
Glad I jumped on Sandy Bridge early this year. This will probably also delay Ivy Bridge.
Click to expand...

:'(

I'm willing to place a bet that IBs won't be seen before Q3 '12 now.

😱

(Complete speculation follows... remember that I am interested in buying BD so I'm not an AMD hater.) IF I were the suspicious sort I might even say that Intel has an inside track on BD performance and finding that it's not presenting any challenge at all they figure why should they cannibalize their own existing lineup sales? Yet another reason why vigorous competition on the high end is beneficial to everyone.
 
bridito said:
:'(

I'm willing to place a bet that IBs won't be seen before Q3 '12 now.

😱

(Complete speculation follows... remember that I am interested in buying BD so I'm not an AMD hater.) IF I were the suspicious sort I might even say that Intel has an inside track on BD performance and finding that it's not presenting any challenge at all they figure why should they cannibalize their own existing lineup sales? Yet another reason why vigorous competition on the high end is beneficial to everyone.
Click to expand...

Remember that Intel competes with itself (more specifically the 80% of the market it sold its CPU's to last year and the year before) for upgrade and replacement sales.

Delaying IB means delaying a huge volume of sales that it needs and wants, even if AMD fails to offer a compelling product in comparison to the chips already in everyone's rigs Intel still needs to.

The TAM for upgrading outdated rigs to Sandy Bridge class performance is only $30-40B, to get the next $30-40B of sales (i.e. 2012's revenue) they need to compel consumers to replace their CPU's (80% of which are Intel CPU's).

AMD could go bankrupt today and Intel's need to sell IB will persist. They must make last years CPU's obsolete by launching next year's CPU's or they won't have much in the way of sales next year.
 
My 980X will be close to two years old when I replace it if this is true. This will be the longest I have had a single CPU.
 
Intel17 said:
Damn!
Click to expand...

got to wait even longer. I've been putting off the upgrade from core2q as I want sb-e numbers.

On the up side, at least IB is going to be nearly on top so performance comparisons will be easier when deciding between them.

This does not read well to me for the performance of AMD's offerings. 🙁
 
OCGuy said:
Well that is not entirely accurate. The current Sandy Bridge lineup is faster than Nehalem in applications that the general public actually uses.
Click to expand...

True but I already have an overclocked Nehalem i7 920, the 2600k is not a big enough upgrade to warrant the cost for me.
 
Wait and see. It was only the other day JFAMD was saying Q3, and while he is AMD not Intel, I'm sure he has a pretty good idea why he thinks that when it has supposedly been Q4 for several weeks.
 
Intel17 said:
Intel's *really* screwing up their high end stuff.
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure they're still sitting on it. Easy to just keep pumping out what they've got, and the ASPs are very high, particularly for the higher end Xeons in workstations and servers.
 
Idontcare said:
Remember that Intel competes with itself (more specifically the 80% of the market it sold its CPU's to last year and the year before) for upgrade and replacement sales.

Delaying IB means delaying a huge volume of sales that it needs and wants, even if AMD fails to offer a compelling product in comparison to the chips already in everyone's rigs Intel still needs to.

The TAM for upgrading outdated rigs to Sandy Bridge class performance is only $30-40B, to get the next $30-40B of sales (i.e. 2012's revenue) they need to compel consumers to replace their CPU's (80% of which are Intel CPU's).

AMD could go bankrupt today and Intel's need to sell IB will persist. They must make last years CPU's obsolete by launching next year's CPU's or they won't have much in the way of sales next year.
Click to expand...

As my grandma used to say "from your mouth to God's ears" or in this case Intel's ears. I would like nothing better for these long awaited high end CPUs to finally be released so that I can retire my i7 940. IF this report is accurate do you see SB-E and IB being released close together, or do you think that Intel will still want to space them out a bit?
 
Well Damn!

May as well just wait for Haswell at this point. All the new instructions coming with Haswell look really impressive.
 
Wow... The chance of Intel facing problems with what is indeed a huge leap in manufacturing technology is something that i see no one speaking about... But yes, AMD's BD must suck... even though there's a guy with SR2 rig as a desktop at XS saying that it would best a i7 990x...

You don't have to believe me... just search this user, 'rintamarotta' on XS and his post 🙂
You may want to believe a guy using SR2 for a desktop, who has access to information on BD
 
garagisti said:
Wow... The chance of Intel facing problems with what is indeed a huge leap in manufacturing technology is something that i see no one speaking about... But yes, AMD's BD must suck... even though there's a guy with SR2 rig as a desktop at XS saying that it would best a i7 990x...

You don't have to believe me... just search this user, 'rintamarotta' on XS and his post 🙂
You may want to believe a guy using SR2 for a desktop, who has access to information on BD
Click to expand...

? Are you talking about SB-E (which is to be produced on what is by now a rather mature 32nm process) or Ivy Bridge?

And where did BD and some guy with access to it enter the equation here? Are you positing that BD is so strong that Intel is delaying SB-E to ensure it can trump BD? I'm not getting the connection, hoping you'll shed some light on your post.
 
The IB and E delay couldn't be due to maybe a problem in manufactoring or something? No , not the mighty Intel. :\

Get over it already. The chances for the delays have more to do with possible chip problems than AMD not having a product.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top