Sandy Bridge may be Un-Overclockable

[386DX]

But you guys... to be honest overclocking today is not what it was back then.

The amount of publicity it receives can be intense.
And a lot of board vendors also take pride in the OC scene.

I can see intel trying to sqeeze segment in here.
If you want the numbers, you pay for the numbers.
Thats basically how i see it.

But as others above said, a stock SB would be plenty fast for almost anything a normal person would use it for.
And with Turbo On, the average user would probably be over joyed in the upgrade purchase, unless it was a P55 / X58.

And for the die hard freaks like me... theres 2011... uhhh.. lets just hope they got that done correctly.
But you guys really need to think.. why did 1156 lose a pin to 1155, and why did 1366 grow a ton more and become 2011?
And i dont think its only because they got a cpu with +2 cores.

Maybe I'm on the wrong track but it looks like Intel is trying to unify the low end/mainstream desktop and the laptop socket with the 1155 pin version of SB. The higher integration (less options) into the CPU core reflects a mobile strategy where OC isn't an important factor. It makes sense when you look at the current Arrandale and Clarksdale CPU's are architecturally the same chip except for the speed they run at, cache size and of course socket. Also if I remember correctly the Intel roadmap showed SB as a replacement for clarkdale/arrandale (ie, i3/i5) but still had i7 (socket 1366) at the high end until middle of next year next year where it'll be replaced by the enthusiast version of SB (socket 2011).

 

[ydnas7]

did anyone notice on the video that it indicated the unlocked version would support up to 2666 DDR3 memory! (ie twice the the speed of 1333 DDR3 memory)

 

[Phynaz]

Didn't they same the same thing about Nahalem?

Edit: Nevermind, I see you guys already started discussing this.

 

[Daedalus685]

Overclocking today is not what it was back then indeed, but I think you are missing the point. Overclocking is about taking an inexpensive part (say $200) and make it behave like a $1000 part. This is the point. Intel does not like this. And Intel wants you to pay a premium and buy directlry the $1000 part.

Through the OC Intel tries to make money.
Through the OC I try to save money.

I work on heavy numerical analyses. Never paid for a CPU more than $200, always stayed on the edge. Thank you OC.

This is very true but how many of us can afford a $1000 CPU in the first place. I didn't get my q9550 instead of a qx9770 because I wanted to save money.. I did it because the extreme CPU was WAY outside of the budget (at least without sacrificing the SSDs or crossfire setup).

All I see this accomplishing is folks buying AMD instead, the K edition perhaps if they are only a little bit more expensive, or simply making due with the slower part.

Most enthusiasts are not totally rich. They set a budget and build to it. If that budget means an i7980x they get it, if it means a 750 they get that. I'm not sure how much over clocking comes into it except for choosing between equally priced parts.

But maybe it is just me... If I could afford 5 times as much for a CPU I'd get one every time. Would many people really simlpy just up 6 price points just to OC, or just to get the speed they woudl have had if they could oc the low end part?

 

[betasub]

Unless Sandy Bridge is a bigger jump in performance than the i7 was from the Core 2, people with 4GHz i7's will have faster processors than anyone who owns a Sandy Bridge.

But Intel isn't going to be marketing Sandy Bridge at users who have 4GHz i7. That's hardly the big demographic they are chasing with this.

 

[Ben90]

Overclocking today is not what it was back then indeed, but I think you are missing the point. Overclocking is about taking an inexpensive part (say $200) and make it behave like a $1000 part. This is the point. Intel does not like this. And Intel wants you to pay a premium and buy directlry the $1000 part.

For the most part, thats exactly what overclocking is;but, for mobo companies, they are more interested in advertising the LN2 stuff.

How many people bought an EVGA Classified because it got its reputations as an overclocking beast. This is all thanks to the extreme overclocking scene. People don't understand that the board is actually pretty slow for day to day use under normal overclock circumstances due to the NF200. Any standard Asus or Gigabyte board will run circles around the Classified except in very niche situations.

Extreme overclocking is still a very viable marketing campaign and its very important to board manufactures.


I think we are going to have to ask ourselves this though, is it worth paying a premium for an asynchronous capable mobo (if those even come to existence) or should you spend that premium on the K series?

 

[aigomorla]

is it worth paying a premium for an asynchronous capable mobo (if those even come to existence) or should you spend that premium on the K series?

My mentality is if it is faster, its worth it.

I am always looking for more speed.



I like to keep my crown on this forum and not retire it to anyone anytime soon...

 

[richierich1212]

Drwho? (I guess he works for Intel) on XS says that this topic isn't true, but he's under NDA and can't really go into specifics:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4483027&postcount=119

 

[aigomorla]

Drwho? (I guess he works for Intel) on XS says that this topic isn't true, but he's under NDA and can't really go into specifics:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4483027&postcount=119

not gonna comment.

:T

 

[khon]

Drwho? (I guess he works for Intel) on XS says that this topic isn't true, but he's under NDA and can't really go into specifics:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4483027&postcount=119

That's not what he said.

What he said is really unrelated to this thread, but it is relevant to something we talked about in another thread(http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2089138&page=2). Basically the speculation was that the amount of cache on the SB quadcores was a clue, and that is showed the i7-2600 did not have a GPU, which he is saying it does.

 

[aigomorla]

That's not what he said.

What he said is really unrelated to this thread, but it is relevant to something we talked about in another thread(http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2089138&page=2). Basically the speculation was that the amount of cache on the SB quadcores was a clue, and that is showed the i7-2600 did not have a GPU, which he is saying it does.

UGH..

He was in the overclocking division of intel.
He used to be invited to a lot of events.

He is no longer welcomed because a lot of overclocking kings can not tollerate him.

He never tells the truth. He will try to misword it somehow only to confuse the hell out of you.

He has done this to me, to Movieman, and to a lot of others.
And you can see him trying to do it to Hans. LOL.

If he was so important on XS. why isnt his name a special color.
Also why did intel assign a new REP to come out the OC competitions.

Take all his statement with a grain of salt unless he decides to violate his NDA and show us proof.

This is the last bit i will say on him.


In short, you guys are defending an employee of intel, who has a hugh fan base in intel.

 

[bryanW1995]

This is very true but how many of us can afford a $1000 CPU in the first place. I didn't get my q9550 instead of a qx9770 because I wanted to save money.. I did it because the extreme CPU was WAY outside of the budget (at least without sacrificing the SSDs or crossfire setup).

All I see this accomplishing is folks buying AMD instead, the K edition perhaps if they are only a little bit more expensive, or simply making due with the slower part.

Most enthusiasts are not totally rich. They set a budget and build to it. If that budget means an i7980x they get it, if it means a 750 they get that. I'm not sure how much over clocking comes into it except for choosing between equally priced parts.

But maybe it is just me... If I could afford 5 times as much for a CPU I'd get one every time. Would many people really simlpy just up 6 price points just to OC, or just to get the speed they woudl have had if they could oc the low end part?

budget has nothing to do with it for me. I mean, 15 yrs ago sure it mattered a lot, but today I just think it's way more fun to oc a cheaper part to make it faster than a $1000 cpu. could I take the extra $700-$800 and spend it on other parts? sure I could, but my last few upgrades I've kept hd's, keyboards, etc. The only real upgrade in that area I've made in the last 5 years is to finally get an ssd. That was definitely a better upgrade than getting the i7 system btw, even though I mostly game and everyone told me not to expect much difference in games.

But Intel isn't going to be marketing Sandy Bridge at users who have 4GHz i7. That's hardly the big demographic they are chasing with this.

huh? so you're telling me that the guy with a 4ghz i7 just sat out the last round of upgrades? highly unlikely imho. people who go through the time/effort to get 4 ghz out of an i7 will jump on the next thing that is faster. and honestly many will like the significantly lower power draw, some because it saves heat and some because it helps the environment.

 

[aigomorla]

huh? so you're telling me that the guy with a 4ghz i7 just sat out the last round of upgrades? highly unlikely imho. people who go through the time/effort to get 4 ghz out of an i7 will jump on the next thing that is faster. and honestly many will like the significantly lower power draw, some because it saves heat and some because it helps the environment.

the only way to get faster tho is by going to a completely new setup / platform.

And the cost on that platform will be greater then the current X58.

In a short sense Intel WINS / PROFITS from overclockers.

Whatever they cant sell to us sucker overclockers, it gets shipped to enterprise where they can sell it in bulk.

Intel Wins period.

You want numbers you pay for them. That is there model now, and its really SAD.

 

[extra]

UGH..

He was in the overclocking division of intel.
He used to be invited to a lot of events.

Yeah, interesting info (from drwho), it's also kind of like jfamd saying on one of the forums (forget which) that bulldozer will "crush" (forget the exact wording) sandy bridge in non-avx fpu stuff. Maybe so, but I'm in the "Spinful...errr wishful... thinking" camp there. (Not to create a bd vs sb debate i hope they are both great, but hafta take everything that the company reps for amd and intel post with a bit of skepticism unless they are giving hard numbers and facts and not just opinions and vague remarks.)

What I can say for sure is that this looks like a huge spew of b.s.:

"One important parameter of the integration happening, with the GPU getting into the CPUs (as Core i3/i5 already) is that the buses and all the programmability included in those new generation processors can impact dramatically the performance and power usage. The Taiwan or Chinese guy running the SB does not have the receipe, and those part can behave very far from what the final product will do, a wrong code in the power control unit can change your performance by massive factors, latencies can change, bandwitch can be limited by not well programmed power saving features.
Policies between sub systems can be conflicting ... This is a very hard work to do it right, and the tool required to figure out those thing are not available yet outside ..."

Still, all this talk about SB doesn't really answer the real question, which imho is: how good is the GPU in SB?

 

[aigomorla]

Still, all this talk about SB doesn't really answer the real question, which imho is: how good is the GPU in SB?

this isnt new when its from Dr. Who.

Take his statements with a big grain of salt.

 

[Tsavo]

this isnt new when its from Dr. Who.

Take his statements with a big grain of salt.

What's wrong with salt? We'd all be dead if we had no salt.

 

[aigomorla]

What's wrong with salt? We'd all be dead if we had no salt.

i like it only when pepper is next to her and they start jaming. :sneaky:

okey.. sorry for freezing this thread over with that lame joke..

i'll shut up now.

 

[cbn]

Are you referring to the CK505 integration? That's for BOM reduction. The amount of PCB space saved by this would be trivial. We aren't talking cellphones here.

I'm disappointed but that makes sense (ie, when a company sells 200+ million CPUs per year every dollar shaved matters.)

I'm just wondering what kind of fallout will see from SB's clock integration:

Enthusiast Mainboard manufacturers looking for new ways of attaining asynchronus clocks vs just providing extra power circuitry for the unlocked multiplier chips? Which cpmbination will be cheaper to enthusiasts? Which method more interesting? (I'll bet asynchronus clocks would be a lot more fun to tinker with)

Also what could happen on the level of mobile? Will Intel eventually offer unlocked multipliers for Laptops in the same way AMD is doing right now ith its new "Black Edition" Laptops? (which I am still waiting to see released) If so, could that be a way for certain mainboard manufacturers to stay in a growth phase? (ie, even if they fail at unlocking asynchronus clocks other avenues could still be open for them.)

 

[Idontcare]

UGH..

He was in the overclocking division of intel.
He used to be invited to a lot of events.

He is no longer welcomed because a lot of overclocking kings can not tollerate him.

He never tells the truth. He will try to misword it somehow only to confuse the hell out of you.

He has done this to me, to Movieman, and to a lot of others.
And you can see him trying to do it to Hans. LOL.

If he was so important on XS. why isnt his name a special color.
Also why did intel assign a new REP to come out the OC competitions.

Take all his statement with a grain of salt unless he decides to violate his NDA and show us proof.

This is the last bit i will say on him.


In short, you guys are defending an employee of intel, who has a hugh fan base in intel.

Ouch. But seriously Aigo, quit beating around the bush and tell us just how you really feel!

 

[IntelUser2000]

What I can say for sure is that this looks like a huge spew of b.s.:

"One important parameter of the integration happening, with the GPU getting into the CPUs (as Core i3/i5 already) is that the buses and all the programmability included in those new generation processors can impact dramatically the performance and power usage. The Taiwan or Chinese guy running the SB does not have the receipe, and those part can behave very far from what the final product will do, a wrong code in the power control unit can change your performance by massive factors, latencies can change, bandwitch can be limited by not well programmed power saving features.
Policies between sub systems can be conflicting ... This is a very hard work to do it right, and the tool required to figure out those thing are not available yet outside ..."

Its not entirely wrong. He might be exaggerating on his words, but not wrong.

With the Core uarch Intel allowed more flexible data prefetchers that can be tweaked to certain market segments when they deem it necessary. The Woodcrest core for Xeons might be tweaked for server apps, the mobile Merom core for better power characteristics and Conroe desktop core for desktop usage.

On the leaked Sandy Bridge benchmark by Cooaler, he said newer drivers gave 5% performance boost. Who knows, maybe we'll get at least 1-2% more on the final version.

I cannot imagine Intel making power features so aggressive that it'll change instruction execution latencies and such, but perhaps there could be an impact as well. After all, the PCU has its own firmware that can be updated.

 

[Dadofamunky]

I'm not too surprised this is coming up as an issue; Intel wants to squeeze every dollar it can for its quarterly results. The OC community has been getting a lot of free MHz for awhile now. Time to grab X58 boards and $200 i7 930s at Micro Center while you can! I doubt SB will bypass that platform by much if anything. By the way, I laugh when I hear people complaining about overpriced CPUs when I used to buy $700 386-25s and $700 Taiwanese clone mobos for them.

 

[beginner99]

Not surprising either, as they basically tested this approach with the i7-875K and i5-655K processors. The premium you pay for the unlocked multiplier is $30 for the i5 and $40 for the i7. I'm guessing SB will be something very similar.

the 875k was actually priced alot cheaper than the 870.
But it's a save assumption shops must lower 870 price because no one with a sane mind will buy one.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3742/intels-core-i5655k-core-i7875k-overclocked-and-analysed-

 

[khon]

I found some additional slides for those interested:

Sandy Bridge-DT (LGA-1155)

Sandy Bridge-B2 (LGA-2011)

 

[khon]

One thing I wanted to ask regarding the first of the slides I posted. If the CPU exceedes the TDP when in turbo mode, presumably that means it can only maintain this higher speed for a short time before the chip becomes too hot, but what if you have better than stock cooling ? Will it be able to maintain turbo speed indefinetely, or is it on a timer of some sort ?

 

[Acanthus]

I won't buy a CPU that can't be overclocked unless its price/performance is better than competing CPUs after being overclocked to the max.

The best-case scenario is for a mobo manufacturer to find a way around this or for Intel to quit the shenanigans.

Intel pulled all the licenses for the chipset makers.

Now you see why.