Makaveli
Diamond Member
I think that is possible.
Thinks like this are hard to judge there are no hard metrics to base it on.
-
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 vs haswell, 30% better clock per clock?
Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
I think that is possible.
Thinks like this are hard to judge there are no hard metrics to base it on.
dragantoe
Senior member
stock speeds easily
Concillian
Diamond Member
I don't think this is the case:
http://anandtech.com/bench/product/677?vs=47
Ivy i3 still gets beat by a small margin in most multithreaded benchmarks, a Pentium would fare even worse.
Probably a ~3.5 GHz dual haswell with HT at least until it starts winning out in MOST multithreaded benchmarks.
Also not sure why 'el etro' bumped a several month old thread here.
Faster in what?
Haswell Pentium will be faster in single threaded performance but certainly not faster in multi threaded performance where the i7 920 will have a massive advantage since it is 4 cores and 8 threads versus Pentium's 2 cores and 2 threads.
Sandy bridge is roughly 30% slower clock per clock compared to Haswell in multithreaded applications. However, the majority of gaming benchmarks do not reflect anywhere near those numbers. The higher the resolution, the less the CPU makes an impact on your fps. If you are talking about 1440p, I would expect less than 5% performance difference between Haswell and Sandy at the same clock speed.
ShintaiDK
Lifer
Single and multithreaded is terrible terms when used with CPUs with multiple cores. The G3220 will certainly be faster in 1 and 2 threads. And possible 3. But is also depends on the scaling factor of the application/game. It doesnt matter much if 4 cores is used, and it only offers 10% over 2 cores.
Last edited:
Single threaded performance usually refers to apps that run off of one thread, or 1 core vs. 1 core performance. Multi-threaded refers to applications which can fully utilize all the threads you throw at it.
I'll leave it at that and let this comparison do the rest:
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/254/Intel_Core_i7_i7-920_vs_Intel_Pentium_Dual-Core_G3220.html
I'll leave it at that and let this comparison do the rest:
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compare/254/Intel_Core_i7_i7-920_vs_Intel_Pentium_Dual-Core_G3220.html
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
I can't tell how much the OP has exploited his OC'ing potential. Maybe I missed something in the posts here.
I'd been very cautious about voltage and diligent about temperatures as I tried to pick up a Centigrade here and grain of rice there. Now, I've given my i7-2600K a shakedown test sequence, hopefully ironed out some shortcomings and tweaked the BIOS some more after finding another sweet-spot at 4.7 Ghz. I think I'm ready to shoot for 4.8, but I don't think it's going to be a 24/7 setting: My best estimate has the load vCORE bumping up too close to 1.4V.
This being said, one could become more casual about pushing V's and Mhz a little higher, knowing that you're not likely to do too much damage and that you "eventually" plan on upgrading to some newer configuration.
The one thing that impressed me, noted in my posts to some other similar threads, is the Cinebench 15 results I got in reaction to the general call to post scores, as made in another thread several weeks ago. On that one, single benchmark, I'm neck-and-neck with an i7-4770K @ 4.4Ghz. Another survey conducted here recently shows that 4.4 is about the most probable preferred clock for a Haswell K.
You can't discount instruction-set enhancements and other features of Haswell performance at seemingly lower clocks. But any difference just doesn't seem worth it now from a sane, benefits-v-costs, practical perspective. It would be different if you had an LGA-775 C2Q, or maybe even a low-end, OC'd Nehalem. A "mainstreamer" with a five year old system might have a hardware failure in need of total replacement, and there I would say "Go for it! Get a Haswell system!"
Might as well "consume" your SB-K as you eyeball technical development. Personally, I'm planning now to build a Haswell-E. And for some time after the fall release, I'm going to take a lot of time thinking about it before I make final parts selection and place my orders. I might even wait until some months into 2015.
I can only say that my SB 2600K with Z68 is the best darn system I've ever had.
I'd been very cautious about voltage and diligent about temperatures as I tried to pick up a Centigrade here and grain of rice there. Now, I've given my i7-2600K a shakedown test sequence, hopefully ironed out some shortcomings and tweaked the BIOS some more after finding another sweet-spot at 4.7 Ghz. I think I'm ready to shoot for 4.8, but I don't think it's going to be a 24/7 setting: My best estimate has the load vCORE bumping up too close to 1.4V.
This being said, one could become more casual about pushing V's and Mhz a little higher, knowing that you're not likely to do too much damage and that you "eventually" plan on upgrading to some newer configuration.
The one thing that impressed me, noted in my posts to some other similar threads, is the Cinebench 15 results I got in reaction to the general call to post scores, as made in another thread several weeks ago. On that one, single benchmark, I'm neck-and-neck with an i7-4770K @ 4.4Ghz. Another survey conducted here recently shows that 4.4 is about the most probable preferred clock for a Haswell K.
You can't discount instruction-set enhancements and other features of Haswell performance at seemingly lower clocks. But any difference just doesn't seem worth it now from a sane, benefits-v-costs, practical perspective. It would be different if you had an LGA-775 C2Q, or maybe even a low-end, OC'd Nehalem. A "mainstreamer" with a five year old system might have a hardware failure in need of total replacement, and there I would say "Go for it! Get a Haswell system!"
Might as well "consume" your SB-K as you eyeball technical development. Personally, I'm planning now to build a Haswell-E. And for some time after the fall release, I'm going to take a lot of time thinking about it before I make final parts selection and place my orders. I might even wait until some months into 2015.
I can only say that my SB 2600K with Z68 is the best darn system I've ever had.
Last edited:
That's conflating terms. Single threaded is a single thread. Multi-threaded is any number of threads greater than one. It does not mean it scales infinitely, that is an entirely different thing, commonly called "embarrassingly parallel." A program with 80% of the work falling into thread 1 and 20% of the work falling into thread 2 is multi-threaded. A program with 25% falling evenly onto 4 threads is also multi-threaded. There is no commonly used single term for this as far as I know. People usually just say "this program is more parallel than that one."
Each program is going to have its own unique thread usage patterns and thus the importance of single thread performance vs number of available threads is going to be a sliding scale, and not binary
Last edited:
tweakboy
Diamond Member
Your wrong sir, its 50 percent gain. NOT!!!!!!!!!!!! There is no real world difference, 5 to 10 percent if that.
cytg111
Lifer
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
It's my understanding that they won't offer a 4-core E chip like the IB-E i7-4820K Skt-2011. It is likely the Haswell-E will come in two flavors: 8-core and 6-core. . . . Unless I misread something about that. . .
BrightCandle
Diamond Member
Doesn't help for gaming but there is evidence at Phoronix and a few other places that Haswell is pretty significant for developers. Compilation has a lot of branches and the increased ports and prediction cache really help compilers out with more speculation resources and better prediction. I have been seeing 20-30% been used which is quite a bit, but about the best we should expect from Haswell compared to IB.
Concillian
Diamond Member
Don't worry too much about the OP. He started this thread like 4-5 months ago. Someone recently bumped it.
I think the OP got what he needed from the thread a few months ago and has done whatever he's going to do.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
This seems to be a volatile topic spread across a few threads the address it. I'm more concerned that the desktop PC may go the way of the steamboat, and I'll just become some mainstreamer-come-lately to mobile devices and the burden of extra wireless account subscriptions.
Makaveli
Diamond Member
The|Hunter
Member
Well in Cinebench15 single threaded benchmark
my 4770k @ 4.7ghz, ram 2133mhz acted as 4930k @ 5Ghz 2133mhz quad channel ram, we both got 188cb.
my 4770k @ 4.7ghz, ram 2133mhz acted as 4930k @ 5Ghz 2133mhz quad channel ram, we both got 188cb.
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
Did you de-lid your Ivy Bridge? What you say about the processor may well be true except for their choice of TIM-goop instead of solder with the non-E processors. The only thing I can say again (with my SB 2600K): You may get high clocks; you may get Cinebench scores close to the Haswell 4770K; but there are enhancements to the instruction set and other features that you don't get with the earlier processor.
That being said: I still love my 2600K. As for your IB, that's pretty darn good -- 4.8Ghz with a corsair H80. My recollection of comparison reviews seemed to show my D14 falling short by about 0.9C from the H80, and I know that replacing the two Noctua fans with a single Akasa 140R gives me a 5C advantage over the review benchmarks.
so, a topic fit more for an i7-920 than a Pentium G3220?
BonzaiDuck
Lifer
Not sure exactly what you mean by that. Sure -- if you had an i7-920 and wondered about upgrading, it's been maybe at least four years -- whenever socket-1366 was released.
Are we concerned about what to do with upgrade possibilities for an $80 Haswell? Can't say. If it turns out the $80 Haswell falls short in some way, it's the user's fault for not picking what he needed from the processor line.
I can see upgrading a bunch of C2D Wolfdales with some of the more modest Haswell offerings. But even that is all about "want" versus "need" versus budget and common-sense.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 25K
-
-
-
