Sandy Brige

[Scali]

I would think of it this way: Building Intel now, will basically ensure that you'll need to buy a new motherboard and cpu to upgrade in the future. Buying AMD now and you'll only have to upgrade your CPU. If you need the performance RIGHT NOW, build Intel. If you don't, AMD is a far wiser choice, both for your budget and upgradability.

I'm not so sure about that...
There's no guarantee that even AMD's next generation will give the performance that Intel delivers today.

If you look at the Core2 Quad series for example, and how long it took AMD to build a CPU that could beat it... Would you really want to wait that long? Core i7 was already out by the time AMD could finally offer something competitive with the Q6600. So wold you want to 'upgrade' to an AMD CPU with Q6600-performance by then, or just go for an I7 920 instead? (which again is a CPU that has been pretty much untouchable for AMD for almost 2 years now).

 

[richierich1212]

Q6600-like performance? Quit trolling.

 

[Scali]

Q6600-like performance? Quit trolling.

Try the Phenom II review at Anandtech:
http://www.anandtech.com/show/2702/12
The Phenom X4 9950 BE struggles to keep up with the Q6600.
It literally took AMD years to beat the Q6600, even at stock. Nothing prior to the Phenom II (which was introduced after Nehalem was already on the market) could be considered an 'upgrade' from a Q6600...
And don't forget the extreme overclockability of the Q6600 and the great pricetag.

So if you'd go for the 'longevity' of the AMD socket, you'd basically be waiting for Phenom II for 2 years, while all this time you could have had a Q6600.

 

[richierich1212]

Q6600 did not have a great pricetag when it was released.

 

[Sickamore]

For intel it is. Amd have no more surprises anymore.

 

[extra]

i'm not so sure about that...
There's no guarantee that even amd's next generation will give the performance that intel delivers today.

If you look at the core2 quad series for example, and how long it took amd to build a cpu that could beat it... Would you really want to wait that long? Core i7 was already out by the time amd could finally offer something competitive with the q6600. So wold you want to 'upgrade' to an amd cpu with q6600-performance by then, or just go for an i7 920 instead? (which again is a cpu that has been pretty much untouchable for amd for almost 2 years now).

play us off keyboard cat!

 

[Dark Shroud]

If you're looking at the 930 then just go ahead and take the plunge, if you don't already have the mobo then get a combo package at Newegg for a discount.

Sandy Bridge will have two new sockets do to new voltage designs. LGA 1366 is a server socket so it will still be supported for years by Intel. And unlike the LGA 1156 socket which is locked at quad-core LGA 1366 has the hexa-core upgrade path with Gulftown instead of just a new Bloomfield chip.

Go ahead and take the plunge on the mobo & CPU and you'll be good for a few years just like LGA 775 with the Q*** CPUs are still respectable today with a little OC goodness.

 

[Nemesis 1]

http://www.v3.co.uk/v3/news/2268352/further-intel-sandy-bridge

 

[Sickamore]

What is the link for.

 

[khon]

What is the link for.

These two sentences:

Sandy Bridge, which will succeed the Nehalem architecture used in the current Core i3, i5 and i7 chips, will feature specialised circuitry to accelerate transcoding functions, the reports say.

Such transcoding functions will speed conversion of multimedia data such as video or audio files from one format to another, offloading this process from codecs handled in software to the CPU itself.​

​

 

[sxr7171]

The way I see it if gaming is your goal the current i7 processors when overclocked barely break a sweat for that role. Even if you need to transcode 50,000 songs or 10,000 movies these chips will get it done, just let it work for a few days and you're done. It's a one time deal. For real-time transcoding you are fine as well.

Now if your goal is to build a low power gaming PC then Sandy Bridge will likely offer an advantage since they have this thing that every 1% increase in power consumption should offer 2% performance increase.

If you are a folding@home user or really do some processor intensive tasks then maybe Sandy Bridge is worth waiting for otherwise these current processor have all the power you need and then some. I don't think that anyone is really CPU limited for gaming anymore. It's all about GPU.

 

[Kakkoii]

These two sentences:

Sandy Bridge, which will succeed the Nehalem architecture used in the current Core i3, i5 and i7 chips, will feature specialised circuitry to accelerate transcoding functions, the reports say.


Such transcoding functions will speed conversion of multimedia data such as video or audio files from one format to another, offloading this process from codecs handled in software to the CPU itself.

[/COLOR][/LEFT]

Ha.. Nvidia and ATI already beat Intel to hardware accelerated transcoding. And Intel's still isn't going to be anywhere near as fast as GPU based transcoding.