[Tom's Hardware] Sandy Bridge-E and X79 Platform Preview

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

are you suggesting there won't be Ivy Bridge for s2011?

I'm pretty sure there will eventually be cheaper 6 or even 8+ core CPUs available for s2011 based off of Ivy Bridge, it really wouldn't be too crazy to go for a quadcore for s2011 to hold over until such options become available

although I'd ultimately agree, with all the nerfing they've done to X79 it really doesn't make sense to go with anything other than a 6 core part considering the overall platform ultimately isn't much better for desktop use vs. current s1155 options, heck, X79 looks hardly better than X58. SB-E vs. Westmere and X79 vs. P67/Z68 is really underwhelming

Ivy Bridge does not equal Ivy Bridge-E...

But yeah, there's really very little that makes X79 better than P67. As a matter of fact, Ivy Bridge already has the upper hand against Sandy Bridge-E when it comes out because it has PCIe 3.0 support, and there's some motherboards out that will support both Ivy Bridge and PCIe 3.0. To get that on Ivy Bridge-E people will have to wait around two more quarters.

Since PCIe 3.0 effectively doubles bandwidth, devices that support it will be getting the equivalent of PCIe 2.0 X8 with PCIe 3.0 X4, and PCIe 2.0 X16 with PCIe 3.0 X8. :thumbsup:

 

[blackened23]

Ivy Bridge does not equal Ivy Bridge-E...

But yeah, there's really very little that makes X79 better than P67. As a matter of fact, Ivy Bridge already has the upper hand against Sandy Bridge-E when it comes out because it has PCIe 3.0 support, and there's some motherboards out that will support both Ivy Bridge and PCIe 3.0. To get that on Ivy Bridge-E people will have to wait around two more quarters.

Since PCIe 3.0 effectively doubles bandwidth, devices that support it will be getting the equivalent of PCIe 2.0 X8 with PCIe 3.0 X4, and PCIe 2.0 X16 with PCIe 3.0 X8. :thumbsup:

This is all speculation on my part, but I think intel will follow IB up with IB-E very quickly. I don't think intel intended for cheap mainstream parts to trump their E processors, historically that hasn't happened prior to sandy bridge. Maybe sandy bridge was far stronger than intel expected? Hmm.

 

[Edrick]

But yeah, there's really very little that makes X79 better than P67. As a matter of fact, Ivy Bridge already has the upper hand against Sandy Bridge-E when it comes out because it has PCIe 3.0 support, and there's some motherboards out that will support both Ivy Bridge and PCIe 3.0.

In one thread you say that PCIe 3.0 means nothing and that is not a reason to buy SB-E (before we knew it would not have it) and in the next thread you say how much better IB will be over SB-E because of PCIe 3.0. It looks like you are just making up excuses to put down SB-E, for whatever reason.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

This is all speculation on my part, but I think intel will follow IB up with IB-E very quickly. I don't think intel intended for cheap mainstream parts to trump their E processors, historically that hasn't happened prior to sandy bridge. Maybe sandy bridge was far stronger than intel expected? Hmm.

I think they're gonna release two or three quarters afterwards. After all, that's what they're doing with Sandy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E. Remember that Sandy Bridge-E still has twice the number of lanes as SB, though, so it's still not a major disadvantage given that Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E will have comparable PCIe bandwidth, just that Ivy Bridge has support for newer devices.

Since SB-E and IB-E are meant more for very high-end enthusiasts and servers, they won't worry much since the most important advantage to have is the Six-Core support.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

In one thread you say that PCIe 3.0 means nothing and that is not a reason to buy SB-E (before we knew it would not have it) and in the next thread you say how much better IB will be over SB-E because of PCIe 3.0. It looks like you are just making up excuses to put down SB-E, for whatever reason.

Here's the difference: I was referring to most users in that one; I'm referring to enthusiasts and people that use it for work in this one. Before you try calling someone out, it's a good idea to know the context in which it's been discussed.

Like I said before I read your comment, even if IB has PCIe 3.0 support, it still has the same bandwidth as SB-E, but since it has no Six-Core support it's a dead end for some enthusiasts.

We don't need the extra bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 X16 for graphics cards alone since we still haven't saturated PCIe 2.0 X16, but if you want devices like RAID controllers in combination then it's worth having. Also, PCIe 3.0 X4= PCIe 2.0 X8, so tri-SLI/CF can be truly implemented.

 

[Edrick]

Here's the difference: I was referring to most users in that one; I'm referring to enthusiasts and people that use it for work in this one. Before you try calling someone out, it's a good idea to know the context in which it's been discussed.

So let me get this right. When talking about SB-E and PCIe 3.0 (enthusiasts platform), you were saying it was not an advantage because you were referring to "most users". Then when referring to IB and PCIe 3.0 (mainstream platform), you were saying it is an advantage because you were referring to "enthusiasts".

And I do read most of your posts and my conclusion is that you have SB-E envy and you try to put it down to make yourself feel better. Thats just my opinion and I will leave it at that.

We don't need the extra bandwidth for graphics cards alone since we still haven't saturated PCIe 2.0 X16, but if you want devices like RAID controllers in combination then it's worth having.

So the people who use RAID controllers and other devices where PCIe 3.0 would be useful, wouldn't they be using a higher end (workstation platform)? Why would IB need PCIe 3.0 on the mainstream platform if graphic cards can not utilize it? So to me, based onyour own comments, PCIe 3.0 makes more sence on SB-E platform than the IB platform.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

So let me get this right. When talking about SB-E and PCIe 3.0 (enthusiasts platform), you were saying it was not an advantage because you were referring to "most users". Then when referring to IB and PCIe 3.0 (mainstream platform), you were saying it is an advantage because you were referring to "enthusiasts".

And I do read most of your posts and my conclusion is that you have SB-E envy and you try to put it down to make yourself feel better. Thats just my opinion and I will leave it at that.



So the people who use RAID controllers and other devices where PCIe 3.0 would be useful, wouldn't they be using a higher end (workstation platform)? Why would IB need PCIe 3.0 on the mainstream platform if graphic cards can not utilize it? So to me, based onyour own comments, PCIe 3.0 makes more sence on SB-E platform than the IB platform.

No, that's not what I said. I said that for IB having PCIe 3.0 is good because now at least it has the same bandwidth as SB-E. That means that a Performance GPU should be fine running at PCIe 3.0 X4 since it's equal to PCIe 2.0 X8; therefore, three card CF/SLI is possible on IB without add-ons like NF200. Graphics card won't benefit from PCIe 3.0 X16, but from the ones below yes.

For SB-E it doesn't mean much because it still has the same bandwidth, and most add-ons like RAID controllers will only support PCIe 2.0. In the future, having both twice the lanes and twice the bandwidth in comparison now will be a definite advantage, as you can have both PCIe 3.0 RAID cards and high-end GPUs with no sacrifice.

I'd ask you stop with the flame bait.

 

[AdamK47]

Will X79 / Socket 2011 require new coolers or new mounting brackets? I heard early on that socket 2011 uses the same cooling mounts as socket 1366.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Will X79 / Socket 2011 require new coolers or new mounting brackets? I heard early on that socket 2011 uses the same cooling mounts as socket 1366.

New coolers unless you get compatible mounting brackets:

Chris Angelini (Tom's Hardware Editor):

I didn’t bother trying to overclock. Without an LGA 2011-compatible heatsink, it was difficult enough to keep the massive (comparatively) Core i7-3960X running cool. In fact, I couldn’t get a stable run of 3ds Max 2010 at stock settings; it’d shut down every time.

 

[Edrick]

I said that for IB having PCIe 3.0 is good because now at least it has the same bandwidth as SB-E. That means that a Performance GPU should be fine running at PCIe 3.0 X4 since it's equal to PCIe 2.0 X8; therefore, three card CF/SLI is possible on IB without add-ons like NF200. Graphics card won't benefit from PCIe 3.0 X16, but from the ones below yes.

Thats not what you said before. But you are 100% correct in this statement now. So thank you for clarifying.

I am sure that IB-E will carry 40 lanes of PCIe 3.0 just as SB-E was supposed to. That will give a small advantage back to X79 at a later time.

For SB-E it doesn't mean much because it still has the same bandwidth, and most add-ons like RAID controllers will only support PCIe 2.0. In the future, having both twice the lanes and twice the bandwidth in comparison now will be a definite advantage, as you can have both PCIe 3.0 RAID cards and high-end GPUs with no sacrifice.

Yes, I also agree with you there. I wish you just said that from the beginning.

Not trying to give you flame bait, I just call people out when I feel they are contradicting themselves.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Thats not what you said before. But you are 100% correct in this statement now. So thank you for clarifying.

I am sure that IB-E will carry 40 lanes of PCIe 3.0 just as SB-E was supposed to. That will give a small advantage back to X79 at a later time.



Yes, I also agree with you there. I wish you just said that from the beginning.

Not trying to give you flame bait, I just call people out when I feel they are contradicting themselves.

Yeah, but I expect that there won't be many PCIe 3.0 RAID controllers available when the next-gen cards come out. You'd have to wait around six months. I think in the meantime, because most controllers are PCIe 2.0 and SB-E will have comparable bandwidth to Ivy Bridge, it wouldn't pose that much of a problem. When IB-E comes out, then people can take advantage of the PCIe 3.0 controllers AND have high-end PCIe 3.0 graphics cards in tandem.

Good to see our initial differences were solved. I'll try to make myself clearer and more specific in the future so there's no confusion.

 

[AtenRa]

Do we actually know the latest X79 features ?? any links ??

Edit: heh never mind, its on toms review

 

[AdamK47]

New coolers unless you get compatible mounting brackets:

Chris Angelini (Tom's Hardware Editor):

He doesn't say definitely that the mounting is totally different than 1366. He only said "LGA 2011-compatible heatsink" which could also refer to the amount of wattage the cooler dissipates. I'm looking for something more definitive with known facts to back it up.

How did you conclude that the cooler will require a new bracket?

 

[blackened23]

I think they're gonna release two or three quarters afterwards. After all, that's what they're doing with Sandy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E. Remember that Sandy Bridge-E still has twice the number of lanes as SB, though, so it's still not a major disadvantage given that Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge-E will have comparable PCIe bandwidth, just that Ivy Bridge has support for newer devices.

Since SB-E and IB-E are meant more for very high-end enthusiasts and servers, they won't worry much since the most important advantage to have is the Six-Core support.

The general concensus is that releasing SB-E so late was a mistake. I fully believe intel will not repeat this - they're not idiots after all, its just stupid for an extreme processor to lag behind in certain applications because its on an old architecture.

This I believe has never happened prior to sandy bridge and I doubt it will happen again. We all know that 2600k is extremely close to gulftown performance, slower in some and faster in others - this is not something that has happened with prior cpu architectures. I seriously doubt intel wants to continue that trend -- besides, making an IB-E is technically not difficult to do. There's really no reason for them not to do it to coincide with IB's release.

Standard disclaimer, this is all speculation and I may be wrong. But looking at their lineup history , its hard to believe they will continue this current course.

 

[Edrick]

The general concensus is that releasing SB-E so late was a mistake. I fully believe intel will not repeat this - they're not idiots after all, its just stupid for an extreme processor to lag behind in certain applications because its on an old architecture.

I feel that their release of Nehalam was much better. High end first and then mainstream a few months later. I hope they go back to this release schedule for Haswell.

 

[AtenRa]

The general concensus is that releasing SB-E so late was a mistake. I fully believe intel will not repeat this - they're not idiots after all, its just stupid for an extreme processor to lag behind in certain applications because its on an old architecture.

This has NEVER happened prior to sandy bridge and I doubt it will happen again. We all know that 2600k is extremely close to gulftown performance, slower in some and faster in others - this is not something that has happened with prior cpu architectures. I seriously doubt intel wants to continue that trend -- besides, making an IB-E is technically not difficult to do. There's really no reason for them not to do it to coincide with IB's release.

Same will happen with IB (1155) vs SB-E,

IB will be 22nm, lower power usage, higher frequencies lower price, it will be SB vs Westmere all over again

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

He doesn't say definitely that the mounting is totally different than 1366. He only said "LGA 2011-compatible heatsink" which could also refer to the amount of wattage the cooler dissipates. I'm looking for something more definitive with known facts to back it up.

Not really. They're more than likely to have a high-end LGA 1366 cooler in their labs, and if we compare how Lynnfield to Sandy Bridge went in terms of power consumption, then it's reasonable to expect that Sandy Bridge-E will consume less power than Gulftown. After all, Sandy Bridge is a more efficient architecture.

 

[blackened23]

Same will happen with IB (1155) vs SB-E,

IB will be 22nm, lower power usage, higher frequencies lower price, it will be SB vs Westmere all over again

Wishful thinking. But judging intels history, it probably won't. Extreme processors should generally crush everything else, and in the past they have. With the ivy bridge groundwork laid, making IB-e technically would not be difficult.

But hey -- I don't have a magical crystal ball to stare into. I can only speculate

 

[AtenRa]

I feel that their release of Nehalam was much better. High end first and then mainstream a few months later. I hope they go back to this release schedule for Haswell.

I hope Haswell will be like 1366 and Nehalem, High End first and mainstream later but Intel knows that High End is only 1-2% market and they really want the low and middle higher market share first

 

[Edrick]

He doesn't say definitely that the mounting is totally different than 1366. He only said "LGA 2011-compatible heatsink" which could also refer to the amount of wattage the cooler dissipates. I'm looking for something more definitive with known facts to back it up. How did you conclude that the cooler will require a new bracket?

Everything I have read about SB-E to date says that socket 2011 and 1366 had the same mounting dimentions for coolers.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

I feel that their release of Nehalam was much better. High end first and then mainstream a few months later. I hope they go back to this release schedule for Haswell.

They want to release from Essential to Performance first. These are by far the markets that will sell the most, hence their decision.

Same will happen with IB (1155) vs SB-E,

IB will be 22nm, lower power usage, higher frequencies lower price, it will be SB vs Westmere all over again

This. What matters to Intel is how much profit they can make. They're not gonna get that much profit from the Enthusiast market, so they release the others first.

 

[Edrick]

I hope Haswell will be like 1366 and Nehalem, High End first and mainstream later but Intel knows that High End is only 1-2% market and they really want the low and middle higher market share first

Is it really only 1-2%? The i7 920 was considered high end, and Dell and HP sold many of those. Not to mention all the people who built systems.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Everything I have read about SB-E to date says that socket 2011 and 1366 had the same mounting dimentions for coolers.

:hmm:

Then why couldn't they test overclocking properly with an LGA 1366 cooler? I'm sure they'd have one around.

If it does have the same mounting support, it's the same story as 1156 and 1155.

 

[LOL_Wut_Axel]

Is it really only 1-2%? The i7 920 was considered high end, and Dell and HP sold many of those. Not to mention all the people who built systems.

Because people at the time didn't know that Lynnfield would be out and offer comparable CPU performance but with a less expensive platform. Even IF Intel decided to launch their Enthusiast line before, people would know better since the Performance version would be only a few months away and it'd offer comparable CPU performance (for the Quad-Core models, that is).

But since what matters most is the $$$, it's a wise decision to launch for the markets that will give them the most profit.

 

[AtenRa]

Is it really only 1-2%? The i7 920 was considered high end, and Dell and HP sold many of those. Not to mention all the people who built systems.

For Quarters Socket 1366 CPUs were 1% of Intel's shipments, so yes we are 1%