[XBitLabs] Sandy Bridge versus 990x/875k/1100T - stock and overclocked

[BD231]

If I had an unlimited budget, I would be on a Power7 system right now with a team of programmers rewriting whatever I needed to be compatible with it

Engineers don't work for people that pee on themselves anyway.

 

[Redshirt 24]

<sits in corner of thread, muttering to himself about how he has to wait for Bulldozer and/or Ivy Bridge with the occasional "dammit" thrown in>

 

[SickBeast]

I'm actually surprised to see Intel pricing the 2600K so low considering how powerful it is relative to everything else on the market.

$300+ is still a lot to pay for a CPU though, IMO. You definitely do get what you pay for in this case, though, which is pretty rare in that price bracket.

 

[Idontcare]

I'm actually surprised to see Intel pricing the 2600K so low considering how powerful it is relative to everything else on the market.

$300+ is still a lot to pay for a CPU though, IMO. You definitely do get what you pay for in this case, though, which is pretty rare in that price bracket.

If you think back to when Intel had the Q6600 out and Phenom (an unknown for performance) was about to release they did the same thing.

2600K is their Bulldozer insurance. Really pins down AMD's price points and they probably don't actually sell much of them.

 

[SickBeast]

I would be surprised to see a 3.5ghz Bulldozer perform slower than an equivalently clocked 2600K. 8 cores vs. 4 cores should be no contest, and I would expect reasonably similar clock speeds given that they are made on the same process.

 

[Soleron]

I would be surprised to see a 3.5ghz Bulldozer perform slower than an equivalently clocked 2600K. 8 cores vs. 4 cores should be no contest, and I would expect reasonably similar clock speeds given that they are made on the same process.

If anything BD should be higher since clocks were a key design goal. It depends on whether the 32nm process is good enough, because Intel has had much more time to improve it.

 

[Idontcare]

I would be surprised to see a 3.5ghz Bulldozer perform slower than an equivalently clocked 2600K. 8 cores vs. 4 cores should be no contest, and I would expect reasonably similar clock speeds given that they are made on the same process.

Its not about the 2600K outperforming the top-end BD at time of release, its about defining the price-point to which AMD must live within the shadow of.

Intel did this with the Q6600. They knew they could roll out higher clocked SKU's if Phenom turned out to outperform, but at the same time they knew if Phenom under-performed then AMD would be in a bad position for setting the ASP's because the Q6600 would represent the upper-limit.

2600K is the analog, only this time it is BD that is the unknown. But Intel has once again defined the terms of engagement, got to the battlefield ahead of AMD and have scoped it out and taken defensive positions on the high-ground. They are in the enviable position of getting to sit back and make AMD come at them.

If AMD happens to launch a Zambezi SKU that outperforms the 2600K then Intel will just launch a 2700K, or 2800K, etc.

The 2600K is merely a 95W TDP SKU, Intel has a lot of room to define a 130W TDP SKU and take those stock clocks up above 4GHz territory if need be.

 

[wwswimming]

> SB's efficiency is just unparalleled.

can't ignore that. especially if you want to run your desktop off solar power.

 

[tweakboy]

1100T is slower then my system , ran thru Aida benchmark for queen

Just one category its faster.. so chill Mark.. Just Queen result from Aida is faster then AMD 6 core I dont know if it was a 1100T or whatever but it was AMD 6 core,,,

Homie thinks Im making up stuff. This is fact Ill wait for someone to ask for a photo proof and then Ill do that.

 

[dguy6789]

So Intel released the 990x knowing it's obsolete. Yeah, right. Whatever gives you warm fuzzies about your chip of choice.

But it is obsolete. Sandybridge is better than Nehalem and the derivatives. There's irony in that your post applies to yourself. The only reason the 990X is sold at all is because Intel simply has not released the 6 and 8 core Sandybridge socket 2011 stuff yet. Comparing a Core i7 990X to a 2600K is like comparing a Pentium 4 Extreme Edition to a low end Core 2 Duo. Sandybridge is just getting started, the low to mid range stuff compares with the best Nehalems, when the high end stuff comes out it won't be pretty.

 

[Markfw]

1100T is slower then my system , ran thru Aida benchmark for queen

No way. I have both, not even close. The 1100T is twice as fast @ 4.1 ghz

 

[AdamK47]

But it is obsolete. Sandybridge is better than Nehalem and the derivatives. There's irony in that your post applies to yourself. The only reason the 990X is sold at all is because Intel simply has not released the 6 and 8 core Sandybridge socket 2011 stuff yet. Comparing a Core i7 990X to a 2600K is like comparing a Pentium 4 Extreme Edition to a low end Core 2 Duo. Sandybridge is just getting started, the low to mid range stuff compares with the best Nehalems, when the high end stuff comes out it won't be pretty.

Yeah OK, sure. Lets compare our systems. Post your benchmark results here.

 

[tweakboy]

No way. I have both, not even close. The 1100T is twice as fast @ 4.1 ghz

It was a NON overclocked amd 6 core


and it beats it in one test ,, AIDA Queen test. That is all IM saying,, Dont put words in my mouth, Thank you gg and gb

Now that I think of it it might have been a lower model 6 core ,,thx. gg and gl

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

But you are comparing a $999 CPU to a $349 CPU. Even with the 990x slightly beating a 2600k in certain benchmarks, the 2600k is the true winner due to its price point. At least in my opinion.

You mean with benchmarks like this
http://ppbm5.com/Benchmark5.html

Yes the 2600k is a wonderful cpu I am enjoying it. But would I choose it when I use my pc as making my daily bread? No. My wife got a 980x which I oc for her to 4.6Ghz. She uses it in her job where CS5 is just one of the applications. I tell you the 2600k getting spanked in CS5 due to the lower bandwidth. Traffick becomes just too heavy for its poor DMI. but my point is when time equals money and lets say the 990x beat the 2600k by 12-13 seconds per encoding or per job how many do you do a day, a month, a year. now calculate the money you saved by that 12 seconds. 600usd more price tag will look cheap and money well spent.
For using your system as a passtime like your avg work like gaming, lil bit of undressing celebs in Photoshop, audio processing etc etc then the 2600k looks excellent and the 990x will be a waste. That cpu wants a crap load of threads thrown at it not a couple

This is the 980x with my 3x gpus
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/517679

My 2600k score you'll find in my sig

 

[Gloomy]

lil bit of undressing celebs in Photoshop,

hahaha what

 

[LiuKangBakinPie]

hahaha what

Can't share my private sessions with Jessica Alba on here. Paparazi might Photoshop it

 

[nOOky]

You mean with benchmarks like this
http://ppbm5.com/Benchmark5.html

Yes the 2600k is a wonderful cpu I am enjoying it. But would I choose it when I use my pc as making my daily bread? No. My wife got a 980x which I oc for her to 4.6Ghz. She uses it in her job where CS5 is just one of the applications. I tell you the 2600k getting spanked in CS5 due to the lower bandwidth. Traffick becomes just too heavy for its poor DMI. but my point is when time equals money and lets say the 990x beat the 2600k by 12-13 seconds per encoding or per job how many do you do a day, a month, a year. now calculate the money you saved by that 12 seconds. 600usd more price tag will look cheap and money well spent.
For using your system as a passtime like your avg work like gaming, lil bit of undressing celebs in Photoshop, audio processing etc etc then the 2600k looks excellent and the 990x will be a waste. That cpu wants a crap load of threads thrown at it not a couple

This is the 980x with my 3x gpus
http://3dmark.com/3dm11/517679

My 2600k score you'll find in my sig

Now subtract the amount of time spent web surfing from any working gain and tell me $600 is worth it?

 

[Idontcare]

Now subtract the amount of time spent web surfing from any working gain and tell me $600 is worth it?

I can't speak for everyone but in my case my time spent surfing the web is priceless.