Quantcast

Jump to content

» «
Photo

Tech General Chat

1,296 replies to this topic
yojo2
  • yojo2

    ~y

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2008
  • Poland
  • Most Knowledgeable [Technology] 2013
    Helpfulness Award
    Helpfulness Award [Technology]

#721

Posted 23 April 2012 - 06:04 PM

NDA has been lifted from Ivy Bridge CPUs, and I must say they've turned out to be a bit disappointing. A bit higher IPC than SB, though it's not really relevant because of worse OC capabilities, and IBs are also harder to cool (they don't heat up more than SB, but dissipation surface is smaller). Overall, IMHO the biggest advantage that IBs have over SB is PCIe 3.0 support; other than that, I can't really see the point in choosing 3770k over 2600k.

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#722

Posted 23 April 2012 - 06:26 PM Edited by Slamman, 23 April 2012 - 06:35 PM.

I'm not familiar with those terms But IB being Ivy Bridge, SB; Sandy Bridge, but came across this from an Over Clocker forum posted earlier in the Month

http://forum.overclo...940-ivy-bridge/

Have you physically got one?

http://www.neoseeker...dge-cpu-review/

http://www.tomshardw...70k,3181-9.html

My take is this die shrink is not that surprising that you can't expect the same overclocking improvements because this is a major Internal Embedded Graphics chipset inside that space, never before has this GPU been around for consumers, so expect that feature to change the whole characteristic of these CPUs from the earlier ones

yojo2
  • yojo2

    ~y

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2008
  • Poland
  • Most Knowledgeable [Technology] 2013
    Helpfulness Award
    Helpfulness Award [Technology]

#723

Posted 23 April 2012 - 06:59 PM

QUOTE (Slamman @ Monday, Apr 23 2012, 19:26)
Have you physically got one?

Nope, I'm fine with my Xeon X3440 wink.gif But I do know one of the Polish CPu reviewers, so I've got first-hand info. And of course I've seen other reviews as well. wink.gif

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#724

Posted 23 April 2012 - 07:52 PM

I'm thinking those reviews are pointing out the GPU is something of an unknown factor in comparing the CPUs, the one that includes SB-E is good, they thought to compare SB and SB-E with IB
The GPU for San Andreas or other demanding games, perhaps GTA IV, that should be the most interesting test here I think

SyphonPayne
  • SyphonPayne

    E FOR EFFORT!!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2003

#725

Posted 23 April 2012 - 08:02 PM

QUOTE (yojo2 @ Monday, Apr 23 2012, 13:04)
NDA has been lifted from Ivy Bridge CPUs, and I must say they've turned out to be a bit disappointing. A bit higher IPC than SB, though it's not really relevant because of worse OC capabilities, and IBs are also harder to cool (they don't heat up more than SB, but dissipation surface is smaller). Overall, IMHO the biggest advantage that IBs have over SB is PCIe 3.0 support; other than that, I can't really see the point in choosing 3770k over 2600k.

Agreed 100%. IB was quite overhyped. Glad I jumped on the 2600K when I did. It really makes sense, as the laws of physics can't be broken by Intel. Since the tri-gate transistors reduce a lot of leakage, it would make sense that it runs warmer, not to mention that we're getting to a point to where there just isn't enough physical room for the heat to go, as they are cramming more and more transistors into smaller places.

I can see IB giving the laptop/ultrabook/etc. market a boost in battery life (though my SB laptop lasts 8 hours anyway,) boost in integrated graphics performance, and PCIe 3.0 support might be worth it eventually (GTX 680 SLI already benefits from PCIE 3.0.)

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#726

Posted 23 April 2012 - 09:12 PM

3D Transistors are not really overhyped though, but I was more excited to get the best improvements of both worlds, if you're moving up from 1156 socket or 775

friendly luggage
  • friendly luggage

    Vette pass by, errbody looking

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#727

Posted 23 April 2012 - 09:41 PM

QUOTE (SyphonPayne @ Monday, Apr 23 2012, 20:02)
Since the tri-gate transistors reduce a lot of leakage, it would make sense that it runs warmer

I thought the more efficient something was, less energy is being turned into heat. I was watching some benchmarks and in the graphical ones paired with a GTX 680. There was something called MVP. With it ON there was a slight increase of fps (1-10). What is this MVP?

SyphonPayne
  • SyphonPayne

    E FOR EFFORT!!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2003

#728

Posted 23 April 2012 - 11:04 PM Edited by SyphonPayne, 23 April 2012 - 11:08 PM.

QUOTE (illegal_luggage @ Monday, Apr 23 2012, 16:41)
QUOTE (SyphonPayne @ Monday, Apr 23 2012, 20:02)
Since the tri-gate transistors reduce a lot of leakage, it would make sense that it runs warmer

I thought the more efficient something was, less energy is being turned into heat. I was watching some benchmarks and in the graphical ones paired with a GTX 680. There was something called MVP. With it ON there was a slight increase of fps (1-10). What is this MVP?

Well, I didn't include the whole picture. The tri-gate transistors allow for greater transistor density due to leakage reduction. So while the transistors themselves are more efficient, thus producing less heat, the fact that there are more transistors crammed into a smaller space ends up creating more heat than a less-efficient planar double-gate chip running on a larger process (therefore less transistor density.) To add to that, the die area is reduced, thus less room for the heat to go.

This is the reason why the 32nm 2600K has the same 95W TDP as the 65nm Q6600. Although the 2600K is on a process that uses transistors half the size of the Q6600, it is also cramming nearly twice as many transistors in the same area while also reducing die size. Well this applies to IB as well, on a lesser scale, as IB is just an incremental upgrade from SB (and a downgrade in terms of overclocking on air.)

Think of it this way, what works better, a bigger heatsink, or a smaller heatsink? The more surface area there is to dissipate heat, the greater the amount potential there is for more heat to be removed. Then to add even more, it is suspected that Intel has used TIM instead of solder to attach the IHS to the die.

AND, to add even more, the current chips seem to run on voltage that is about the same amount of voltage that SB runs on. With the new 22nm process, you would think that vcore could be less than 1 volt. However, current steppings of IB run on very similar voltage as SB (typically around 1.1-1.3 volts.) More volts = more heat. The fact that they need the same amount of voltage, could indicate that IB is not truly as efficient as it is made out to be. I suspect that future steppings will further refine IB and in the future we well see sub-1V IBs.

As for the MVP. That is a feature of the new Z77 chipset, supposed to make gaming look smoother, but this FPS increase isn't actually an FPS increase. It's sort of like 120Hz HDTVs, they take 24FPS movies and attempt to make them look smoother with less judder. I personally don't like it as it looks unnatural to me. Long story short, I could be wrong, but it's looking to me like MVP is just an artificial way to "increase" FPS for benchmarks and placebo effect. I'll have to read into it more to see if it's really a worthwhile feature. So far not looking that way.

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#729

Posted 24 April 2012 - 03:40 AM

The design for the layman is to use space vertically as well as horizontally, and again, that GPU is taking up some of the space afforded by the shrinking. This is a Tick in the Tick/Tock process of Intel, the Tock will be Haswell IIRC

Stinky12
  • Stinky12

    No title

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2010

#730

Posted 24 April 2012 - 04:22 AM

LucidLogix Virtu MVP is found on all Intel 7 series chipset including the Intel B75. Don't know about their Q75 and Q77 as they haven't released yet.
It also depends on whether board makers want add it or not.

SyphonPayne
  • SyphonPayne

    E FOR EFFORT!!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2003

#731

Posted 24 April 2012 - 04:42 AM

QUOTE (Slamman @ Monday, Apr 23 2012, 22:40)
The design for the layman is to use space vertically as well as horizontally, and again, that GPU is taking up some of the space afforded by the shrinking. This is a Tick in the Tick/Tock process of Intel, the Tock will be Haswell IIRC

No it's nothing to do with using space vertically vs horizontally. The gates have have been wrapped around a three-sided inversion layer (versus two-sided in the former planar design, thus why it's called 3d tri-gate) thus providing more surface area for the inversion layer, and more gate/current control. Yes, on the transistor level, the inversion layer is now vertical, but this is per-transistor, the die shrink more-than compensated for the vertical "space" used. As a matter of fact Intel claims for 2x density with IB vs SB.

However with that 2x density combined with a smaller silicon die area that means more heat. The only way it would even be the same amount of heat generated is if it were 14nm vs 22nm. Even then I bet that transistor density will shoot up a great deal. What I'm betting on with IB is that they refine the new process, and allow for more reasonable voltages to be applied to the chips, thus reducing heat to more "acceptable" levels.

What I mean by "acceptable" is, acceptable to overclockers that are running on air. Obviously Intel thinks that the current iteration of IB chips produce acceptable amounts of heat at stock frequencies, which is what 90% of people will be using. IB will also have (small) benefits in reduced power consumption, however as previously stated, they need to reduce the operating voltage to really see much of a benefit.

As it currently stands, IB is only good for those running at stock or those that plan on doing watercooling. However as mentioned, I have a feeling that Intel will release more refined revisions of IB in the future, to make them more appealing to overclockers. I would say that at the moment Intel doesn't care about the overclockers, they're just getting the new design out, so that they can later refine it and make their unlocked processors more worthwhile.

You are right though, Haswell is the next iteration, the Tock, also based on 22nm tri-gate transistors, in which further proves that they will be refining the new process to have more acceptable temperatures/voltages. Perhaps they won't be using TIM to attach their heatspreaders by then either, makes me wonder what they were thinking with IB.

Depending on how things go, I might even be sticking out Haswell to go straight to Skylake. I managed to do just fine with skipping Nehalem (had Kentsfield,) and going to Sandy Bridge, but things could be different this time around.

Stinky12
  • Stinky12

    No title

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2010

#732

Posted 24 April 2012 - 05:23 AM

Currently still running on my Xeon X3350 (Q9450) and I'm still happy with its performance. Intel's SB and IB are indeed a lot faster, but their results doesn't impress me to a point where
I need to upgrade for the sake of shaving off a few seconds. I may upgrade when it's absolutely necessary or when my motherboard goes out.

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#733

Posted 24 April 2012 - 07:55 AM Edited by Slamman, 24 April 2012 - 08:16 AM.

If I sell my 1156, I don't know if it will be nearer to the Haswell or not, but I would like to know what that CPU holds in store!

@Syphon, my reading was awhile ago, so I can't get into minute details with you, you seemed to have studied up, but I still stand by the process of using the same relative space to get more transistors in there using the "3D" mentioned

http://en.wikipedia......architecture)

Another article covered some similar R and D in the ever challenging mission to shrink electronics, this benefits much smaller devices as well, not just gaming PC desktops, so, it'll be interesting how they go from here

http://en.wikipedia....ate_transistors

http://www.5min.com/...istor-517059214

One thing missing is a discussion about heat, evidently, but I recall they did mention that one of the key advantages is a shorter path of flow, compared to the older technology, this accounts for speed when it takes less time now to travel per component transistor, and provide the output

SyphonPayne
  • SyphonPayne

    E FOR EFFORT!!!

  • Members
  • Joined: 08 Aug 2003

#734

Posted 24 April 2012 - 07:00 PM

You can "stand by" all you want but the "3d" has nothing to do with anything other than the new 3-dimentional gates and 3-sided inversion layers versus planar inversion layers with a 2-dimensional gate. Of course they're using the same relative space to get more transistors in, that's the point of a die shrink, and that has been occurring for generations. All the tri-gate transistors do is allow Intel to combat physics with lower-leakage transistors in order to cram more transistors into a smaller space. I "stand by" the fact that it is nothing to do with vertical space or horizontal space.

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#735

Posted 26 April 2012 - 02:57 AM Edited by Slamman, 26 April 2012 - 03:37 AM.

By that, they mean it's not flat any longer, making use of vertical space, that's what I'm saying. Although these reports SEEM disappointing, the delay points to the new tech needing some time to evolve. Can't expect new technology to be at it's prime out of the gate. Often an early adopter gets burned buying in to tech at the moment it emerges from the gate.
It's needed to take off as well, however, if everyone hesitates to buy a new tech, it can never take off
But Intel is far ahead of AMD with this and they're confident it can lead to more advances, so I wouldn't be thinking a poor Overclock means it shouldn't perform well as stock.

"A new transistor technology from Intel that operates in a true three-dimensional fashion, moving electrons across three dimensions rather than the two dimensions of the traditional planar design. Tri-Gate transistor technology will debut in Intelís Ivy Bridge family of processors in the first half of 2012 and should help Ivy Bridge and future processors from Intel operate at lower voltage with lower leakage, enabling both improved performance and reduced power consumption.

Tri-Gate transistors have a vertical "fin" form that conducts channels on all three sides of the structure, with two channels on each side and one on the top. This enables the transistors to be packed closer together and allows more transistor current to flow when the transistor is on. The 3D Tri-Gate transistor technology is expected to help enable Moore's Law to continue for at least the next few years"

'Vertical' as a point in describing it came up several times as I did a fresh search

This most recent Search seems better at explaining the confusion away;

http://www.extremete...processor?print

So, rather then me getting two or more confused, refer to these links! haha
http://eda360insider...ent-kind-of-3d/

Stinky12
  • Stinky12

    No title

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2010

#736

Posted 30 April 2012 - 10:10 PM

Intel Ivy Bridge CPU are finally on sale.
Pricing are similar to their Sandy Bridge models, but their K cpus are $8 to $30 more depending on model of comparison.
e.g.
Core i5 3550 is the same price as Core i5 2500k (same clock speed)
Core i5 3570K is $30 more than Core i5 2500K (100MHz more for Core i5 3570K)
Core i5 3570K is $8 more than Core i5 2550K (same clock speed, Core i5 2550K does not have IGP)

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#737

Posted 01 May 2012 - 04:39 AM

Ouch!... a premium for matching performance?? I did read that the power consumption should be a notable improvement for notebooks, and of course, GPU internally will be entirely new

friendly luggage
  • friendly luggage

    Vette pass by, errbody looking

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#738

Posted 01 May 2012 - 09:58 AM

I really like the look of the card but it will be interesting to see its performance and how much power it uses.

yojo2
  • yojo2

    ~y

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2008
  • Poland
  • Most Knowledgeable [Technology] 2013
    Helpfulness Award
    Helpfulness Award [Technology]

#739

Posted 01 May 2012 - 10:01 AM

Too bad that the price is just insane. $999??? You could buy two GTX680 for that icon13.gif

friendly luggage
  • friendly luggage

    Vette pass by, errbody looking

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#740

Posted 01 May 2012 - 10:11 AM

Yeah I would never spend that much on a graphics card. Most would be about £250 but I would go a bit higher if the card was really worth it. Still I ain't buying a new graphics card until I can no longer play games at 1080p with decent settings.

Stinky12
  • Stinky12

    No title

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2010

#741

Posted 01 May 2012 - 01:52 PM

GTX 690 is a dual GPU card, so price at $999 really isn't expensive at all nor is it insane.

GTX 690
user posted image

yojo2
  • yojo2

    ~y

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2008
  • Poland
  • Most Knowledgeable [Technology] 2013
    Helpfulness Award
    Helpfulness Award [Technology]

#742

Posted 01 May 2012 - 04:29 PM

$999 IS insane, seeing as HD6990 and GTX590 started from $700.

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#743

Posted 01 May 2012 - 07:53 PM

Was at MicroCenter the other day, looking at their latest products, On sale under $100 is the older X67 mobo or X68, then the newer 77s, IIRC
Pricing from $70 to $200 for the better PCIexpress multiple GPUs, of course, being a cheapskate, I get mobos for $55 or less, getting old PCI slots, now the PCI is nearly a legacy in terms of being abandoned from newer motherboards, how have you guys looked at no PCI card options??

Also, GPUs I looked at $130 to $140 the low end on GTX nVidias that are TI series, still more then I spend, but may need to get one that costs me $150 approximately

Stinky12
  • Stinky12

    No title

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2010

#744

Posted 01 May 2012 - 08:19 PM

QUOTE (yojo2 @ Tuesday, May 1 2012, 16:29)
$999 IS insane, seeing as HD6990 and GTX590 started from $700.

If I remember correctly, previous dual GPU cards mostly use the 2nd fastest GPU, such as a GTX 590 runs on a pair of GTX 570 GPUs not a pair of GTX 580s (Asus MARS uses a pair of GTX 580s).
The GTX 690 GPU is close in specs compare to the GTX 680. Because the GTX 670 isn't out yet, does the GPU spec on the GTX 690 give us a clue as to how fast the GTX 670 will be?
If the specs for the GTX 690 is the same for the GTX 670, then yeah, at $999 the price is insane.

user posted image

yojo2
  • yojo2

    ~y

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 06 Dec 2008
  • Poland
  • Most Knowledgeable [Technology] 2013
    Helpfulness Award
    Helpfulness Award [Technology]

#745

Posted 01 May 2012 - 08:37 PM

GTX590 consisted of two downclocked GTX580s. wink.gif And judging from the chart above, GTX690 will be basically 2xGTX680 with lower clocks too.

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#746

Posted 01 May 2012 - 09:03 PM

Dual GPU seems like a good way to mate two or three cards in motherboards that allow for SLI or Crossfire, if you can have two mated, that's pretty expensive, but can it be pulled off with tangible results?

.2D
  • .2D

    I Shed The Blood of Saxon Men

  • Andolini Mafia Family
  • Joined: 25 Jun 2009
  • United-Kingdom

#747

Posted 01 May 2012 - 10:43 PM

So, I've been looking at asking the guy at the local computer shop down here about building me a new gaming rig at about £400-£500, and I've been pondering for a while now on what video card to go for. Now I have really limited knowledge of tech stuff and prices, so pardon any retarded sounding comments I make tounge.gif .
So yeah, since he seems to sell parts and rigs off of the shelves very cheap compared to what I've seen, I've been looking at something like a Dual/Quad core depending on the price, 4gb of Ram to begin with, 250-500GB of HDD space, and a 600W PSU; anything other than that I'll try and go as basic as I can allowing room to upgrade when I need to. So with all that, what would be a good Video card to go for that can run games such as Skyrim, Napoleon and Shogun 2 Total War, Napoleonic Wars and GTA IV on good settings. If need be I believe it's also possible to go with 2 video cards? But yeah, I gave a fairly good range of games to give a good idea of what I'm after. So yeah, I'm aware I probably sound pretty dumb with a lot of what I said, but I'm really behind on computer stuff; I was f*cking amazed when I heard you could go for like 32GB of RAM and 2 Graphics cards. cry.gif . So long story short, what do you fine fellows think a good Graphics card would be to run games like GTAIV, Total War and Skyrim?

Slamman
  • Slamman

    Smote

  • BUSTED!
  • Joined: 29 Nov 2003
  • United-States

#748

Posted 02 May 2012 - 12:09 AM

I looked over an HP Compaq DV6500 at the pawnshop, asking $140, basically a much better deal then the other selections I've seen at pawn.

This model has 1.7Ghz AMD64 x2, nVidia 7100 series mobile video, seems integrated, about 512MB vRAM I believe, at least over 256
The memory was reporting just under 2GB, and the OS was Vista Home Premium SP1. The system just seemed slower then my Intel 945GM with Core Duo T2450 at 2Ghz and two actual cores. I wonder if anyone's noticing similar results? What do you think of that price? One key fell off the keyboard and it was less then pristine, but other then that...working

friendly luggage
  • friendly luggage

    Vette pass by, errbody looking

  • Members
  • Joined: 19 May 2011
  • United-Kingdom

#749

Posted 02 May 2012 - 11:47 AM

QUOTE (.2D @ Tuesday, May 1 2012, 22:43)
So long story short, what do you fine fellows think a good Graphics card would be to run games like GTAIV, Total War and Skyrim?

A Nvidia GTX 550Ti will do the job nicely or you could go for an ATi 6770 which has similar performance.

Stinky12
  • Stinky12

    No title

  • Members
  • Joined: 14 Oct 2010

#750

Posted 02 May 2012 - 04:57 PM

Intel's Sandy Bridge will be getting a few new CPUs into the mix as Intel is planning to release the Xeon E5 2400 and Pentiums.
These new processors, categorized as Sandy Bridge EN will run on socket 1356 and support for single and dual socket configurations.
Socket 1356 Pentium will be limited to only single CPU setups.
Socket 1356 is the replacement socket 1366 and a alternative to socket 2011.
Comparing socket 1356 to socket 2011, socket 1356 is identical to socket 2011, with a few differences.

socket 1356: single QPI (dual socket CPUs)/Triple channel ram/24 lanes of PCIe 3.0
socket 2011: dual QPI (quad socket CPUs)/Quad channel ram/40 lanes of PCIe 3.0




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users