Lostconfused
Member
Guess there is no point in upgrading from an i5-750 right now.
Except if the Tweaktown review is any indication, not really. There were some benchs where the 2500k was a frame or two quicker. It was pretty much a dead heat. And it was only 2 or 3 watts more efficient under load and idle than the 2500k. It's a COMPLETE disappointment if you're expecting anything over the 2500k in terms of performance/efficiency.
If you got Core 2 stuff, yeah. The performance increase is noticeable. Phenoms II have more or less a little bit more performance than Core 2s, and that 1100T runs at 3.3Ghz.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5626/ivy-bridge-preview-core-i7-3770k/9
Yup, still happy I didn't wait and went for a 2600k. Hopefully the next 'tick' (or is it 'tock'?) wrings out some more performance.
This is a tick, next up is a tock.
I hope Haswell will blow is away.
Ivy Bridge is a "Tock+", as in, their second "tock".
No it isn't, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Tick-Tock
IB is shrunk to 22nm, which means it's a Tick
It's tick+.Ya, I see that, but just because it's on Wikipedia doesn't necessarily make it accurate.
I could have sworn I saw a slide from an Intel presentation that had it listed as a Tock+, but I can't find it right now.
Ya, I see that, but just because it's on Wikipedia doesn't necessarily make it accurate.
I could have sworn I saw a slide from an Intel presentation that had it listed as a Tock+, but I can't find it right now.
Either way, it seems that this is some kind of weird in-between chip that for some reason doesn't fit into their typical "Tick-Tock" structure.
It's tick+.
What are you talking about ? In almost every benchs in the TD review, we see the 3570K ahead of the 2500K (even 2700K in certain cases) for less energy consumed. Sure it's maybe 5-10% more performance but for a guy like me who is building a rig for the first time I don't see the benefit of choosing a 2500K over a 3570K, apart from the fact that IB may end up bad overclockers.
So far it seems that way. We'll see how mass retail chips fare, almost always better.So it's basically a wash, with less overclocking headroom? How disappointing. Will SB chips still be available for a while or are they going to aggressively clear them out?
I think HD4000 and AMDs are about the same with Intel still a tad slower. Both are fine for integrated and Intel is still a faster CPU iirc.so if i want an integrated gfx laptop, is it time to choose intel over amd yet?
Not worth the upgrade.Question about this. I have an i7920 oc'ed to 4.1. I am super happy with it. I am having a hard time identifying if this kind of thing would be a real upgrade or not.
Any help?
The only things I give a hoot about. Gaming and power. I don't care about synthetic benchmarks for the irrelevant. It slightly nudged the 2500k in 3D Mark 2011, but was one frame slower in AVP. I'd call it a draw if ever there was one.
As for power it was 88/303 vs 90/305. So it was a whopping two watts more efficient during idle and load.
That's a pile of you know what for something that's a new die process and had all the rhetoric about 3D transistors.
EDIT: I'm not telling you to choose the 2500k over the 3570, just that's it's an absolutely worthless update from a performance POV. It's basically all about the IGP and notebooks it seems.
I'm not sure it's relevant to judge Ivy Bridge CPUs performance in games based on a whopping one frame difference. Anyway, I agree with you, when it comes to upgrading it's not worth it if you're on SB. But let's see some reviews first, on retail chips, before making any final conclusion.
I'm not sure what we're really arguing. It's not like Ivy Bridge is a different architecture. It's not going to perform worse than the thing it's replacing. It's just a colossal disappointment if anyone was holding off on a 2500k purchase for the past 6 months thinking it was going to give the 10 - 15 percent performance boost, 20 percent power reduction that was being claimed (due to die shrink and 3D transistors).
I have a core i5 750 its worth upgrade to 3770??
I am also one of the many who has been waiting with their q6600, cant wait to build my new rig this witner.
I don't know, we're getting to the point where you can play games at decent resolutions and settings at playable framerates on IGPs.
I guess you could blame that on consoles lowering the bar for PC game requirements and it will all be moot when next-gen starts and requirements see a spike, but who knows?
·feist·;37021186 said:Ivy Bridge launch is going to be a hell of a thing. So many folks on a collision course with reality.
Worthwhile upgrade over the Q6600?
I'm not sure what we're really arguing. It's not like Ivy Bridge is a different architecture. It's not going to perform worse than the thing it's replacing. It's just a colossal disappointment if anyone was holding off on a 2500k purchase for the past 6 months thinking it was going to give the 10 - 15 percent performance boost, 20 percent power reduction that was being claimed (due to die shrink and 3D transistors).
Sticking with my i7 920. I'll spend the money I was saving for IB on a GTX 680 GB model or a similar non-reference design. Should tie me over for 2 more years I hope.
looks like Nvidia was right. We're hitting a wall with die shrinks as far as cost reduction and efficiency go.
looks like Nvidia was right. We're hitting a wall with die shrinks as far as cost reduction and efficiency go.
these had a 30W (under load) power reduction. That is pretty significant...
According to whom? Tweaktown didn't get that but maybe they were an anomaly.
When is the official embargo up? Don't want to make a decision just on one set of benches.