Back to Article

  • DanNeely - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    This chip seems mostly pointless unless it's a 6core part down binned due to core failures. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    You get the extra PCIe lanes and X79 goodness. That is probably its only real use, otherwise i7-2600K (or even i7-2500K) should be a better deal. Sure, the market is fairly limited but better than offering only +$500 CPUs IMO :-) Most likely it's a binned down version of the 6-cores though, doesn't make much sense to produce 6-core chips if there is only one model. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    Quad core models I meant. Damn we really need the edit button. Reply
  • fhaddad78 - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    I've been wanting to upgrade for a while now, I'm liking the i7-3820. Anyone know what the diff is between the i7-3820 and i7-960. Seems like you are getting less for the same price. Unless that chip is for some other market. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    The micro-architecture is different (Nehalem vs Sandy Bridge). Clock for clock, SB seems to be around 20% faster. You also get X79 chipset which has some additional tweaks (SATA 6Gb/s and more SATAs). Reply
  • fhaddad78 - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    Thank you! :) Reply
  • darkos - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    I beleive you also get quad channel memory controller instead of the dual and tri that we have with the existing lga1155 and lga1366 parts. It will be interesting to see what performance improvement this yields over the existing situation. Reply
  • Taft12 - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    Bold prediction: Somewhere between 0 and 1% on everything except for the Sandra Memory Bandwidth benchmark. No sale.

    (actually, G.Skill, Mushkin, Kingston et al will turn the quad-channel memory scam into PLENTY of DIMM sales!)
  • DanNeely - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    Probably right. You normally* need 6 cores to start bottlenecking LGA1366's triple channel memory on a few real world apps. Quad channel gives room for 8 cores; although unless they're coming under the Xeon brand it doesn't look like we'll get any of them until Ivy Bridge reaches this socket.

    *One Einstein@Home tester found an IIRC 10% slowdown with 2 channels on quads but he was OCing the CPU to >3.6ghz and had the ram down around DDR3-1000. I'm not sure if he retested with ram at normal speeds; and the app in question has parts with highly random memory patterns that hammer the controller hard.
  • intel_is_so_gay - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    There are rumours that there will be an 8-core i7-3980X. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    It is certainly possible that we will see 8-core CPUs under the i7 brand at a later date. Right now, it looks like 8-core parts will be limited to Xeons at the launch. Maybe Intel is having poor yields, thus they cannot release an 8-core part with a reasonable price tag. It looks like Intel is trying to stay under the $999 tag for i7 CPUs. 8-core chips will most likely end up costing a lot more (probs close to $1500) at the launch.

    We will see what is Intel's approach soon. If all parts are 8-core chips with cores disabled, then an 8-core i7 in the future sounds plausible.
  • MrSpadge - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    Quad channel will be significant in scientific number crunching software. It also allows you to get away with using cheaper, slower DIMMs (like in basically all OEM systems).

  • Filiprino - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    What's the difference between 3930K and 3960X apart from the 100Mhz and 3MB of L3 cache difference? $416 don't justify that. Reply
  • DanNeely - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    Have you ever seen an Intel Extreme part that wasn't intended primarily to fleece corporate buyers/noobs?

    In theory you get the absolute best binned parts; which might matter if you're chasing a record with LN2; otherwise forget they even exist.
  • intel_is_so_gay - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    Yepp. X means it's fully unlocked so if you want to do some weird liquid nitrogen overclocking, you can. K is only partially unlocked. Reply
  • Filiprino - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    Yes, that's true. But on Nehalem you got 2 extra cores and full unlocking. They released the full locked 6 cores later.
    Now they are releasing at the same time two 6 cores units, one partially locked (before it was full locked) and one fully unlocked. Given the memory architecture, if being fully unlocked means you are capable to also configure a BLCK without affecting the rest of the system, then it's almost useless unless you are going sith LN2 for overclocking and trying to break records.

    Here I'm seeing the pressure Intel is thinking will have when AMD releases Bulldozer.
  • pattycake0147 - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    There also is an increase from 12 MB cache to 15 MB cache. Again minimal increase in performance for a large increase in price. Reply
  • maroon1 - Saturday, August 20, 2011 - link

    Both 6 models are full unlocked

    The one that is partially unlocked is the quad core model (i7 3820)
  • RussianSensation - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    For power users, the i7-3930K @ $583 looks like a sweet toy. That prob will overclock just as good as the flagship $999 model and the 3mb cache is unlikely to have a huge difference in performance.

    So essentially, Intel is going to offer a FAR faster chip in the i7-3930K vs. $999 990X. Looks like a winner to me for workstation/power users.

    Now that i7-3820 chip, looks like a completely waste of $ without unlocked multiplier.
  • maroon1 - Saturday, August 20, 2011 - link

    Actually you can change the BLCK frequency from 100Mhz to 250MHz

    In other words, even with locked multi you can still overclock any SB-E
  • gevorg - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    These CPUs are made for quite a small niche market. The 8core 22nm chips should be under 100W TDP, so I rather use 2500K/2600K for now. Reply
  • intel_is_so_gay - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    As far as I know there is no guarantee there is an 8-core mainstream Ivy Bridge.

    And when you think about it - releasing one would undermine their LGA 2011 CPUs.

    It's very possible that we will not see 6 or 8 cores until Haswell.
  • hiongster - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    These ARE LGA 2011 CPUs... Reply
  • gramboh - Monday, August 15, 2011 - link

    He said that Intel is unlikely to release an 8 core mainstream Ivy Bridge (socket 1155) CPU in the lineup that will replace the current 1155 Sandy Bridge CPU's sometime around March/April 2012, because doing so would make these 6 core SB-E's a bad deal for most users. Intel is going to keep 6+ core to the workstation/server market for now. Reply
  • Kristian Vättö - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    6-core isn't even mainstream yet so it will be at least until Haswell before we see 8-core mainstream CPUs. I would even guess Broadwell since Intel hasn't usually increased the core count with new MA. Reply
  • MadMan007 - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    Dramatical? That's unpossible! Reply
  • B3an - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    I've had a Nahalem what seems like forever and i want to upgrade to this platform. Only problem is... it's just 6 core? This is MEANT to be high-end. Wheres the 8-core or higher? It's not 2009 any more.

    So will this platform be getting Ivy Bridge-E or whatever at some point?? No one knew this for sure months ago, so does anyone know the answer now? Upgrading from a 6 core 980X Nahalem to a 6 core Sandy Bridge-E isn't going to do much. Or will there atleast be 8 core Sandy Bridge-E at some point?
  • Pneumothorax - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    With SB-E, you basically need to spend >$500 now to overclock! Reply
  • Filiprino - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    If you want to overclock a 4 core CPU just buy the i7 2600k. Sandy Bridge-E is just only for 6 core units, and that's why you get now a cheaper unlocked 6 cores. Reply
  • Golgatha - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    Yeah, and you and I won't be buying until Intel pulls their head out of their posterior and gives the consumer something that's a good value. I'm completely unimpressed with their pricing on this upcoming tech and will stick with my $200 i7 on X58 for awhile longer it seems. Reply
  • javier_machuk - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    the way i see it, the cheaper model got pricier... with the i7 920 at least you could OC. If this SB-E with 4 cores can't be OC at all then that's a mayor step back, also there's the deal of the cooler (even if it was a crappy one, it is still better than no cooler) Reply
  • m.amitava - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    Point to think I must say. You can't OC the 3820 and it doesn't ship with a stock cooler. So why would somebody go out and buy an aftermarket cooler for a processor which will run at stock anyway? Reply
  • Ytterbium - Tuesday, August 16, 2011 - link

    I think the i7 965 didn't come with a cooler either, so this isn't new, I'm glad there not putting one in TBH.

    It's sad the top end chip isn't much better than the 990X from a clockspeed poitn of view, I hope it is ~20% better clock for clock.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now