The Sandy Bridge Preview
by Anand Lal Shimpi on August 27, 2010 2:38 PM ESTThe Test
As was the case with Lynnfield, the current Sandy Bridge CPUs Intel is sampling are slightly different than what will be sold. The Core i5 2400 runs at 3.1GHz, has four cores, 6MB of L3 cache but no Hyper Threading. In order to help Intel’s partners test HT functionality however, the i5 2400s being sampled right now have Hyper Threading enabled. For the purposes of our test I’ve run with HT both enabled (to give you an idea of higher end SB parts) and disabled (to give you an idea of i5 2400 performance).
The other major difference between what’s out today and what’s coming in Q1 is turbo. Early Sandy Bridge samples, ours included, do not have turbo enabled. The CPU simply runs at 3.1GHz all the time, regardless of workload. The final retail 2400 will be able to run at up to 3.4GHz.
In other words, what we show here should be indicative of final performance, but it's probably slower than what will ship in Q1.
On the GPU side, the part I’m testing appears to be the single-core GPU configuration (6 EUs). Intel hasn’t released any info as to what parts will get the dual-core/12 EUs GPU configurations, although it may make sense for Intel to use the 12 EU parts in notebooks given the importance of integrated graphics to the mobile market. Update: The part we're looking at may actually have been a lower clocked 12 EU part, we're still waiting for additional confirmation.
Our test platform was a H67 based motherboard running with 4GB of DDR3-1333, the same memory we use in our Lynnfield testbeds.
I’m comparing to four other CPUs. The Core i7 980X for a high end comparison, the Core i7 880 for a near clock-for-clock comparison (albeit with HT enabled), the Core i5 760 for a potential price comparison and the Phenom II X6 1090T. The latter should be AMD’s fastest offering (if not close to it) when Sandy Bridge ships. Update: Note the Core i5 650 is actually the predecessor to the Core i5 2400, however I didn't feel a dual core vs. quad core comparison was too fair. The i5 760 will actually go head to head with the higher clocked i5 2500 when it launches in Q1.
| Motherboard: |
ASUS P7H57DV- EVO (Intel H57) Intel DP55KG (Intel P55) Intel DX58SO (Intel X58) Intel DX48BT2 (Intel X48) Gigabyte GA-MA790FX-UD5P (AMD 790FX) |
| Chipset Drivers: |
Intel 9.1.1.1015 (Intel) AMD Catalyst 8.12 |
| Hard Disk: | Intel X25-M SSD (80GB) |
| Memory: |
Corsair DDR3-1333 4 x 1GB (7-7-7-20) Corsair DDR3-1333 2 x 2GB (7-7-7-20) |
| Video Card: |
eVGA GeForce GTX 280 (Vista 64) ATI Radeon HD 5870 (Windows 7) |
| Video Drivers: |
ATI Catalyst 9.12 (Windows 7) NVIDIA ForceWare 180.43 (Vista64) NVIDIA ForceWare 178.24 (Vista32) |
| Desktop Resolution: | 1920 x 1200 |
| OS: |
Windows Vista Ultimate 32-bit (for SYSMark) Windows Vista Ultimate 64-bit Windows 7 x64 |
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
200 Comments
View All Comments
Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link
You're correct, I didn't feel a dual vs. quad-core comparison was fair which is why I focused on the 760. I'll clear up the text though :)Take care,
Anand
Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link
fixed :)mastrdrver - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link
If we go with what Anand has said and use the roadmap to guess pricing I just have one question then:Why in the world would anyone spend ~$300 for the 2500 and ~$500 on the 2600 then use the on chip gpu with no plans on some kind of discrete?
If the difference between a $600 HP is Llano and Sandy Bridge, Llano has a possibly huge advantage since I think its safe to assume that the gpu side will start at 5450 performance.
Its like Intel would be trying to tell you that SD Xbox 360 is better than HD Xbox 360 (Llano). Are you serious? If Llano can hit a pc at that price point and have a full shader count, Sandy Bridge is dead in the consumer market.
I know that's a lot of ifs and time between here and then but Intel doing what it has always done with graphics (suck) is going to haunt it. I think Intel let the door wide open and its head between it and the frame. All AMD has to do is shut it.
DanNeely - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link
There are people whose workloads are heavily CPU bound but who don't need a heavy duty GPU. Higher end servers and a lot of workstations fall into this category.Beyond that unless Intel made a GPUless die or deliberately disabled the onboard GPU there's no reason not to include it. While we'll have to wait until Intel shows off labeled die shots I doubt that the GPU is a large enough chunk to justify the engineering effort just to save a little on the manufacturing side.
mastrdrver - Saturday, August 28, 2010 - link
You are correct but my point was meant to be on "Best Buy" systems and not server or workstations. Sorry if I didn't get that clear.On the server front this will have to go up against Bulldozer which is an entirely different topic.
While it would be foolish for Intel to make a gpuless die since integration with the cpu side is inevitable, Larabee or what ever better be good. Then there is the driver thing. That Dragon Age Origin picture sure doesn't look right. For drivers that still have work to do, that picture looks exactly like the one from when Clarkdale was released. I'd be a little surprised if much driver work is left if those two pictures are actually different.
arh2o - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link
How much will these new 1155 motherboard prices be? Will they be in the same price range as the current 1156 motherboards?Rajinder Gill - Saturday, August 28, 2010 - link
I'd imagine the P67 boards will be priced between $150~$200.odin607 - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link
What about temps =(cmdrdredd - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link
I'm never buying an Intel CPU or Motherboard ever again. This is one area that made them what they are today. The ability to take a mid range part and clock it up is what made the Core 2 series such a success with gamers and other performance enthusiasts. Not all of the success is attributed to overclocking, but a good bit of the popularity came from a $200 CPU being able to clock up to levels that the $700+ cpus hit. Now, if the unlocked parts can hit big overclocks and aren't overpriced then maybe it'll work out. However, it's all to easy for Intel to give us the finger and price a $200 CPU at $600 because it's unlocked and say "tough crap, if you want to overclock then pay up!". I am hopeful it doesn't come to this.Anyway, quads are old news IMO...I'm looking at 6core for my next one.
JumpingJack - Saturday, August 28, 2010 - link
"but a good bit of the popularity came from a $200 CPU being able to clock up" ...Reading the preview, it looks like the 2500K may fit this description.
From the articles:
"...and the 2500K will replace the i5 760/655K ($205 - $216). ..."
Even the 875K, when it launched, wasn't as you claim... it actually came in 200 bucks cheaper than the 870.
http://techreport.com/articles.x/18988
It would seem to me that Intel has been planning this change for sometime and went out to address this....