Intel Core i7 3820 Review: $285 Quad-Core Sandy Bridge E
by Anand Lal Shimpi on December 29, 2011 2:28 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
- Intel
- Sandy Bridge
- Sandy Bridge E
Gaming Performance
Gaming performance across the board echoes what we've already seen a lot of - the 3820 shows marginal gains over the 2600K.
Civilization V
Civ V's lateGameView benchmark presents us with two separate scores: average frame rate for the entire test as well as a no-render score that only looks at CPU performance.
Crysis: Warhead
Dawn of War II
DiRT 3
We ran two DiRT 3 benchmarks to get an idea for CPU bound and GPU bound performance. First the CPU bound settings:
Metro 2033
Starcraft 2
World of Warcraft
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
84 Comments
View All Comments
keristerzt - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
Of course, the X79 is support up to 40 lanes, that means you got native 16x16x bandwidth for both cards, this is a great deal, plus it has impressed me by it 4-channel of memory, brings up the bandwidth to 51.2GB/stech6 - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
As you can see by the benchmarks, the extra PCI and memory bandwidth will make no difference to your gaming experience whatsoever. Games simply don't require more than SB delivers. However, if you want to be the first kid on your street that has a SB-E then go for it.MySchizoBuddy - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
Compute will benefit from it. best option for compute is for 8 full x16 PCI-e.tyan provides a motherboard with those features for Compute servers.
DanNeely - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
The benches anand did are meaningless for a GPU comparison. Where LGA2011 might perform better is on 3/4 GPU setups, but these numbers are for a single 5870.cactusdog - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
This is why Intel didnt release the quad core 3820 with the initial launch of SB-E. It gives us an easy comparison with the 2600K and it highlights just how poor SB-E performs when compared to normal SB.I've always been a supporter of the highend but its hard to like SB-E unless you're prepared to spend $600-$1000 on a 6 core CPU, even then it aint great.
SlyNine - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
Not sure I agree with that, It does slightly better in the benchmarks and the 6 core CPU's for 600$ sounds about right to me.Taft12 - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
If you think $600 for a 6-core CPU sounds about right, you're going to lose your shit when I show you the Phenom II X6 prices!nevertell - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
Well, you're going to lose your shit when I tell you that they are discontinuing all the stars based phenom II x6 processors.iLLz - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
I'm not going to lose anything! The Penom II x6 performs worse than Intels Quad Cores so pffft!SlyNine - Thursday, December 29, 2011 - link
Then you're going to lose your shit when you see this 280$ CPU beating the crap out of the Phenom II X6.Seriously lets keep it in context here. Thats like saying I can buy 6 atom CPU's for 50$ so paying for a phenom is too much.