Page 1 of 6 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 53

Thread: As FUD tells it... Ivy Bridge 20 percent faster than SB

  1. #1
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    350

    As FUD tells it... Ivy Bridge 20 percent faster than SB

    Fudo is reporting that Ivy Bridge will be 20 percent faster than SB.

    The timing of this leak seems most curious. If this is a deliberate leak (and in my subjective opinion, it is), it would suggest that the Blue team is getting a tad nervous. Theoretically not only would they be potentially hurting AMD's sales while people waited for the performance numbers of IB, but they'd be hurting their own as well.

  2. #2
    Is that 20 percent more performance through more cores?

  3. #3
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    350
    Quote Originally Posted by fatty2nd View Post
    Is that 20 percent more performance through more cores?
    Good question, one of many. It's understandably vague at this point. Another question is, are they referring to CPU or Graphics performance?

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquineas View Post
    Good question, one of many. It's understandably vague at this point. Another question is, are they referring to CPU or Graphics performance?
    That is also a good question, though the reason why I think more cores is simply because there weren't meant to be any architectural changes to Ivy Bridge were there? Unless the 20% is from increased clock speed, or a combination of both, or even as you said for GPU performance.

  5. #5
    8-bit overflow
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    343
    I hope the gpu gains alot more than 20%..
    And the 20% number isn't new, when the first rumours about the 20% came they spoke of 20% more performance for the same priceclass/tdp. Indicating it is due to higher frequencies.

  6. #6
    I think they claimed they'd at least double the GPU performance for Ivy, so definitely CPU. Other than that...

  7. #7

    Eh..

    Based off what the article says it does not imply that there will be a 20% improvement per core, but a 20% improvement in the same thermal envelope. In my mind that is pretty abysmal, given the drastic jump from 32nm to 22nm. You can only hope that the new process will allow for huge overclocks.

    Intel is already talking to its partners about its upcoming 22nm Ivy Bridge CPU, and it is sharing some hints of performance. One of the things that Intel told recently is that this 22nm processor should offer more performance with a similar thermal envelope.

  8. #8
    640k who needs more?
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    995
    That is most definitely the speedup Vs old SB that has the same TDP envelope,like it was in the past. In practice 95W IB with higher clock(+Turbo) and slight uarchitectural improvements should be 20% faster that 95W SB.

  9. #9
    640k who needs more?
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    783
    Quote Originally Posted by Aquineas View Post
    Fudo is reporting that Ivy Bridge will be 20 percent faster than SB.

    The timing of this leak seems most curious. If this is a deliberate leak (and in my subjective opinion, it is), it would suggest that the Blue team is getting a tad nervous. Theoretically not only would they be potentially hurting AMD's sales while people waited for the performance numbers of IB, but they'd be hurting their own as well.
    In my experience, it would be to prevent business from defecting to AMD.

    So if I'm happy with SB and AMD comes along with a better solution, Intel's argument is to stay with us as once IB comes out, we'll blow them out of the water, why go through the trouble of changing vendors?

    Its very effective in large accounts...Retail not so much as price point and what can I sell now is a lot more important.

  10. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by Pablo View Post
    So if I'm happy with SB and AMD comes along with a better solution, Intel's argument is to stay with us as once IB comes out, we'll blow them out of the water, why go through the trouble of changing vendors?
    If someone is putting together a system now or within the next couple of months, why wait for a chip that's likely not going to be available until 4Q 2011 or 1Q 2012 at the earliest? Is changing vendors really that big of a hassle?

    Also, does this mean IB is going to be 100% compatible with existing SB sockets then?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
WordPress Appliance - Powered by TurnKey Linux