The First Intel Ivy Bridge CPU Clock Speeds and More

[Marcus Yam]

Intel's Ivy Bridge specifications and release windows for Q2 2012 and beyond.

The First Intel Ivy Bridge CPU Clock Speeds and More : Read more

 

[soccerdocks]

Its surprising how all of these chips have a TDP of 77W. This should make for some nice temperatures even with a significant overclock.

 

[pbrigido]

As much as I would love to upgrade to an Ivy Bridge CPU, I can't seem to justify replacing my 2600k i7.

 

[Area51]

I wonder if with the LV version of the CPU it would be possible to run a system without a CPU Fan or not. That would make a great home entertainment system.

 

[neoverdugo]

So, whats the price tag?? If its Over 8000 I'll stick with the Bulldozer (That's a textbook definition of irony)

 

[slhpss]

can't wait... kinda upset it got pushed back to April release now... but I'm resolved to wait until these bad boys come out until upgrading.

 

[jjb8675309]

^exactly more importantly, what are the projected prices! Id like a 3570k if the price is right...

 

[sinfulpotato]

There is no reason to upgrade over the LAST generation i5 and i7. Hell, I will even say people with a second generation phenom have no incentive to upgrade. We are talking the neighborhood of 1-5 FPS differences in high resolution gaming across three generations.

 

[lasaldude]

These are LGA 1155 right? Not that stupid 2011 shit!

 

[davewolfgang]

[citation][nom]pbrigido[/nom]As much as I would love to upgrade to an Ivy Bridge CPU, I can't seem to justify replacing my 2600k i7.[/citation]

That's the reason I didn't upgrade from my i7-960 to Sandy - which was VERY, VERY hard to not do. But I have purposely waited in my upgrading until Ivy. Looks like my wait will be VERY well worth it.

 

[captaincharisma]

3D tri-gate transistor technology introduction.

i hate it when companies try to take advantage of using the latest buzzword to promote something. AMD is bad for this too with its HD internet technology or whatever it really is

 

[de5_Roy]

Nice! finally some numbers.
looks like they got lower tdp (take note, zambezi), 2700k-like speeds.
even the lower end i5s have at least 3 gigs of min. freq. that, combined with the die-shrink should get some strong numbers. r.i.p. i5 2300!
all the good things have already been said, now caveats:
why are the high end cpus only the ones with hd 4000? most people buying those cpus won't end up using them anyway. i hope that intel will release lower end cpus with hd4000 later.
why do the cpu model numbers look so similar to amd's old radeon hd cards?
why is the tdp so low? that alone makes ivy bridge a much less powerful cpu than amd's mighty fx 8150!!! muahahaha.....ha...

 

[ojas]

[citation][nom]sinfulpotato[/nom]There is no reason to upgrade over the LAST generation i5 and i7. Hell, I will even say people with a second generation phenom have no incentive to upgrade. We are talking the neighborhood of 1-5 FPS differences in high resolution gaming across three generations.[/citation]
Everything isn't just gaming!!
[citation][nom]lasaldude[/nom]These are LGA 1155 right? Not that stupid 2011 shit![/citation]
Yes, these are. From a workstation p.o.v LGA 2011 isn't exactly stupid, mind you.

 

[nhat11]

LOL the lowest speed is a 3.0 GHz, this is getting great and crazy

 

[Guest]

I'm more interested in this platform on a laptop/ultrabook. The upgraded GPU will come in handy there as I finally plan to just buy a laptop without the video card and will instead spend on an SSD. I should nearly double my battery life by doing so. I suspect a 9 cell battery with an IvyBridge CPU/GPU and an SSD should last me the entire day. While it would be heavier than a tablet, it could do everything I ever wanted to do in Ultrabook form factor including engineering work.

 

[tmk221]

I'm very disapointed by the fact that we don't have 8 and 16 core desktop processors by now... I mean come on! we have 4 core cpus from like 3-4 years now and still most of the new cpus are 4 core.

Is that becouse Intel don't feel any pressure from AMD? Personally I don't belive that Intel with it's multi billion budget and great sandy and now Ivy bridge architecture is not capable of making 16 core desktop cpu...

 

[sethusmaximus]

I'm most curious about the pricing... I feel like Intel might be a little too comfortable right now to price these reasonably/competitively.

I hope I'm wrong, though.

 

[billybobser]

4 Threads still!

Seems somewhat logical, when we struggle to get decent value from 2.

It seems somewhat retarded (and I like AMD, from a consumer pov) to add tons of cores (and more threads).

 

[verbalizer]

OK now show me some PRICING and THEN show me some BENCHES in relation to the i5-2500K and the i7-2600K.
Please do not mention any AMD Bulldozer (FX-8150) comparisons, that's a waste of time.

 

[Pherule]

You can see by the comments who uses multiple threads and who doesn't. Believe it or not, there are people out there that can and WILL utilize more than 8 threads (and indeed, more than 16) if that becomes available. Very disappointed that there isn't at least a 6 or 8 core Ivy Bridge from the get go.

 

[JOSHSKORN]

Can...not...wait...must...have...now!!

Can't wait for some benchmarks.

 

[spookyman]

[citation][nom]malmental[/nom]OK now show me some PRICING and THEN show me some BENCHES in relation to the i5-2500K and the i7-2600K.Please do not mention any AMD Bulldozer (FX-8150) comparisons, that's a waste of time.[/citation]

The Bulldozer platform is not a bad if it came in an Opteron Platform. Multi-Core CPU's are great for virtual server builds.

 

[Uberragen21]

[citation][nom]tmk221[/nom]I'm very disapointed by the fact that we don't have 8 and 16 core desktop processors by now... I mean come on! we have 4 core cpus from like 3-4 years now and still most of the new cpus are 4 core. Is that becouse Intel don't feel any pressure from AMD? Personally I don't belive that Intel with it's multi billion budget and great sandy and now Ivy bridge architecture is not capable of making 16 core desktop cpu...[/citation]
The problem isn't Intel or AMD not being able to make higher core processors, just look at the server processors, they have 12 and 16 cores. But the server software is designed to utilize them. The consumer market is not. It's the software dictating the hardware in this case.

 

[iamtheking123]

[citation][nom]captaincharisma[/nom]i hate it when companies try to take advantage of using the latest buzzword to promote something. AMD is bad for this too with its HD internet technology or whatever it really is[/citation]
What are you on about? It's called a 3D transistor it allows the gate to control the source-drain channel using 3 surfaces instead of just 1.

 

[iamtheking123]

It's lame that you have to buy the mid-price 3770 to get a K series Ivy Bridge. Why would I want to pay for the higher 3.4 ghz base clock when it's the exact same silicon as the 3.0 ghz chip? I'm going to overclock way beyond that anyways.