Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Intel’s Second-Gen Core CPUs: The Sandy Bridge Review

Tags:
  • Core
  • Sandy Bridge
  • CPUs
Last response: in Reviews comments
Share
January 3, 2011 3:00:04 AM

Although the processing cores in Intel’s Sandy Bridge architecture are decidedly similar to Nehalem, the integration of on-die graphics and a ring bus improves performance for mainstream users. Intel’s Quick Sync is this design’s secret weapon, though.

Intel’s Second-Gen Core CPUs: The Sandy Bridge Review : Read more

More about : intels gen core cpus sandy bridge review

January 3, 2011 3:15:00 AM

BENCHIES! Thanks Tomshardware!
Score
6
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 3:21:38 AM

Editor, page 10 has mistakes. Its LGA1155, not LGA1555.
Score
4
Related resources
January 3, 2011 3:25:16 AM

MoneyFace pEditor, page 10 has mistakes. Its LGA1155, not LGA1555.


Fixed, thanks Money!
Score
2
January 3, 2011 3:35:43 AM

"an unlocked Sandy Bridge chip for $11 extra is actually pretty damn sexy."

i think the author's saying he's a sexually active cyberphile
Score
10
January 3, 2011 3:41:37 AM

juncturei think the author's saying he's sexually active


Just this.
Score
11
January 3, 2011 3:49:52 AM

Contest is limited to residents of the USA (excluding Rhode Island) 18 years of age and older.

Everytime there's a new contest, I see this line. =(
Score
7
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 3:51:52 AM

Great article guys. Glad to see you got your hands on those beauties. I look forward to you doing the same type of review with bulldozer. =D
Score
5
January 3, 2011 3:52:23 AM

Wow Intel owns when it came to converting video, beating out much faster dedicated solutions, which was strange but still awesome.

I don't know how AMD's going to fare but i hope their new architecture will at least compete with these CPU's, because for a few years now AMD has been at least a generation worth of speed behind Intel.

Also Intel's IGP's are finally gaining some ground in the games department.
Score
5
January 3, 2011 3:58:50 AM

fakieContest is limited to residents of the USA (excluding Rhode Island) 18 years of age and older.Everytime there's a new contest, I see this line. =(


I really wish this weren't the case fakie--and I'm very sorry it is. We're unfortunately subject to the will of the finance folks and the government, who make it hard to give things away without significant tax ramifications. I know that's of little consolation, but that's the reason :( 

Best,
Chris
Score
6
January 3, 2011 4:07:52 AM

"It’s the value-oriented buyers with processor budgets between $100 and $150 (where AMD offers some of its best deals) who get screwed."

I believe that says it all. Sorry, Intel, your new architecture may be excellent, but unless the i3-2100 series outperforms anything AMD can offer at the same price range WHILE OVERCLOCKED, you will see none of my desktop dollars.

That is all.
Score
1
January 3, 2011 4:13:00 AM

... will wait til 'buldozer'... and two things may happen... the buldozer at the price point will kick ass... or the sandy bridge parts will get cheaper...
Score
6
January 3, 2011 4:30:59 AM

There is some pretty cool stuff going on here. I like the way the article points out the good and the bad. As for me I really am mystified at Intel's decision to only put the higher end graphics in the k-models as most likely anyone buying them will be going for the P67 platform that doesn't even use the integrated graphics. It would have been soooo much better for the HTPC crowd if there were some lower end chips with the better integrated graphics. I guess somehow this is money motivated???

As for overclocking, well it seems a bit odd in the way it is being implemented. But for $216, I can't complain too much about a quad-core with a base clock of 3.3 GHz. Some enthusiasts won't like the limited overclocking features, but others will welcome the simplified approach.

I will be building my brother a new gaming computer for graduation this summer and now I have another viable option to look at. I had planned on going with a P55 + i5 760, but now I will need to consider the P67 + i5 2500K.

Waiting on bulldozer...
Score
3
January 3, 2011 4:36:57 AM

I mean this looks like a thorough test but its really not. I wanted to see an I7 1:1 clock performance comparisons. Mainly, 3.4GHz I7-950 vs 3.4GHz I7-2600K. Obviously 3.4 GHz new tech would usually beat a 3.0 current tech in benches. UGH. lame lame lame. Really want to see this comparison instead.
Score
7
January 3, 2011 4:39:25 AM

Shouldn't the title be second gen Core i series... because Core 2s were second gen Cores, weren't they?
Score
7
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 4:57:46 AM

Where is the 980x in these benchmarks?
Other than that its a great article, and I'm drooling over QuickSync!
Score
8
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 5:30:36 AM

Thanks for the review Chris :) 
QuickSync definitely looks interesting.
Score
0
January 3, 2011 5:34:53 AM

I just bought an i5-760 system on 12/30 from newegg, I guess I wasn't paying attention to when Sandy Bridge would actually be released. It's not here yet, so I could just send the mobo and cpu back when they get here, but I don't see enough justification as a gamer to move to the 2500k. Based on the number of 1.35V 4.7ghz for the 2600k, I would assume that on stock voltage it doesn't get much higher in frequency than my 760 will, and I don't like raising stock voltage.

This is all very nice, but I'll keep my bclk control for now and maybe move up when I get out of college in seven months and the tech is set in stone and dropping in price a little.

Not a bad chip, and I'm excited to see where they go with it. =]
Score
1
January 3, 2011 5:45:57 AM

Is sandy bridge the replacement to the x58 chipset? I thought I read somewhere they were planning on x68 sometime in 2011.
Score
-1
January 3, 2011 6:00:37 AM

Remember though as this is the lower end Sandy Bridge platform NOT THE MAIN LGA2011 socket. As Intel decided to release for the mainstream first before the enthusiasts this go around.
Score
1
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 6:08:04 AM

Just looked at the AnandTech review and here is their opinion -

Quote:
In all but the heaviest threaded applications, Sandy Bridge is the fastest chip on the block—and you get the performance at a fairly reasonable price. The Core i7-2600K is tempting at $317 but the Core i5-2500K is absolutely a steal at $216. You're getting nearly $999 worth of performance at roughly a quarter of the cost.


These things are as fast as the i7 980X and in some cases they're even faster!
Score
-2
January 3, 2011 6:19:00 AM

i5-2500k + p67 ftw!
Score
-1
January 3, 2011 6:26:34 AM

What if you throw something like 8k x 4k or 4k X 4k resolution video to QuickSand.. Sync :) 

Nice review, but personally still not going to replace my 3.6ghz C2Quad.. when will this cpu die so I can replace it!
Score
-2
January 3, 2011 6:35:06 AM

Im just waiting for bulldozer to get me out of buyin the i5 2500k
Score
4
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 6:35:41 AM

Quick Synch is just downright embarrasing for AMD ...
Score
5
January 3, 2011 6:42:34 AM

Quote:
A Radeon HD 6970 turns back lower utilization numbers and betterperformance results.


On page 5 last paragraph, the text reads 6970 while the attached image is using a 6870... just saying :) 
Otherwise great review, this is why we keep coming to Tom's
Score
1
January 3, 2011 7:49:00 AM

Goodbye overclocking, and nobody cares, eh?
Score
1
January 3, 2011 7:50:02 AM

Another Rhode islander disappointed
Score
2
January 3, 2011 7:52:55 AM

no video transcode quality check ? do you REALLY think anyone cares how fast a transcode is, if it sucks ?
Score
2
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 7:53:09 AM

Would love to have seen a Microsoft Flight Simulator X Benchmark with those new i7-2600K,2500K against the i7-950 and the i7-980X.In addition some more multi core gaming benchmarks as well.
That Quick Sync does look awesomely good though.
Score
2
January 3, 2011 9:20:09 AM

Quote:
Ignoring 1680x1050 (nobody with high-end graphics and a respectable processor is gaming on a 17” display, right?)

My monitor is 19" and 1440x900. Where do you find these strange monitors?
Score
0
January 3, 2011 9:29:36 AM

I guess we will see the full picture as soon as MB vendors will promote the new MB's line's. UEFI, USB3, SATA3...is something wrath talking about. For now i don't see many reasons to upgrade my two years old x58 based rig, and i have mixed fillings about that...
Thanks for the review.
Score
-1
January 3, 2011 9:52:21 AM

release date is still 9th of january right?
Score
0
January 3, 2011 10:08:29 AM

no need in a random drawing, just send it to me already!!
Score
0
January 3, 2011 10:28:20 AM

"Contest is limited to residents of the USA (excluding Rhode Island) 18 years of age and older."

Gee, don't a hate that line...
Score
-1
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 10:30:19 AM

Tamz_mscJust looked at the AnandTech review and here is their opinion -These things are as fast as the i7 980X and in some cases they're even faster!


I wonder if that means we will soon be able to pick up an i7 980x on the cheap/cheaper?!?!

I hope AMD isn't hearing this about right now...

http://www.rosswalker.co.uk/movie_sounds/sounds_files_2...
Score
0
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 11:08:29 AM

I knew the numbers would be good, but didn't know they would be this good. Seems like "tick-tock" just went boom. Might as well discontinue i7 980x right now.
Score
1
January 3, 2011 11:19:34 AM

DjEaZy... will wait til 'buldozer'... and two things may happen... the buldozer at the price point will kick ass... or the sandy bridge parts will get cheaper...

compared to past prices, this is already cheap
Score
1
January 3, 2011 11:24:12 AM

Thank you Tom's Hardware!! I've been eagerly awaiting reports comparing the new 2600k SB chip to the i7 950 for a new build I plan to do very soon. It looks like Sandy Bridge is the way to go!

One question though, in this article, (sorry I forgot where), you mentioned these chips are being released today....was that a typo? I thought they weren't being released until Jan 9th, last day of CES.

Can somebody get back to me as to when exactly these chips are being released.....or more importantly, when NewEgg will let me order one lol
Score
0
January 3, 2011 11:36:43 AM

Great review! It would be nice to see a follow up showing clock-for-clock performance with turbo boost shut off, memory bandwidths all the same, just to see if the cores are more efficient.
Score
0
January 3, 2011 11:56:31 AM

Sooo...
You used a 580 on all these setups.
Does that disable the onboard graphics?
Score
0
January 3, 2011 11:56:33 AM

This brings me good vibes about the LGA 2011 offerings later this year. Where are those Turbo and Unlocked top ends going to be?

I would also like to see what the MB manufacturers offer with this platform, and how THEY play with the options available.
Score
1
January 3, 2011 12:10:13 PM

Intel wasted a large amount chip area for the integrated graphics.They should have used it for additional cache.
Score
2
January 3, 2011 12:33:38 PM

"But after running the the numbers I’ve run on Sandy Bridge,"

Page 1, under road map.
Score
-1
January 3, 2011 12:38:10 PM

You said you used a radeon HD6870 and a GTX 570 as graphsics cards but in the hardware list it says you used a 5550 and a 4550 ...
Score
-1
January 3, 2011 12:38:59 PM

one thing I do not get is the QuickSync hype ... I hope somebody explains this to me.

Intel basicaly added a few features to their already existing video decode/encode engine used in integrated graphics and integrated this with the GPU. Won't the same happen when ATI/AMD releases Fusion parts ? UVD3+CPU integration basicaly. There might be slight feature differencies, but that's what I see it as.

So again why the hype ? It's nothing ground-breaking, just further level of integration.
Score
-1
January 3, 2011 12:50:31 PM

rhino13Sooo...You used a 580 on all these setups.Does that disable the onboard graphics?

I am pretty certain it does. I doubt the onboard GPU can be used simultaneously with another GPU.
ilikegirlsYou said you used a radeon HD6870 and a GTX 570 as graphsics cards but in the hardware list it says you used a 5550 and a 4550 ...


Those were for comparing the onboard GPU's performance for the 1 person reading this that actually intends to use the onboard GPU and may be curious as to what performance levels it offers.

Score
0
a b à CPUs
January 3, 2011 12:51:20 PM

Wow, AMD chips get CLOBBERED.

SB is looking like a winner!
Score
-4
January 3, 2011 12:51:32 PM

ilikegirlsYou said you used a radeon HD6870 and a GTX 570 as graphsics cards but in the hardware list it says you used a 5550 and a 4550 ...


Those were for comparing the onboard GPU's performance for the 1 person reading this that actually intends to use the onboard GPU and may be curious as to what performance levels it offers.
Score
0
!