Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Anand has a sandbridge i5

Last response: in CPUs
Share
August 27, 2010 7:30:58 PM

http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-pre...

10% faster than nehalem, bottom end integrated graphics, can't overclock, new socket....FAIL INTEL. :lol: 

More about : anand sandbridge

a b à CPUs
August 27, 2010 7:39:12 PM

Did you not read? The intergrated graphics on non-finalized drivers beat every IGP out there by a handy margin.
a c 203 à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 27, 2010 7:45:56 PM

23% faster at the same price point. Top end integrated graphics.

K model CPUs for those that want to overclock. (maybe 10% of the market)
People buying a new system won't care about that socket thingy.
Related resources
August 27, 2010 7:50:11 PM

BadTrip said:
Did you not read? The intergrated graphics on non-finalized drivers beat every IGP out there by a handy margin.


Did you catch the part where most of the games were under 60fps at rock bottom settings and resolution? :lol: 
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2010 7:53:50 PM

bullcat said:
Did you catch the part where most of the games were under 60fps at rock bottom settings and resolution? :lol: 


Damn, what does that say about AMD, who were under 40fps? :kaola: 
August 27, 2010 7:55:15 PM

BadTrip said:
Damn, what does that say about AMD, who were under 40fps? :kaola: 


Can I just remind you we are comparing AMD's worst graphics vs intels best? :lol: 
August 27, 2010 7:58:18 PM

Now were cookin.
Hope this keeps up with fusion as well, where anyone who buys a PC will end up with usable GFX
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2010 7:59:32 PM

Intel doesnt make discrete cards.

All in all, I think this is a quite nice mainstream chip. OEM's will love them. Should make for some really nice laptops.
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2010 8:00:21 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Now were cookin.
Hope this keeps up with fusion as well, where anyone who buys a PC will end up with usable GFX



I agree as well. IGP has needed this for a long time.

Oh, and long time no see. Welcome back.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 27, 2010 8:01:04 PM

Forget the IGP, the enthusiast is going to get the p67- I5 2500K. At reasonable prices, maybe $210 ? 3300-3700mhz, 32nm. 15-20% faster core performance ?
IMO, lets see AMD leak something even close, lol
Fail not !
August 27, 2010 8:03:31 PM

TY, been moving etc etc.
Fiiiinally the decent IGPs are coming
a c 81 à CPUs
August 27, 2010 8:04:12 PM

This looks exciting.. Especially considering that its only the mainstream sneak peek.. If Intel time this well along with some very aggressive price cuts on their current CPU's, AMD's woes are going to increase even more.. Though i highly doubt it after seeing the treatment the core 2 series got even after the much better nehalems and lynnfields got launched..
August 27, 2010 8:05:06 PM

notty22 said:
Forget the IGP, the enthusiast is going to get the p67- I5 2500K. At reasonable prices, maybe $210 ? 3300-3700mhz, 32nm. 15-20% faster core performance ?
IMO, lets see AMD leak something even close, lol
Fail not !

Thing is, with decent IGPs, this allows for a bottom up focus on games, as the minimums are raised, so too will our gaming experience
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2010 8:07:43 PM

Intel has delivered on this one, being it is just the mainstream part. I hope that AMD delivers on Bulldozer as well. We need a good price war. Competition always benefits the consumer and leads to innovation.
a b à CPUs
August 27, 2010 8:08:33 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Thing is, with decent IGPs, this allows for a bottom up focus on games, as the minimums are raised, so too will our gaming experience



+1
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 27, 2010 8:11:31 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Thing is, with decent IGPs, this allows for a bottom up focus on games, as the minimums are raised, so too will our gaming experience


I get you, I agree. More people that can game, the better. Just IMO, the launch of p67 chipset , which does not allow use of the igp (choice)acknowledges that some just won't use it (igp).
How will they market it though, not having to include certain vga, hdmi parts to the board should make it cheaper, but maybe the chipset itself will be more expensive with its increased pci-e capacity.
August 27, 2010 8:22:33 PM

I think most people who would buy one of these would have a 1680 or 1920 resolution screen so unfortunately this still isn't going to be good enough for reasonable gameplay.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 27, 2010 8:30:40 PM

For the OP:

Hate to break it to you, but this is a very nice integrated chip(set), and the (gaming) benchies show it competing with lower end standalone cards. Not something I expected to be able to say about "Intel Graphics", which historically have been turd~like. Past offerings had me expecting the integrated version would be something suitable for an Office PC (which, to be honest, is exactly where they're aimed), and not much else. Nice to see the new offering can play some decent games at... well.. "non suck" framerates.


JAYDEEJOHN said:
Thing is, with decent IGPs, this allows for a bottom up focus on games, as the minimums are raised, so too will our gaming experience



You been good, man? Haven't seen you in a while - wondered where you disappeared to. :) 


a b à CPUs
a c 100 K Overclocking
August 27, 2010 8:44:58 PM

Cool to see at least some basic review on Sandy Bridge. My gf needs a new PC or laptop... probably will be perfect for her, since she doesn't really game but I'm sure having the option without needing a GPU would be very attractive.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 27, 2010 8:50:45 PM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Now were cookin.
Hope this keeps up with fusion as well, where anyone who buys a PC will end up with usable GFX



I have a good feeling about Fusion and bulldozer... i suspect that Fusion will be a bit better than intel's offerings and i am holding off upgrading with the anticipated potential of both...
August 27, 2010 11:41:06 PM

Scotteq said:
For the OP:

Hate to break it to you, but this is a very nice integrated chip(set), and the (gaming) benchies show it competing with lower end standalone cards. Not something I expected to be able to say about "Intel Graphics", which historically have been turd~like. Past offerings had me expecting the integrated version would be something suitable for an Office PC (which, to be honest, is exactly where they're aimed), and not much else. Nice to see the new offering can play some decent games at... well.. "non suck" framerates.





You been good, man? Haven't seen you in a while - wondered where you disappeared to. :) 

Yea, its all good, fiiinally.
Ive moved, have tons of projects to do, been busier than ten cats in a sandbox!
August 28, 2010 12:01:11 AM

Hey JayDee's back!

And about Sandy Bridge, i am sure Fusion will be a much more appealing product since the gpu that Fusion uses is equivalent to a 56xx series chip (based on the amount of sp's AMD said it would have, something like 400 to 500). The cpu may be faster than the Phenom II based Fusion chips, but who knows when the BD parts come out.
August 28, 2010 1:13:21 AM

OMG....I look at prospective pc's both desktop and laptops, run the system specs, drop the graphics link, read Intel, then close the lid and keep looking....crikey and you guys are saying finally I can play Zuma Delux with out constantly having to reenable 3D hardware support.....amazing, wonders will never cease... :na: 
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 28, 2010 2:40:10 AM

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Sandy Bridge suppose to limit OCing? As in, we won't get a $75 CPU (ie E5200) to $150+ CPU (E8xxx) speeds. In either case, Sandy Bridge looks very promising for the Mobile CPU market at least.

In any case, I think my LGA1366 will still hold off for a while after Sandy Bridge comes out.

Note: Prices based on the time they were significant; before the i7s came out.
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 8:02:22 AM

Shadow703793 said:
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't Sandy Bridge suppose to limit OCing? As in, we won't get a $75 CPU (ie E5200) to $150+ CPU (E8xxx) speeds. In either case, Sandy Bridge looks very promising for the Mobile CPU market at least.

In any case, I think my LGA1366 will still hold off for a while after Sandy Bridge comes out.

Note: Prices based on the time they were significant; before the i7s came out.


From what it looks like right now, lower end parts will be able to overclock, but perhaps not all that far. Midrange (~$200-300) parts will be available with fully unlocked multipliers though, so it's not all bad.
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 10:09:50 AM

AMD really need to wake up now, otherwise they are going to be 3 gens behind....

I wish AMD will have some high-end that can at least compete with the lower high-end from Intel, so that we consumers will have great bargains.
August 28, 2010 11:29:40 AM

Why oh why should AMD have to match Intel for speed. The current crop of Phenoms are superb and have all the functuallity of Intel's flagship processors, throw in some fantastic utilities and unlocked multipliers, outstanding graphics cards...the world is their oyster. Why would we AMD fanbois want to pay top dollar for our parts... leave that to the Intel devotees... long live the king...



...on reflection of my last comment...It might be better we wished that Intel had a competitive GPU of any description so that those rather nice 5870's fell bellow $500 bucks....but no, we have to wait for AMD's tick-tock 6000 series GPU's for that one...
August 28, 2010 3:32:16 PM

If some claims turn out to be true, then AMD will be catching up to Intel.
Will they surpass them? Maybe in some uses, overall? Probably not, but if the claims are true, the gap wont be noticeable to many a enthusiast, and most average Joes, which may mean Intel having a decent competitor in power and process, as well as price, again, in some areas
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 28, 2010 3:51:02 PM

cjl said:
From what it looks like right now, lower end parts will be able to overclock, but perhaps not all that far. Midrange (~$200-300) parts will be available with fully unlocked multipliers though, so it's not all bad.

That's just the thing.... if I'm building a cheap gaming PC for a friend, I seriously doubt I will spend $200-300 of ~$600 budget on just the CPU.
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 4:06:01 PM

Like Anand said in the review, a very early look with early drivers, turbo not working (possibly on the GPU as well), yet it still looked pretty impressive. Would like to see a review of the 12 execution unit GPU instead of the 6 EU one. Also, the OP is incorrect about only a 10% IPC improvement over Nehalem - Anand estimated that with turbo working, it would be between 13% and 17% improvement. I wouldn't be surprised to see 20% with the shipping silicon.

Anyway, with the impressive power and performance numbers, I suspect this will be aimed squarely at the notebook market. AMD did increase their marketshare in mobile last quarter, and I thnk part of the reason was the OEMs waiting on SB for their new models.

I'd really like to see a 6 or 8 core extreme edition for desktop - should blow the pins off a i7-990X. Esp. if the GPU can be used with a discrete GPU for gaming (like the Hydra Lucid chip that allows just about any combination of video cards to be used together, no matter if SLI or Xfire).
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 4:12:33 PM

What appalls me is the fact that performance is so close to the i7 980x.As always, I like the low power consumption.I can't wait to upgrade, though probably when LGA 2011 comes out :D 
August 28, 2010 4:16:34 PM

Dont discount AMDs better focus on mobile also.
If, again, its 17-20%, then AMD will be in the same boat its in now, except older Intel solutions wont be at all competitive. Tho, they may dump them in pricing, which will keep them going (older solutions), which Intel can afford to do as well.
All this speculation is too early, as I put more weight in Annands speculations as to turbo etc, especially since Intel knows there may be some competition this time around, and wont be showing its entire hand as it has before, knowing AMD was more limited as far as competition goes
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 4:31:38 PM

The good news for me is that I'll be upgrading from a 65 nm Core 2 duo e6300, so the new socket issue won't be affecting me.
a c 123 à CPUs
August 28, 2010 4:57:17 PM

WR2 said:
23% faster at the same price point. Top end integrated graphics.

K model CPUs for those that want to overclock. (maybe 10% of the market)
People buying a new system won't care about that socket thingy.


Its pretty nice. And considering they are running on alpha/beta drivers, a unfinalized board and no turbo feature that could change.

The IGP is pretty impressive. I had a feeling that if the GPU was attached to the CPU it would be able to help improve performance.

bullcat said:
Can I just remind you we are comparing AMD's worst graphics vs intels best? :lol: 


Its Intels best IGP ves ATIs worst discrete GPU. Lets also look at this:

Intels best IGP beats ATIs worst discrete and also beats AMDs best IGP which does not come anywhere close to ATIs worst discrete GPU.

It is by no means a high end gaming GPU. But it is much better than Intels previous versions and is going to currently be the best IGP you can buy when it hits.

As for the overclocking, I am still waiting for a full test that is using a finalized mobo of their choice.
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 8:15:18 PM

Shadow703793 said:
That's just the thing.... if I'm building a cheap gaming PC for a friend, I seriously doubt I will spend $200-300 of ~$600 budget on just the CPU.

I agree, but generally, if I build a cheap gaming PC for a friend, I won't overclock it much if at all. Especially when you consider the built in turbo mode, I don't see overclocking as a necessity for a cheap gaming PC in these.

Of course, that's just my opinion.
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 28, 2010 10:01:27 PM

cjl said:
I agree, but generally, if I build a cheap gaming PC for a friend, I won't overclock it much if at all. Especially when you consider the built in turbo mode, I don't see overclocking as a necessity for a cheap gaming PC in these.

Of course, that's just my opinion.

Good point. But if I understand correctly, the Turbo is still limited by the TDP, correct? As in, it will OC only 1-2 cores to 3.xGhz on a Quad. In this case, this would mean that even with turbo, you would be unable to run all 4 cores @ Turbo speeds due to the TDP limit, where as with OCing, we will be able to push all 4 cores.

At any rate, it's kind of sad to see that we probably won't be able to have fun in OCing the low end stuff. I think many people have OCed the hell out of E2xxx and E52xxx with LN2,H2O,etc just cause they were cheap.
August 28, 2010 10:08:10 PM

I have a problem with this because if intel can stop overclocking on most of their cpu's, whats to say they wont just stop it on all of their cpu's next generation?

Does intel get anything out of you overclocking? No. Guess what will be gone next time? If ever intel needed a good kicking this is it.
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 10:11:49 PM

bobdozer said:
I have a problem with this because if intel can stop overclocking on most of their cpu's, whats to say they wont just stop it on all of their cpu's next generation?

Does intel get anything out of you overclocking? No. Guess what will be gone next time? If ever intel needed a good kicking this is it.

Honestly, I don't see Intel preventing all overclocking. If anything, they've become more openly accepting of it just recently than they ever were in the past (with their release of midrange parts with a fully unlocked multiplier).

I don't even think that any overclocking prevention on Intel's low end Sandy parts is because of a desire to prevent overclocking. The main reason is probably because it is cheaper and lower power to integrate as much as possible into fewer dies, and integrating the clock generator saves power and money. It also happens to significantly increase the difficulty of overclocking, but I think that's a byproduct rather than their main intention.
August 28, 2010 10:13:09 PM

Do you think intel will charge more for the same cpu but with a "k" suffix cjl?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 28, 2010 10:16:00 PM

Quote:
The main reason is probably because it is cheaper and lower power to integrate as much as possible into fewer dies, and integrating the clock generator saves power and money.

Would some one explain to me EXACTLY HOW this new clock generator works? I know that all PCIe,QP,etc are tied to it, but exactly WHAT does this clock do?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 28, 2010 10:16:47 PM

bobdozer said:
Do you think intel will charge more for the same cpu but with a "k" suffix cjl?

Perhaps a 5-6% premium for the mid range "K" CPUs?
August 28, 2010 10:18:36 PM

Intels attitude toward OCing changed with AMDs change in its OCing attitude.
Theres a nice chunk of the market thats influenced by this, and I dont see Intel just ignoring it
a b à CPUs
August 28, 2010 10:22:49 PM

bobdozer said:
Do you think intel will charge more for the same cpu but with a "k" suffix cjl?

Probably, but looking at their current lineup, it won't be excessive. Nothing like the price of the extreme editions. It's also possible that certain processors will only come as k variants - there might not be an i5-2600, just the 2600k for example.

I would certainly bet that there will be at least one k series in the $200-250 price range though.
August 28, 2010 10:49:04 PM

I remember a time when there was no good reason to lower prices, but I Digress, mustve been my imagination
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 29, 2010 12:20:48 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Intels attitude toward OCing changed with AMDs change in its OCing attitude.
Theres a nice chunk of the market thats influenced by this, and I dont see Intel just ignoring it

Agreed, as long as each company work in a competitive manner, things will be fine. Competition is good for us consumers.
August 29, 2010 1:19:25 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
Intels attitude toward OCing changed with AMDs change in its OCing attitude.
Theres a nice chunk of the market thats influenced by this, and I dont see Intel just ignoring it



...the big difference here is the software support that AMD provide to support the OCing, ie Overdrive, Riva Tuner for GPU and the Fusion utility all designed to work with BE products... as opposed to copy, dump and hope for the best strategy from Intel and hope that a small bunch of vocal enthusiasts would celebrate their achievements and lead to an increase in sales, but unfortunately finished up with record levels of RMA's.... :lol: 
August 29, 2010 1:29:22 AM

You have links or proofs of this?
I know about the small bunch, but musta missed the rma thing?
a b à CPUs
a b K Overclocking
August 29, 2010 2:31:16 AM

^ Lawl.
August 29, 2010 4:01:51 AM

....a lot of it is first/second hand reports of users striking trouble...it's all over the net and on all tech sites, it's not too hard to fathom that by FSB OCing you tax a lot more of the system than just the cpu...then the Paradigm that a lot of folks try to do this at low cost with lower speced parts and you can see why Intel may be losing a bit of enthusiasm for the enthusiast PC market...

...AMD on the other hand has cut it's lunch on this market and infact needs it in some respect, and they learned just how much when they finally got on par performance with the A64 and hoped to leave that segment of the market behind, but they have learned a hard lesson, but turned their view around and programmed for it much more solidly of recent times..

...Intel just tried to stomp their giant foot on it to stop AMD getting any traction from their work in this market...but it didn't quite work because AMD, to it's credit, remained focussed on the bigger picture and has come up with a platform that is now entirely independant from Intel...

....whereas Intel still badly needs third parties like AMD and nVidia to remain in this market area. The disparity is getting wider...this eyefinity stuff is really catching on... hence Intel's focus on their graphics units...they know they have to improve in this area if they are going to hold onto the high levels of market leadership they currently enjoy...

...Intel and AMD are in the process of diverging from one another...the future is Intel, AMD or Macs...pick your weapon....there won't be much similarity left between the systems in the next 5 years, maybe sooner...

...shaved prices and reducing market share is an unattractive climate for the bottom line... make no mistake Intel is under some considerable pressure from the little green goblin, thanks in large part of course to ATi, but what a good purchase that has turned out to be...tough work, but I think AMD is over the hump, thanks also to a small cash injection from Intel, that served as a warning that you can go a bit too far in trying sure up your market share.

As for direct proof? I guess we need to ask Intel about what levels of returned goods they have received...but I'd be super confident in the fact that as the risk went up so did the RMA's, as sure as the sun rises in the morning...it was a silly strategy anyway...Intel are well out of it...

I for one am glad to see that they are starting to close the door on this a little with Sandybridge, and to some degree already have with the self OCing (AKA turbo mode)... they don't need the hassel and a better GPU will serve their ends far more effectively in the long term...IMO

..will this mean higher prices? Alas yes...we are already seeing AMD's ability to charge customers equally as well as Intel can. The top graphics cards are at premium prices and are taking somewhat longer to come back to the pack as compared with past years...it's a sure sign that AMD is feeling a lot more boyant about its future...and what evidence I hear you say?...well follow my GPU upgrade path for a second... 3870....4850....5770-Xfire each has cost me more dosh. but am losing ground at the bleeding edge as I am looking for performance for the buck...

Interesting road ahead...I just hope that the upgrader/system builder has a future, but that to seems to be getting harder due to software registrations and activations...but that's a whole other saga....
a b à CPUs
August 29, 2010 4:15:58 AM

What's next? Ram with IGP? Power supply with Blu-Ray? HDD with RAM? Case with integrated CPU?

The CPU manufacturers make IGPs. In the meantime the graphics producers are making GPGPUs. They should stick to what they're supposed to do. There are lots of mobos with onboard video, why the hassle? For movies and stuff, those are good, for gaming the ones in the CPU are way too weak anyway. Even for a gaming laptop.

!