Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

Unofficial Benchmarks Show Intel Core i7-4960X Ivy Bridge-E Performing 10% Faster Than i7-3970X

Last response: in News comments
Share
April 26, 2013 11:53:44 AM

All that time for 10%, that sucks. It's been 2 years since Sandy Bridge E came out.
Score
8
a b à CPUs
April 26, 2013 11:55:59 AM

hopefully they at least fix and update all the mobo issues with Sandy E. I want to upgrade from my OCed 2500K because I'm starting to do some processor heavy work, and it seems that neither 4770k nor 4960X are too interesting atm. should've just bought a 3960x or something
Score
-1
a b à CPUs
April 26, 2013 12:03:20 PM

Sounds about exactly what I'd expect anymore from one generation to the next.
Score
2
a c 140 à CPUs
April 26, 2013 12:07:09 PM

powerincarnate said:
All that time for 10%, that sucks. It's been 2 years since Sandy Bridge E came out.

What else did you expect? SB to IB only had 5-10% improvement on mainstream LGA1155 chips so it follows naturally that the same would occur on LGA2011.

Based on leaked Haswell numbers, you can expect Haswell-E to be yet another "only ~10%" over IB-E as well.

The majority of cost-effective and power-efficient clock+IPC improvements are tapped out. We will most likely never see the days of 40%/year improvements ever again unless Intel and AMD decide to start a core count war... but such a war is pointless when almost no mainstream software is capable of making meaningful use of it.
Score
15
April 26, 2013 12:29:12 PM

Well, By the time Ivy Bridge E comes out, it will be two year, that is a long time in processor world. I miss the days of Moore's law of getting like a doubling of performance every 18 months.
I remember having a 500 mhz Pentium3 and then like 2 years later, got an Athlon XP 1600+ and that was like night and day then.
I remember like 2 years later getting an Athlon 64 3200 and that was like night and day compared to the previous one.
I remember going from That to Core 2 due E 6600, and again, that was like night and day.
I remember going from that to Core 2 Quad Q9550, and that was a lot bettter, but more importantly, I didn't go that route, but I remember the folks who went from a Core 2 duo like I had and went to the Core I7 processors, and they had a huge jump.
For me, I took the route of coure 2 quad first, and then went to the Sandy Bridge E 3820, but 2 years is a lot of time, and to only get 5-10% performance then, that sucks.
For the GPU days, 2 years use to be two generation, so again, same huge improvements like for me it was going from Rage card to Radeon 64 DDR, then I had the Radeon 9700 pro,
Then the 8800 GT (nVidia),
then I was stuck because I still had an AGP motherboard,
finally when I switched to the Core 2 Duo, I also got a Radeon 4870, and switched it shortly after for the 5850, and now the 7970.
It seems AMD and Nvidia are both in a rut as well, because the next general is going to be late by 2 years, and I don't have high hopes for the old days of massive gains.
Score
0
a c 900 à CPUs
April 26, 2013 12:44:21 PM

Small steps just means that our current hardware is going to be competitive longer.
Score
13
a b à CPUs
April 26, 2013 12:57:16 PM

FINALLY! my i7-3970X just isn't cutting it anymore for playing Bejeweled 2
Score
10
a c 140 à CPUs
April 26, 2013 1:07:06 PM

powerincarnate said:
I miss the days of Moore's law of getting like a doubling of performance every 18 months.

Moore's law was about transistor count, not performance. The combination of clock rate increases and extra transistors just happened to roughly double performance at a similar rate for about 15 years or so.

The clock rate part of the performance gain equation hit a brick wall almost a decade ago with the market shift towards power-efficiency while the transistor count is mostly driven by IGP and cache these days because there are few other cost-effective uses for the growing transistor budget on mainstream CPUs.

Unless mainstream software starts actually using multi-core CPUs, even transistor counts may end up brick-walled by lack of software to justify it in the mainstream market.
Score
9
Anonymous
April 26, 2013 1:37:40 PM

I know its a CPU benchmark but a GTX 480 in the test run, really? This won't be worth an upgrade over Ivy but for those of us that are on 2 year old cpus (2600k) like me it should be.
Score
1
a b à CPUs
April 26, 2013 1:42:03 PM

Anonymous said:
I know its a CPU benchmark but a GTX 480 in the test run, really? This won't be worth an upgrade over Ivy but for those of us that are on 2 year old cpus (2600k) like me it should be.


out of curiosity, why do you think it's a worthwhile upgrade over an i7-2600k @ 4.5ghz?

Score
0
April 26, 2013 2:57:57 PM

Isn't 10% considered within the margin of error so , no change. So sad AMD lost their competitive edge cause now we're stuck with no CPU performance progress.
Score
0
April 26, 2013 2:59:04 PM

It would be nice if it come with a price drop :-)
Score
1
April 26, 2013 3:04:08 PM

For me:
6809->386sx 16mhz (ZOMG! 117 times faster!!!)
386 -> P100 (NO WAY! 30 times faster!!)
P100 -> 233MMX (This is more like it!! 2 times faster!)
233MMX -> PIII 1GhZ (Who will ever need more than this?!? 6.5 times faster!!)
PIII -> P4 3Ghz (This is Insane!! 3 times faster!)
P4 -> 2600K (I can do everything I did before, but now it is awesome fast, 15 times faster - multi thread, 3.5 times faster - single thread)
Starting to think that I will not have to upgrade my 2600K for a long LONG time. Maybe there will be a revolutionary step, but as it stands it will take like 10 years to double performance... At least I don't feel like I have to spend money to upgrade, I just hope it does not end up killing the enthusiast crowd out of boredom. :-(
Score
1
April 26, 2013 3:06:28 PM

I think this is just a genious way to promote a website
Score
-1
April 26, 2013 3:47:42 PM

I think this is just a genious way to promote a website
Score
-1
April 26, 2013 5:18:27 PM

But how do they overclock ? Will they use the same stupid tim paste like for non-E ivy?
Score
1
April 26, 2013 5:24:11 PM

I think this is just a genious way to promote a website
Score
-1
a b à CPUs
April 26, 2013 5:57:17 PM

I didn't think it was going to be 50 percent jump..
Score
0
April 26, 2013 9:44:53 PM

AMD isn't phased by this type of news anymore
Score
1
April 26, 2013 11:48:42 PM

Is it just me or is the naming scheme for the E-edition CPUs extremely misleading?
Core i7-3970X is a SB-E whilst 3770K is IB.
Likewise, Core i7-4960X is an IB-E whilst 4770K is Haswell? Huh?
Couldn't they have just kept the same nomenclature for the same architecture?
Score
1
April 27, 2013 12:23:53 AM

AMD, release some benches on Steamroller already or Intel will start charging gazillion dollars for 1-2% improvements on CPUs.
Score
0
April 27, 2013 4:31:49 AM

You should not care as the low difference will indeed permit users to keep sing old hardware longer hence, saving money to spend elsewhere.
Still going with C2D E8400 and GTX460 and I'm sure I do not NEED an upgrade to play any games.
Score
0
April 27, 2013 6:39:32 AM

Waiting to see how the Ivy Bridge-E 2011 socket CPUs compare when they come out late this year (hopefully).
Score
-1
a c 140 à CPUs
April 27, 2013 7:47:39 AM

dr-hoads said:
233MMX -> PIII 1GhZ (Who will ever need more than this?!? 6.5 times faster!!)
PIII -> P4 3Ghz (This is Insane!! 3 times faster!)

The P4 had horrible IPC compared to the P3 and that made it the laughing stock of many enthusiast sites for several months. The P4 did not start to clearly outperform the 1GHz P3 until the P4 hit 2GHz, which must have been quite embarrassing for Intel. With HT, the 3GHz P4 may be just over twice as fast as the 1GHz P3 - not counting software optimized specifically for the P4.
Score
0
April 27, 2013 9:03:06 AM

I'm wondering if the Core i7-4970X is a 8-core processor. It's been rumored that Intel will introduce one for the single CPU workstation market.
Keep in mind though that you can pop in the Ivy Bridge into your existing 2011 motherboards. I wonder if Intel will keep the same socket for Haswell? Making a purchase of the 2011 motherboards a nice long term investment.
Score
0
April 27, 2013 9:16:29 AM

I'm wondering if the Core i7-4970X is a 8-core processor. It's been rumored that Intel will introduce one for the single CPU workstation market.
Keep in mind though that you can pop in the Ivy Bridge into your existing 2011 motherboards. I wonder if Intel will keep the same socket for Haswell? Making a purchase of the 2011 motherboards a nice long term investment.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
April 27, 2013 11:41:25 AM

The difference is this is supposed to be a Tock not a tick. This is nonsence even Amd is moving faster
Score
0
April 27, 2013 3:08:22 PM

Man the hardware scene is just so boring these days. 10% improvements are not exciting, no reason to upgrade. And they wonder why sales are slumping, its because there is no reason to upgrade.
I miss the days of performance doubling every 1-2 years. Oh well maybe next generation will give me a reason to upgrade(ive been saying that the last 3 generations tho). If you've bought any cpu made in the last 4 years there is no reason to upgrade heh.
Score
0
a c 199 à CPUs
April 28, 2013 1:12:24 AM

Wonder what TDP it is?
If it's a 130W part then that's a significant increase over the 150W 3970X
Score
0
a c 140 à CPUs
April 28, 2013 8:37:03 AM

none12345 said:
Man the hardware scene is just so boring these days. 10% improvements are not exciting, no reason to upgrade. And they wonder why sales are slumping, its because there is no reason to upgrade.

Even if the 40-60%/year performance improvements had continued, most people today would likely still not bother to upgrade anywhere near as often as they used to due to lack of software that can actually put that extra processing power to good use.

Most computers out there today will rarely be used for anything much more intensive than video playback and today's low-end chips can easily handle multiple simultaneous 1080p streams even without GPU acceleration.

Even if AMD and Intel released 5X faster chips tomorrow, most people would not bother upgrading due to lack of mainstream software that can make any meaningful use of that: today's low-end chips are already overkill for most of what people do on a regular basis so for most people, it does not really matter much how much better today's chip might be until software catches up in a justifiable way.
Score
0
July 10, 2013 2:47:11 AM

i care more about the chipsets. Haswell was meh but Z87 is awesome compared to Z77 with all those sata3 ports
Score
0
!