Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

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

By - Source: Coolaler.com | B 32 comments

Based on very early benchmarks, the upcoming Intel Core i7-4960 Ivy Bridge-E processors will deliver 5 percent to 10 percent better performance than their Sandy Bridge-E predecessor.

Coolaler.com user “Toppc” has posted some initial benchmarks comparing a Core i7-3970X Sandy Bridge-E to an engineering sample of an i7 Ivy Bridge-E configured to match the upcoming Core i7-4960X processor.

Using Toppc's system configuration (tabulated below), the i7-4960X performed 5 percent to 10 percent better across the board than its Sandy Bridge-E predecessor. Specifically, the i7-4960X scored 10.94 points in CineBench vs. i7-3970X's 10.16 points, 561 vs. 533 points in CPU Mark, 38,644 vs. 35,804 in 3D Mark Vantage, and in WPrime it crunched 32 M in 4.601s vs. 5.01s for the i7-3970X. 


Sandy Bridge-E

Ivy Bridge-E

CPU

Core i7-3970X

Core i7-4960X Equivalent

CPU Clock

3.50 GHz (Base) / 4.00 GHz (Turbo)

3.50 GHz (Base) / 4.00 GHz (Turbo)

Motherboard

MSI X79A-GD45 Plus

MSI X79A-GD45 Plus

RAM

16 GB DDR3

16 GB DDR3

GPU

GeForce GTX 480

GeForce GTX 480

We can’t say we’re surprised to see these results and are certainly looking forward to Intel’s next generation of CPUs. Screenshots from the benchmarks are available below.

Discuss
Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the News comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 15 Hide
    InvalidError , April 26, 2013 12:07 PM
    Quote:
    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.
  • 13 Hide
    rolli59 , April 26, 2013 12:44 PM
    Small steps just means that our current hardware is going to be competitive longer.
  • 10 Hide
    dirtyferret , April 26, 2013 12:57 PM
    FINALLY! my i7-3970X just isn't cutting it anymore for playing Bejeweled 2
Other Comments
    Display all 32 comments.
  • 8 Hide
    powerincarnate , April 26, 2013 11:53 AM
    All that time for 10%, that sucks. It's been 2 years since Sandy Bridge E came out.
  • -1 Hide
    vmem , April 26, 2013 11:55 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
  • 2 Hide
    g-unit1111 , April 26, 2013 12:03 PM
    Sounds about exactly what I'd expect anymore from one generation to the next.
  • 15 Hide
    InvalidError , April 26, 2013 12:07 PM
    Quote:
    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.
  • 0 Hide
    oraygungor , April 26, 2013 12:15 PM
    If you really compared it, it is not even 10%...
    http://img.donanimhaber.com//images/haber/46217/corei74960xxx2_dh_fx57.jpg
  • 0 Hide
    powerincarnate , April 26, 2013 12:29 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.
  • 13 Hide
    rolli59 , April 26, 2013 12:44 PM
    Small steps just means that our current hardware is going to be competitive longer.
  • 10 Hide
    dirtyferret , April 26, 2013 12:57 PM
    FINALLY! my i7-3970X just isn't cutting it anymore for playing Bejeweled 2
  • 9 Hide
    InvalidError , April 26, 2013 1:07 PM
    Quote:
    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.
  • 1 Hide
    Anonymous , April 26, 2013 1:37 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.
  • 0 Hide
    dirtyferret , April 26, 2013 1:42 PM
    Quote:
    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?

  • 0 Hide
    warezme , April 26, 2013 2:57 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.
  • 1 Hide
    becherovka , April 26, 2013 2:59 PM
    It would be nice if it come with a price drop :-)
  • 1 Hide
    dr-hoads , April 26, 2013 3:04 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. :-(
  • -1 Hide
    MrPintar14 , April 26, 2013 3:06 PM
    I think this is just a genious way to promote a website
  • -1 Hide
    MrPintar14 , April 26, 2013 3:47 PM
    I think this is just a genious way to promote a website
  • 1 Hide
    wavetrex , April 26, 2013 5:18 PM
    But how do they overclock ? Will they use the same stupid tim paste like for non-E ivy?
  • -1 Hide
    MrPintar14 , April 26, 2013 5:24 PM
    I think this is just a genious way to promote a website
  • 0 Hide
    christop , April 26, 2013 5:57 PM
    I didn't think it was going to be 50 percent jump..
  • 1 Hide
    alfaalex101 , April 26, 2013 9:44 PM
    AMD isn't phased by this type of news anymore
Display more comments