With the The First Intel Ivy Bridge CPU Clock Speeds and More story from earlier this week, we caught some of the early details of the first Ivy Bridge chips, which is set to release in April 2012. Now, with some more leaked information from Chinese site Corecn, via German site ComputerBase, we find out more information on S and T model numbers.
The table provides a full listing of remaining eight upcoming models, including model number, base frequency, cache size, cores/threads, memory speed, turbo boost speeds, Intel HD graphics, frequency / dynamic frequency and TDP ratings. It appears that Ivy Bridge will have similar clock speeds to current generation Sandy Bridge CPUs, just with a lower TDP based on Intel's transition to 22 nm from 32 nm transistor design.
|Processor||Base Frequency (GHz)||Total Cache (MB)||Cores / Threads||Memory Speed Support (DDR3)||Turbo Boost max single core (GHz)||Intel HD Graphics||Frequency / Dynamic Frequency (MHz)||TDP (W)|
|Core i7-3770S||3.10||8||4 / 8||1600, 1333||3.90||4000||650/1150||65|
|Core i7-3770T||2.50||8||4 / 8||1600, 1333||3.70||4000||650/1150||45|
|Core i5-3570S||3.10||6||4 / 4||1600, 1333||3.80||2500||650/1150||65|
|Core i5-3570T||2.30||6||4 / 4||1600, 1333||3.30||2500||650/1150||45|
|Core i5-3550S||3.00||6||4 / 4||1600, 1333||3.70||2500||650/1150||65|
|Core i5-3475S||2.90||6||4 / 4||1600, 1333||3.60||4000||650/1100||65|
|Core i5-3470S||2.90||6||4 / 4||1600, 1333||3.60||2500||650/1100||65|
|Core i5-3470T||2.90||3||2 / 4||1600, 1333||3.60||2500||650/1100||35|
|Core i5-3450S||2.80||6||4 / 4||1600, 1333||3.50||2500||650/1100||65|
|Core i5-3330S||2.70||6||4 / 4||1600, 1333||3.20||2500||650/1050||65|
S - Performance-optimized (low power with 65W TDP), T – Power-optimized (ultra low power with 35-45W TDP)
Features shared by all the above mentioned Ivy Bridge CPUs are a 2-channel integrated memory controller; and all but the Core i5-3450S and i5-3330S have Intel's SIPP 2012, vPro 2012, VT-d, TXT, and AES-NI support.
Stay on the Cutting Edge
Join the experts who read Tom's Hardware for the inside track on enthusiast PC tech news — and have for over 25 years. We'll send breaking news and in-depth reviews of CPUs, GPUs, AI, maker hardware and more straight to your inbox.
I will take a 3570S please.Reply
at the risk of sounding totally noob on this website, an inquiring mind wants to know: What happened to the GHz race? i thought we would be at 5GHz already :( . please no flaming, i sincerely want to know.Reply
Looks like there's not much reason to upgrade from Sandy Bridge unless you really want that energy savings.Reply
I think there's gonna be a lot of headroom for overclocking on Ivy Bridge, next year is going to be awesome.Reply
Looks like they downclocked from SB...strange. I thought they could keep the same thermal and power savings draw but can raise the frequency higher due to moving to tri-gate 22nm.Reply
Long story short, power consumption and heat. The high clock speed Pentium 4s started drawing about 125W once they got to the 3.8Ghz range, and for reasons of power consumption and heat that just wasn't economical. It seems like 125W is about the ceiling for most processors, past that point is gets very difficult to go much higher economically.Reply
rebel1280at the risk of sounding totally noob on this website, an inquiring mind wants to know: What happened to the GHz race? i thought we would be at 5GHz already . please no flaming, i sincerely want to know.The GHz race was the rage when performance scaled with frequency so the point was going up-up and of course going up meant power hungry and hot processors. But at a distinct point in time, a light bulb lit in one engineers head and he thought "what if performance can scale upwards with improvements in architecture rather than just plain speed". So back to the drawing board and there u have it, speed obtained through "cleverness" rather then "brute force".Reply
rebel1280at the risk of sounding totally noob on this website, an inquiring mind wants to know: What happened to the GHz race? i thought we would be at 5GHz already . please no flaming, i sincerely want to know.Reply
AMD lost it, so Intel stopped competing. the 3770K would probably have been introduced at 3.9GHz base and 4.5GHz turbo, and probably would have hit the market already, if Zambezi would have been at least competitive. Intel now has no reason to push their chips to go faster. Nobody else is going to come along and sell something cheaper and faster, so why bother? they'll sap us for as much money as they possibly can until someone comes out with something that would compete again.
Looks to me like this Ivy Bridge will greatly help sales of notebooks with the lower TDP and increased graphics power!Reply
rebel1280at the risk of sounding totally noob on this website, an inquiring mind wants to know: What happened to the GHz race? i thought we would be at 5GHz already . please no flaming, i sincerely want to know.The GHz race died some 6-7 years ago when AMD figured out that they could kick intel's ass in optimizing design rather than raw speed. Then intel took that cue and came out with the Core solo/duo and Core 2 duo/quad and AMD has been playing catchup ever sense. Also they found that there are issues with power constraints and stability going past 5GHz, as the power requirement started turning exponential, and then running that much power causes damage to the processor so things start dying quickly.Reply
But ya, there was a time when the P4s were coming out that they thought they could push the micro-burst architecture to some 15GHz before they would have to change their processor design... obviously this did not work out.