Ivy Bridge Memory Scaling
A deliberate effort went into extending Ivy Bridge’s memory overclocking ceiling and adding more granular settings. In theory, scaling memory bandwidth up could have a big impact on integrated graphics performance (more throughput certainly helped AMD’s A8-3850). So, is it worth spending extra on modules rated for higher data rates?
A synthetic like Sandra 2012 demonstrates sizable gains. Bandwidth literally doubles as we move from two channels of DDR3-1066 to DDR3-2133.
Real-world performance improvements trail off a lot faster though, likely because memory isn’t the most debilitating bottleneck.
Assuming you use a high-end Ivy Bridge chip with a discrete GPU, does faster memory affect our other benchmarks? WinRAR is notoriously sensitive to bandwidth changes, and it easily shows where more throughput helps…and where it ceases to make a difference.
It definitely makes sense to buy a DDR3-1600 kit, and even DDR3-1866 nudges performance forward a little. Stepping up to DDR3-2133 really doesn’t do anything though.
On the other end of the spectrum, well-threaded compute-intensive titles like 3ds Max give you nothing back in return for installing faster memory.
Looking forward to the further information coming out this week on Ivy Bridge, as I was initially planning on buying Ivy Bridge, but now I might turn to Sandy Bridge-E
Temps as expected are high on the IB, but better than early ES which is very good.
Those with their SB or SB-E (K/X) should be feeling good about now ;)
Now, time to read the review. :D
I really wish they would introduce a gaming platform between their stupidly overpriced x79esque server platform and the integrated graphics chips they are pushing mainstream. 50% more transistors should be 30% or so more performance or a much smaller chip, but gamers get nothing out of Ivy Bridge.
They're using their process to get to places they'll need to get to in the future
I have a few things on my mind.
1.) AMD - C'mon and get it together, you need to do better...2.) imagine if Intel made an i7-2660K or something like the i5-2550K they have now.
3.) SB-E is not for gaming (too highly priced...) compared to i7 or i5 Sandy Bridge
4.) Ivy Bridge runs hot.......
5.) IB average 3.7% faster than i7 SB and only 16% over i5 SB = not worth it
6.) AMD - C'mon and get it together, you need to do better...
(moderator edit..)
To me it shows 2 main things. 1) that Ivy didn't improve on Sandy Bridge as much as Intel was hoping it would, and 2) just how far behind AMD actually is...
Yea yea I know most apps won't use 8 cores, but that's only because there was no 8 cores processors in past, not the other way around