G.Skill 16 GB (4 x 4 GB) DDR3-1600, F3-12800CL9Q2-32GBZL @ 9-9-9-24 and 1.5 V
Row 15 - Cell 0
Kingston 4 GB (2 x 2 GB) DDR3-2133, KHX2133C9AD3T1K2/4GX @ up to DDR3-2133 1.65 V for memory overclocking
Hard Drive
Intel SSD 510 250 GB, SATA 6 Gb/s
Graphics
Nvidia GeForce GTX 680 2 GB
Power Supply
Cooler Master UCP-1000 W
System Software And Drivers
Operating System
Windows 7 Ultimate 64-bit
DirectX
DirectX 11
Graphics Driver
Nvidia GeForce Release 301.10
We used Intel's new DZ77GA-70K for our LGA 1155 testing, but pulled out a number of boards from Gigabyte for testing compatibility of older Z68-based platforms.
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Game Benchmarks And Settings
Batman: Arkham City
Game Settings: High Quality Settings, Anti-Aliasing: Disabled/8x MSAA, V-sync: Disabled, DirectX 11 Mode, 1680x1050, 1920x1200, 2560x1600, Built-in Benchmark
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim
Game Settings: High Quality (8x AA / 8x AF) / Ultra Quality (8x AA, 16x AF) Settings, FXAA disabled, V-sync: Disabled, 1680x1050 / 1920x1080 / 2560x1600, 25-second playback, Fraps
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm
Game Settings: Ultra Quality Settings, Anti-Aliasing: 1x AA and 8x AA, Anisotropic Filtering: 16x, Vertical Sync: Disabled, 1680x1050, 1920x1080, 2560x1600, Demo: Crushblow to The Krazzworks, DirectX 11
Audio Benchmarks and Settings
iTunes
Version: 10.4.10, 64-bit Audio CD ("Terminator II" SE), 53 min., Convert to AAC audio format
Lame MP3
Version 3.98.3 Audio CD "Terminator II SE", 53 min, convert WAV to MP3 audio format, Command: -b 160 --nores (160 Kb/s)
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
It gets higher temps at lower frequencies? What the hell did Intel break?
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.
It makes sense Intel is making this its quickest ramp ever, as they see ARM on the horizon in today's changing market.
They're using their process to get to places they'll need to get to in the future
OK after reading most of the review and definitely studying the charts;
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...
It's a shame that this chip is marginally faster than 2700k. I guess it's all AMD fault. there is simply no pressure on Intel. Otherwise they would already moved to 8, 6, and 4 cores processors. Especially now when they have 4 cores under 77W.
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