4 ms·

Quite disappointing gains considering the move to 22nm, 3d transistors, and being delayed (from Jan). I could live with the overclocking/heat issues if it mean

by polshaw 15y ago

Quite disappointing gains considering the move to 22nm, 3d transistors, and being delayed (from Jan). I could live with the overclocking/heat issues if it meant more undervoltage headroom- but this doesn't seem to be the case either.. odd. Perhaps the process will improve over time? Load power is down, but the 3770K is only where the 2500K was.. yet to see where the 3570K lies. GPU increases are welcome but not thrilling. I was waiting for this for an upgrade, but i'm left unsure 3570k vs 2500k. Think i'll wait for some more info on clocks vs volts/temps. You have to say it's a no-brainer for anyone considering a non-K cpu however; cheaper, faster, better GPU, less power. And they don't lose virtualisation, either.

ctdonath 15y ago
Methinks the point is to survive & solidify the transition to the new manufacturing tech before going whole-hog on capability improvements. Such is the nature of Intel's "tick-tock" development cycles: get fundamental and boring changes down cold before showing what awesomeness can come of them.
- wmf 15y ago
  But a new process is at least supposed to provide 30% more performance even without awesomeness, not 10%.
  - pmjordan 15y ago
    Let's check that claim for the 65nm -> 45nm transition of the Core2Duo. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors#.22Allendale.22.2C_.22Conroe.22_.2865_nm.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microproce... The fastest 65nm Core2Duo with 65W TDP was the 3.0GHz E6850, released in July 2007. The first batch of 45nm CPUs was released in January 2008, the fastest one being the 3.17GHz E8500. A whopping 6% clock speed improvement, though admittedly the cache size grew from 4MB to 6MB. Bus speed stayed the same. I doubt that resulted in a 30% performance improvement overall, 10-15% seems more likely. They followed up with some significantly faster CPUs a few months later, and I suspect they will do so with Ivy Bridge, too.
    - deleted 15y ago
      [deleted]
ajross 15y ago
Transistor density went up about 60%. Power per performance is down about 20%. Performance per clock is up about 5-10% for some loads. Idle power is mostly unchanged because it's dominated by leakage in modern CPUs and that gets worse with process shrinks (note that Ivy Bridge isn't showing much change in idle consumption despite being a smaller die). Really, except for the 3.5 month slip, this is a pretty typical new process release. You don't get a Sandy Bridge "wow factor" release with a die shrink. It used to be that they didn't do a big product reveal at all. The P5 core saw (I think) three die shrinks over its lifetime but was always just marketed as the X MHz Pentium.

by polshaw 15y ago

ctdonath 15y ago

Methinks the point is to survive & solidify the transition to the new manufacturing tech before going whole-hog on capability improvements. Such is the nature of Intel's "tick-tock" development cycles: get fundamental and boring changes down cold before showing what awesomeness can come of them.

wmf 15y ago
But a new process is at least supposed to provide 30% more performance even without awesomeness, not 10%.
- pmjordan 15y ago
  Let's check that claim for the 65nm -> 45nm transition of the Core2Duo. According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microprocessors#.22Allendale.22.2C_.22Conroe.22_.2865_nm.29 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Intel_Core_2_microproce... The fastest 65nm Core2Duo with 65W TDP was the 3.0GHz E6850, released in July 2007. The first batch of 45nm CPUs was released in January 2008, the fastest one being the 3.17GHz E8500. A whopping 6% clock speed improvement, though admittedly the cache size grew from 4MB to 6MB. Bus speed stayed the same. I doubt that resulted in a 30% performance improvement overall, 10-15% seems more likely. They followed up with some significantly faster CPUs a few months later, and I suspect they will do so with Ivy Bridge, too.
  - deleted 15y ago
    [deleted]

ajross 15y ago

Transistor density went up about 60%. Power per performance is down about 20%. Performance per clock is up about 5-10% for some loads. Idle power is mostly unchanged because it's dominated by leakage in modern CPUs and that gets worse with process shrinks (note that Ivy Bridge isn't showing much change in idle consumption despite being a smaller die). Really, except for the 3.5 month slip, this is a pretty typical new process release. You don't get a Sandy Bridge "wow factor" release with a die shrink. It used to be that they didn't do a big product reveal at all. The P5 core saw (I think) three die shrinks over its lifetime but was always just marketed as the X MHz Pentium.