Tag Archives | intel

Ivy Bridge is Here – An Overview

7093651619 c69ea33e4f o Ivy Bridge is Here   An OverviewThis week brought us the release of Ivy Bridge.  This particular release is especially strange and rather challenging to cover as a lot of the critical parts are spread out over a 3 month period. Earlier this month we saw the release of the Z77 chipset, which is the primary enthusiast chipset to support Ivy Bridge (like the Z68 Chipset).  This week we get the release of the Quad Core CPU versions of Ivy Bridge.

The article below is a great extensive look at the Ivy Bridge release and more specifically, the Core i7-3770K.  I just want to touch on a few key points here which will be important to you.

The number one question I am sure:  ”Is it worth upgrading to Ivy Bridge from Sandy Bridge?”  From a value standpoint my answer is no – UNLESS you want to run PCIe 3.0, or you want to support Thunderbolt technology.

Before I continue, there is a HUGE caveat about Thunderbolt.  If you are wanting to use Thunderbolt devices with your new Ivy Bridge System – DO NOT BUY ANYTHING YET.  The Z77 chipset will be supporting Thunderbolt with an additional controller, but this will not be released until the end of May.  So that means you can’t buy a Z77 motherboard right now, and have it support Thunderbolt.  If you don’t care about using Thunderbolt, then don’t worry about it.

Ivy Bridge CPU Ivy Bridge is Here   An OverviewThe largest benefit for building an Ivy Bridge system is PCIe 3.0 – or it will be eventually.  Currently you can play any game at max settings with PCIe 2.0 cards – though I am interested to see the effect PCIe 3.0 will have on current benchmarks.  There are currently PCIe 3.0 capable cards on Tom’s Benchmarks, but it is difficult to compare the current offerings.  AMD’s 7XXX series cards are PCIe 3.0 capable, and they perform better than the previous generation – but that is to be expected for a new generation video card.  nVidia has released the GTX 680 as their only PCIe 3.0 video card, and it outperforms everything except certain cards with higher memory at higher settings – the Extreme benchmarks are dominated by 3 and 4 GB cards, which is to be expected considering the large resolution (keep this in mind when Retina Displays become mainstream).

My take on this is that if you have a Sandy Bridge system right now, don’t upgrade just yet (unless of course you simply enjoy doing that, then feel free to go nuts icon smile Ivy Bridge is Here   An Overview .  There is no value justification in upgrading from a Sandy Bridge / Z68 system to an Ivy Bridge / Z77 system at this time.

Just to wrap up some other notes about this release.  This release is only for the Quad Core Ivy Bridge CPUs.  The i7-3770k reviewed below is the IB version of the i7-2600k/2700k.  The i5-3570k is the IB version of the i5-2500k.  So the mid-range build will likely consist of an i5-3570k on a Z77 chipset board.  As I am writing this, I haven’t actually seen these chips available in retailers, so I am not sure when that will happen.  It’s nice to note that the new versions of these CPUs are actually going to be slightly cheaper than their predecessors – the i7-3770k being $19 cheaper than previous, and the i5-3570k being $13 less.  This says to me that retailers are going to likely drop prices on Sandy Bridge not insignificantly (or at least provide sales).

So again, if you currently have a Sandy Bridge system of at least the mid range build, there’s really no reason to upgrade to Ivy Bridge (other than for the heck of it).

I’ll be building a new Ivy Bridge system in the next couple of months – I’m waiting on Thunderbolt for Z77 as well as the rest of nVidia’s Kepler lineup.

For now, do check out this article for more extensive information on the Ivy Bridge release.

The Intel Ivy Bridge (Core i7 3770K) Review
http://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the-intel-ivy-bridge-core-i7-3770k-review

The times, they are changing. In fact, the times have already changed, we’re just waiting for the results. I remember the first time Intel brought me into a hotel room to show me their answer to AMD’s Athlon 64 FX—the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition. Back then the desktop race was hotly contested. Pushing the absolute limits of what could be done without a concern for power consumption was the name of the game. In the mid-2000s, the notebook started to take over. Just like the famous day when Apple announced that it was no longer a manufacturer of personal computers but a manufacturer of mobile devices, Intel came to a similar realization years prior when these slides were first shown at an IDF in 2005:

 

image from IntelFreePress

Comments { 0 }

The Ultra Dream Gaming Build

intel sandy bridge e 300x200 The Ultra Dream Gaming BuildWith the release of Intel’s Sandy Bridge E series CPUs, I can now take my Ultra Gaming build dreaming to the next level. Previously I have presented realistic gaming builds, in the ‘mid-range’ and ‘budget’ level categories – these have been based on developing systems of value that will allow you to play video games for many years while staying within a specific budget. In this article, I’m skipping over the ‘high-budget’ build and going straight for the Ultra Dream system.

There is no reasonableness in this build. If you want a build that gets you the best performance value for your money, check out the mid-range budget build. This Ultra Build here is simply an incredibly awesome system, made with the most powerful hardware available. It takes advantage of the increased memory and video bandwidth using all four slots of quad channel ram, and using both 16x/16x SLI video slots. I suppose I could go all out with 4 video cards, but then I wouldn’t have room for the PCIe based SSD, and the unnecessary, but still surprisingly appealing Killer gaming NIC.

I would take it a step further and go all out with custom liquid cooling, but I honestly don’t have the experience with extreme custom liquid cooled systems. I’ve always used air cooling, because unless you are overclocking to the extreme, or using a system like this, air cooling is fine. In this system, I will be using a liquid cooling block for the CPU only. In the near future, I plan on writing up an article on custom liquid cooling, as I started researching it for this article.

The CPU choice is obvious – the i7-3960X is the most powerful. It’s also over $1,000 for the processor alone – but here we aren’t worried about that. The CPU will be cooled by the excellent Corsair H100 As previously mentioned, Asus provides yet again another superb quality motherboard. For the RAM, I chose the Corsair Dominator because of the higher speed (DDR 2133 vs DDR 1600) – also we don’t NEED 32 GB RAM, but we CAN use 32 GB ram, so we take 2 packs of 4.

For the GPU – as it is the ULTRA system, one could easily plug in two GTX 590s for the set. There are two main reasons I am not going with the 590. First, the 590 runs hot – or at least there were problems with this at the release of the card. The performance of the 590 is undeniable, but two 580s is absolutely amazing. If I were going to go with two 590s, I would only do so with a custom liquid cooled system – I wouldn’t want to do so with air.  I also chose the 3GB memory version of the 580 vs the 1.5, as we are going for a large 30″ monitor – possibly two.

small revodrive3x2 The Ultra Dream Gaming BuildThe SSD you might find odd. First off, I’ve always loved the Revodrive concept – it’s basically an SSD slotted via x4 PCIe into the system. The result is you end up with twice the read/write as a normal SSD. The downside is price. I picked the 240GB for operating system and games/programs, with a set of RAID HDDs in the background for storage. I have on the list 2 1TB WD Black Hard Drives to be set in RAID – I would actually go with 5 1TB drives set up in RAID 5, giving the perfect combination of speed AND security. Hard Drives are expensive right now though, so starting with 2 is fine.

The Killer NIC is something that a lot of people might call a way to throw away money. While I wouldn’t recommend the NIC to someone building a “regular” gaming system – benchmarking has shown that Killer’s NICs do have an effect on lowering latency. If I were a hardcore gamer, or “pro” gamer, I would probably look at adding one to a mid-range or high-range gaming build – every little bit helps.

The case I chose because I always wanted the Thermaltake Level 10 – which runs in the $800 range, is difficult to work with, and doesn’t have amazing cooling – but my oh my does it look sweet. The Thermaltake Level 10GT has a lot of improvements. It’s lighter, cheaper, and has excellent cooling. It also can easily fit the Corsair H100 CPU radiator block. It also looks awesome. Check out the Gaming Case article for some other options.

Thermaltake Level 10 GT Snow Edition Case 1 300x276 The Ultra Dream Gaming Build

The Monitor is the 30” I selected on my Gaming Monitors article. You could also go with two 30”, or two 27”, or three 27” – remember this setup has 2 GTX 580s in x16/x16 SLI. Super.

 

That about wraps up this splurge of an article. I surely do love dreaming about systems like this. The total for the above listed is $5000 without the monitor and $6200 with it, so if that looks like spare change to you, then you should definitely indulge. In the future after I put together the liquid cooling article, I’ll likely revisit this and update for full liquid cooling.

 

 

Comments { 0 }

Welcome Sandy Bridge E – a CPU Fit for a King

Welcome Sandy Bridge E, a true enthusiast processor. Intel is between mainstream CPU architectures right now, with Sandy Bridge out and Ivy Bridge coming around 6 months from now (no official dates on that). What they like to do in between is release their enthusiast level processors. Sandy Bridge E processors will run you at least $1000, so they aren’t for the typical pc gamer or computer builder. These are for those folks who love to build a powerhouse system for the sake of building a powerhouse system – and for who can afford it icon wink Welcome Sandy Bridge E   a CPU Fit for a King . Granted I would love to build a system around this setup, but it’s a bit out of my budget range currently.

325080 intel sandy bridge e cpu Welcome Sandy Bridge E   a CPU Fit for a KingSandy Bridge E brings us two 6 core processors (and later a 4 core), each with hyper-threading for 12 threads. The i7-3960X is a 3.3 GHZ processor which comes with 15MB L3 Cache. The i7-3930K is a 3.2 GHZ processor bearing 12MB L3 Cache. In a few months Intel will also be releasing the i7-3820, a 4 core 8 thread processor at 3.9 GHZ with 10MB cache – this being part of the Sandy Bridge E series and sitting between the i7-2700k and the i7-3930K. The i7-3960X will run you around $1000, while the i7-3930K will be an ‘affordable’ $600.

To play with these delicious 6 core processors, Intel has also released the x79 chipset. The x79 chipset boasts quad channel memory capabilities (up to 64 GB RAM support), and enough PCIe bandwidth to support true x16/x16 SLI, x16/x16/x8, x16/x8/x8/x8, and even x16/x8/x8/x4/x4 – all depending on the specific motherboard of course. Anandtech showed a sparkling review of Asus P9X79 Pro, which looks to be a slam dunk for me. If I were to be building a Sandy Bridge E system, I would surely go with that motherboard. It should be noted that the x79 chipset is more like P67 than Z68 – it doesn’t come with on board video nor does it include SSD caching. Asus has included it’s own version of SSD caching on the P9X79 Pro which you can read about here – however, if I were spending this much on a processor/motherboard combo, I would be sporting full sized SSDs (probably in RAID) and would have no need for the ssd caching feature.

4381 03 asus p9x79 pro and deluxe intel x79 motherboard preview full 300x220 Welcome Sandy Bridge E   a CPU Fit for a KingTo me, the increased performance in gaming over a i5-2500k system is not worth the $$ in terms of value. As we know, there aren’t games which take advantage of 6 cores and 12 threads (one of the reason’s that AMD’s Bulldozer fails). The benefit comes in the video and memory bandwidth increase. As is shown in the Anandtech analysis, games like World of Warcraft actually benefit not insignificantly (13% boost in performance over an i5 system). Still, performance in those games is fantastic in the ‘lesser’ system..

Sandy Bridge E is really for the super enthusiast. It’s part of my dream build that I drool over. So that begs the question: should you consider the Sandy Bridge E? Well, if you are willing to spend $3k minimum to build a computer when a $1200 system can play most games maxed then yes. I myself hope to one day put together a glorious $5,000 gaming system, and I will love every minute of it – but that day is not today. One thing is for sure, that system is going to last you for a number of years. Unless the pc gaming world gets its act into gear and starts putting out games that take advantage of 8-12 cores, PCIe 3.0, and other advancements like quad channel memory and multi-card SLI systems.

For now though, I’m certainly going to have fun dreaming about ultra gaming systems that blow the pixels out of my monitor…keep an eye out for my High End Gaming PC Build icon wink Welcome Sandy Bridge E   a CPU Fit for a King

Comments { 0 }

Consider the CPU Cache

For the most part, determining the best CPU option is simply about looking at benchmark tests done by the industry leaders in pc building – Tom’s Hardware, Anandtech, and Overclockers are my reference points of preference. If ultimately we are looking at quantitative performance evaluation on an overall level (system wide in terms of gaming) then the individual details about the processors – such as cpu cache – become less important.

For example, one might look at the i5-2500k and compare it to the i7-2600k. On the surface you can see that both processors have four cores, but the i7 includes hyper-threading which effectively doubles the cores. However, we know from testing that the i7 performs virtually the same as the i5 in gaming (since no game needs more than 4 cores), even though the i7 looks ‘better.’

Even though we can look at processors exclusively via benchmarks – and it is in fact important to do so – it is still good to have an understanding of some of the underlying details about CPUs as this can help us. The CPU Cache is one of those details that often gets glossed over, but sometimes the difference between one CPU or another ends up being the cache – and understanding that can help explain why one has ‘better’ performance than the other.

cpu cache structure 300x168 Consider the CPU CacheCache is designed to improve frequent memory access speed. You may notice a pattern in data access and memory design of systems. If you recall the SSD caching article – where the ssd is used to cache for the RAM reference, the cpu cache is used to cache data from RAM. Ultimately, the closer (physically) that a component is to the CPU, the faster the CPU is capable of accessing that data. The CPU cache acts like RAM which is physically sitting on the processor itself – so data access rates for the processor are much higher than from RAM, which is much higher than a hard drive. The downside of course is that cache sizes can’t be RAM sized (similar to how RAM can’t be hard drive sized).

There is also a trade-off between speed and size of the cache. Some executions benefit from greater speed, and some benefit from greater cache size. This is why most modern CPUs contain three levels of cache. Each cache is for specific actions – the L3 cache is one which often gets attention, and one where increased size means increased performance. The cores don’t need the L3 to be fast as the CPU already has the small L1 and L2 caches.

intecorei7 sb 267x300 Consider the CPU CacheIntel does this a bit different now, with what they call Smart Cache. Essentially, their Smart Cache is one block of CPU Cache which the CPU cores can intelligently utilize different sizes of depending on needs. Check out the video.

Here is one way we can use this knowledge: Let’s consider the new i7-2700k. This is just a slightly updated version of Intel’s i7-2600k – which we know to be a 4 core processor with hyper-threading. The only difference between the i7-2600k and the i7-2700k is 100mhz in the base processor speed. That to me is no justification for the extra price (about $50 more). If instead (or in addition), Intel had bumped the cache from 8mb to 12mb – that would be something to take note of (the i7-2700k has 8mb cache, as does the i7-2600k).

Comments { 0 }

The New AMD Bulldozer CPU – Where does it Stand?

This isn’t necessarily an analysis of AMD platforms so much as it is a look at the new AMD Bulldozer CPU offerings and seeing how they stands up vs the Intel Sandy Bridge offerings. This is with respect to my general approach of ‘value’ building – which tends to land within the mid-range build.

One of the questions most people ask who are getting into computer building is: Do I go AMD or Intel? I can understand a certain appeal for either. AMD makes some very good quality processors at the lower prices ranges, and there is a fair argument for going AMD when building a budget system. For me, it simply comes down to performance and value. How much am I spending now and how long will this system likely last? Right now Intel’s Sandy Bridge CPU systems score very high in the charts and on top of that, the i5-2500k can be overclocked an impressive amount (increasing the long-term value of the system).

AMD’s philosophy is geared towards making multi-core CPUs. Of their offerings, they have 4 core, 6 core, and 8 core CPUs – the Bulldozer FX-8150 is AMD’s 8 core offering which looks to stand against Intel’s impressive 4 core i5-2500k. Intel does not have an 8 core processor – instead they have the i7-2600k, which is a 4 core processor that uses hyper-threading to virtually duplicate the 4 cores creating what is effectively 8.

Here’s the deal though: 8 cores are technically better than 4 cores with hyper-threading used to create an effective 8. The problem that is being experienced right now is that the way Windows is constructed, and the way most games are made, they won’t take advantage of more than 4 cores. This is a rather simplistic explanation – the way AMD constructed Bulldozer is rather complex on the technical level, but in the end it’s all about real world performance.

The short of it is that when put the FX-8150 up against the i5-2500k Sandy Bridge Intel CPU, the Bulldozer offering just doesn’t cut the cake. One would need a game to take advantage of 8 cores (or conceivably at least more than 4 cores) in order to see a benefit over the i5. Considering the i5 is cheaper and performs better, that still keeps us with the Intel based I5-2500k system. The AMD systems generally are more well suited to a budget build approach. I have yet to write up a budget suggestion, but I suspect that I will be looking into AMD’s Phenom II X4 955 CPU, as it performs well next to Intel’s i3-2100 with the right setup.

If you want to read up on the more detailed technical analysis of AMD Bulldozer cpu look here, and for testing on the Bulldozer FX-8150 look here.

Comments { 0 }
Web Analytics