Intel Sandy Bridge E (LGA2011) review thread
- Thread starter Bludd
- Start date
I think this is probably more directed at the workstation market (although some may argue that whether such market still exists
). After LGA 1366, we don't even have a system with enough PCIe channels to, say, support four video cards, and that's a shame (not to mention that LGA1155 Sandy Bridge is much faster than any LGA1366 CPU for most workloads). SNB-E fits this niche nicely.Now if only they benchmarked with a newer game like that Battlesomething tech demo.
;D
$990? Wow. Intel back at their old game of charging whatever the hell they want for their CPUs, I see.
Does anyone have any concrete info on how the prefetcher has been improved in SNB-E? That's assuming it's not a closely guarded trade secret, of course... (Then again, maybe Intel thinks software devs would find it useful to know such things so they know how to properly optimize for the chip, I dunno...)
Does anyone have any concrete info on how the prefetcher has been improved in SNB-E? That's assuming it's not a closely guarded trade secret, of course...
(Then again, maybe Intel thinks software devs would find it useful to know such things so they know how to properly optimize for the chip, I dunno...)What do you mean by "back"? They have always had ~$1k high-end consumer level CPUs on sale.$990? Wow. Intel back at their old game of charging whatever the hell they want for their CPUs, I see.
$990? Wow. Intel back at their old game of charging whatever the hell they want for their CPUs, I see.
I think you mean Intel back to charging whatever muppets will pay, and AMD powerless to rein them in due to their own ineptitude?
Personally I'm more worried about what's going to happen in the €100-300 range. Anybody with $990 to spend on a CPU can fend for themselves as far as I'm concerned.
AMD would put out a $1k consumer CPU if they could. There was about a two year stretch when they did but too bad Core 2 came and rained on that. A64 X2 was not exactly cheap in 2005 while it was Intel's performance equal.
The competition that AMD has been providing has been pretty weak for years. I think Intel has new problems besides AMD. PC hardware sells for really cheap these days and it has new threats to it like tablets. There are also no "killer apps" for PC to generate buzz and require more performance for the mass market so people will upgrade.
The competition that AMD has been providing has been pretty weak for years. I think Intel has new problems besides AMD. PC hardware sells for really cheap these days and it has new threats to it like tablets. There are also no "killer apps" for PC to generate buzz and require more performance for the mass market so people will upgrade.
Yup. The Pentium 4 EE 3.73Ghz was around that price point, as were all the "X" models in the C2Q line and later in the i7 line. This is nothing new, the "x" models always have the ~$1k pricetag. Hell, the i7-990x is still that price last I looked, and it's technically two generations behind this one.
Just not with a salvaged 8 core chip. Do you think they would break the bank if they would sell the full 8 core chips for 1K $.
Just not with a salvaged 8 core chip. Do you think they would break the bank if they would sell the full 8 core chips for 1K $.
Why would they do that when they can sell them for two to three times that for servers?!
Just not with a salvaged 8 core chip. Do you think they would break the bank if they would sell the full 8 core chips for 1K $.
The high clock 8-core don't fit in the 130W TDP. You'd end up with a chip which for desktop workloads was slower than the 6-core.
No idea, half tempted to build a single socket 8-core Xeon system, but running dual X5680's at the moment so technically I'd be downgrading in terms of CPU and memory - just getting a bit fed up of server board thermal controls, hard to keep the system noise levels down.
Similar threads
- Deleted member 7537
- PC Industry
