Monday, February 27th 2012

Intel Ivy Bridge Revised Launch-Schedule Revealed

Citing issues with the 22 nm manufacturing process, Intel postponed the release of its 22 nm "Ivy Bridge" Core processor family by as much as 10 weeks. There still seems to exist some confusion surrounding this launch, which SweClockers sought to clear with its latest article containing important dates related to the launch.
  • 8 April, 2012: This was supposed to be the day "everything" (all CPU models slated for April, compatible motherboards) launched. Instead on this day, motherboard vendors will launch their products based on Intel Z77, Z75, H77, and B75 chipsets. System builders (you) will have to use existing "Sandy Bridge" processors, which are very much compatible with those motherboards. You will not be able to buy "Ivy Bridge" processors from anywhere on this day.
  • 29 April, 2012: This is when Intel will launch quad-core Core i5, Core i7 "Ivy Bridge". On this day, the media will be able to post reviews of the new processor platform. It's not clear if you'll be able to buy these chips on this day, either. Perhaps you might.
Continued

  • 3 June, 2012: This is when Intel will launch Q77 and Q75 chipset. The notebook platform based on "Ivy Bridge", dual-core "Ivy Bridge" processors, and the much talked about Ultrabook "Ivy Bridge" form-factor are due for "sometime in June".
Source: SweClockers
Add your own comment

33 Comments on Intel Ivy Bridge Revised Launch-Schedule Revealed

#1
pjl321
Forget it then, i'm waiting for Haswell. Its only 12months away and at least that will last 2 generations through Broadwell as well.
Posted on Reply
#2
brandonwh64
Addicted to Bacon and StarCrunches!!!
by: pjl321
Forget it then, i'm waiting for Haswell. Its only 12months away and at least that will last 2 generations through Broadwell as well.
Source?
Posted on Reply
#3
TheLostSwede
The Haswell roadmaps leaked a while back, but it's likely that Intel will delay that schedule now too, although it's currently "on track" for Q2 next year.
Posted on Reply
#5
TheLostSwede
Here's some of the stuff that has leaked to date about Haswell http://vr-zone.com/articles/detailed-intel-haswell-specs-revealed/13908.html
And as per this http://www.donanimhaber.com/islemci/haberleri/DH-Ozel-intelin-ote-nesil-Haswell-islemcilerinin-cikis-tarihi.htm it's scheduled for 1H of next year, although they seem to say March-June... it's a bit too early to say exactly when though, as I'm pretty sure not even Intel knows right now.
There's always Ivy Bridge-E...
Posted on Reply
#6
rob49152
What about the new Xeon chips?
Posted on Reply
#7
happita
I'm also going to wait for Haswell. People can run just about any app perfectly fine on their 2500k or 2600k. Unless you people have the itch that needs to be scratched :p
Posted on Reply
#8
TheLostSwede
by: rob49152
What about the new Xeon chips?
Good question, they were meant to be out in Q2 as well, dunno about specific launch schedules though, but a safe bet would be sometime after the consumer processors.
Posted on Reply
#9
TheLostSwede
by: happita
I'm also going to wait for Haswell. People can run just about any app perfectly fine on their 2500k or 2600k. Unless you people have the itch that needs to be scratched :p
I don't think you'll be too jealous if you have a 2500K or 2600K, but if you like me skipped Sandy Bridge, then it's about time to get an upgrade and the delay is annoying to say the least, as I was planning an upgrade and so are several people I know.
That said, I'm not desperate, but it's about time for an upgrade, just because... right? :D
Posted on Reply
#10
EarthDog
So Swede, you are buying a laptop as an upgrade?
Posted on Reply
#11
trickson
OH, I have such a headache
Man Intel is just leaping forward faster and faster! A delay is a good thing. I would rather they delay the CPU than put out some thing that will FAIL!
Posted on Reply
#12
pjl321
by: trickson
Man Intel is just leaping forward faster and faster! A delay is a good thing. I would rather they delay the CPU than put out some thing that will FAIL!
Yes, no one wants to see another recall but don't be fooled by this delay, it is to clear old stock pure and simple. If there was a problem with 22nm then no chips would be able to come out.
Posted on Reply
#13
Shakur92
is SweClockers a trusted source?:confused:
Posted on Reply
#14
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
by: Shakur92
is SweClockers a trusted source?:confused:
Yes.
Posted on Reply
#15
Octavean
by: pjl321
Yes, no one wants to see another recall but don't be fooled by this delay, it is to clear old stock pure and simple. If there was a problem with 22nm then no chips would be able to come out.
I thought the Z77 and 70 series chipset family were on the 22nm Tri-gate process. If there were a problem with the process I dont see how they could release the new motherboards,....... :rolleyes:

The problem would have to be specific to the Ivy Bridge family of processors not the 22nm Tri-gate process itself. Assuming there even is a problem,....
Posted on Reply
#16
dieterd
I do not think, that Haswell will apear only 4 quaters after Ivy. Intel has no where to hurry -nothing/no one will cach them up by that time :(. I thint that Intel will delay Haswell at least for 2Qs - and this time they will PR those delays much earlieer.
Posted on Reply
#17
pjl321
by: Octavean
I thought the Z77 and 70 series chipset family were on the 22nm Tri-gate process. If there were a problem with the process I dont see how they could release the new motherboards,....... :rolleyes:

The problem would have to be specific to the Ivy Bridge family of processors not the 22nm Tri-gate process itself. Assuming there even is a problem,....
I am saying that the only reason that some chips are delayed and not others is because they need to clear old stock first, in this case the SB mobile chips.

Also, and I am sure someone here will correct me if i am wrong but just because the CPU's transistor gates are made at 22nm it doesn't mean everything is at 22nm. I don't think the chips on the mobo will be 22nm.

Am i wrong?
Posted on Reply
#18
option350z
Nope you aren't wrong. Only the cpu will have the 3d tri-gate process. While at the same time S.o.C.s are being made with the process.
The PCH has nothing to do with how the processor is made. Thus boards can be made and used with older SB chips.
Posted on Reply
#19
pjl321
Another reason i really want to try and wait for Haswell (although it feels like a lifetime away right now) is that i am absolutely sick of quad-cores!! 6 years we have had quad cores and a good 4 years they have been a the mid-range chip.

I don't have the money to buy SB-E set up and tbh i don't think i would want one anyway as i would use the Quicksync feature a fair bit.

Its such a shame there hasn't been competition for Intel at the high-end so that they were forced to release 6 and 8 core mid-range chips.

I think its very good sign for the computer industry in general that Microsoft is coding Windows for something other than x86. I really hope this might open the door to not only ARM but maybe IBM PowerPC coming back to the PC, China's ALPHA RISC chips, SPARC or MIPS.

ARM is a long way off challenging Intel at the high-end desktop but looking at the benchmarks that the new dual-core A15 chips can do, i would love to see an 8, 16 or even 32 cores chip at higher clocks that a massive desktop heat sink would allow.
Posted on Reply
#20
trickson
OH, I have such a headache
by: pjl321
Another reason i really want to try and wait for Haswell (although it feels like a lifetime away right now) is that i am absolutely sick of quad-cores!! 6 years we have had quad cores and a good 4 years they have been a the mid-range chip.

I don't have the money to buy SB-E set up and tbh i don't think i would want one anyway as i would use the Quicksync feature a fair bit.

Its such a shame there hasn't been competition for Intel at the high-end so that they were forced to release 6 and 8 core mid-range chips.

I think its very good sign for the computer industry in general that Microsoft is coding Windows for something other than x86. I really hope this might open the door to not only ARM but maybe IBM PowerPC coming back to the PC, China's ALPHA RISC chips or MIPS.

ARM is a long way off challenging Intel at the high-end desktop but looking at the benchmarks that the new dual-core A15 chips can do, i would love to see an 8, 16 or even 32 cores chip at higher clocks that a massive desktop heat sink would allow.
I do not think there is a real pressing need for 8+ cores at all. seeing that most programs are still struggling to use 4 cores let alone 8+. AMD has the core war won but that is not as impressive as the performance side.
Posted on Reply
#21
borandi
by: trickson
I do not think there is a real pressing need for 8+ cores at all. seeing that most programs are still struggling to use 4 cores let alone 8+. AMD has the core war won but that is not as impressive as the performance side.
Don't confuse your core usage with other peoples core usage. I see many people crying out for the dual socket SB-E systems to be released, so people can pair up a couple of Xeons in a workstation. There's plenty of people around who need more good cores and know how to use them. Just because you don't need them isn't valid enough. I need them. Others need them. But we're reduced to 4/6 core on mainstream with Intel and anything AMD produces is a bit of a joke for pure computational throughput.
Posted on Reply
#22
trickson
OH, I have such a headache
by: borandi
Don't confuse your core usage with other peoples core usage. I see many people crying out for the dual socket SB-E systems to be released, so people can pair up a couple of Xeons in a workstation. There's plenty of people around who need more good cores and know how to use them. Just because you don't need them isn't valid enough. I need them. Others need them. But we're reduced to 4/6 core on mainstream with Intel and anything AMD produces is a bit of a joke for pure computational throughput.
But see you are in the minority not the majority. The plain fact that normal every day users do not need any thing above 4 cores is a fact. even games are hard pressed to use 8+ cores. It is bad for business to make some thing no one can really use or no one needs. Intel knows this. The server / Work station market is small. The desk top/Laptop market is the biggest. So would it be smart to cater to workstation/server market over your bread and butter market? I do not think so.
Posted on Reply
#23
pjl321
by: trickson
But see you are in the minority not the majority. The plain fact that normal every day users do not need any thing above 4 cores is a fact. even games are hard pressed to use 8+ cores. It is bad for business to make some thing no one can really use or no one needs. Intel knows this. The server / Work station market is small. The desk top/Laptop market is the biggest. So would it be smart to cater to workstation/server market over your bread and butter market? I do not think so.
I take your point Trickson but there are only 3 ways to increase performance, improving architecture, increasing clock speed or more cores. The first is very difficult as AMD is finding right now, the second has its problems but the third is very easy.

I'm afraid its the chicken and the egg, if 16 cores was the norm then software developers would write their software to use them all (when needed). Yes most everyday stuff doesn't need that many cores but there is alot of everyday programs out there screaming for more power, photoshop, video encoders, games when you have physics or ray tracing...

If you don't need anything more than web browsing then just use a tablet.
Posted on Reply
#24
LagunaX
TOPPC could only get it to 4.8ghz.
10% improvement over Sandy Bridge overall.
We'll see closer to April what it can do...
Posted on Reply
#25
Octavean
by: pjl321
I am saying that the only reason that some chips are delayed and not others is because they need to clear old stock first, in this case the SB mobile chips.

Also, and I am sure someone here will correct me if i am wrong but just because the CPU's transistor gates are made at 22nm it doesn't mean everything is at 22nm. I don't think the chips on the mobo will be 22nm.

Am i wrong?
I don’t disagree with what your saying. I was reading an article on the Z77 chipset and boards and I was under the impression that the chipset itself was manufactured using the same process due to that article. I don’t think I misinterpreted the article but I can try and find a link for it.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment