Thursday, July 18th 2013

More Core i7-4960X "Ivy Bridge-E" Benchmarks Surface

More benchmarks of Intel's upcoming socket LGA2011 flagship client processor, the Core i7-4960X "Ivy Bridge-E," surfaced on the web. Tom's Hardware scored an engineering sample of the chip, and wasted no time in comparing it with contemporaries across three previous Intel generations, and AMD's current generation. These include chips such as the i7-3970X, i7-4770K, i7-3770K, i7-2700K, FX-8350, and A10-5800K.

In synthetic tests, the i7-4960X runs neck and neck with the i7-3970X, offering a 5 percent performance increment at best. It's significantly faster than the i7-3930K, Intel's $500-ish offering for over 7 quarters running. Its six cores and twelve SMT threads give it a definite edge over quad-core Intel parts in multi-threaded synthetic tests. In single-threaded tests, the $350 i7-4770K is highly competitive with it. The only major surprise on offering is power-draw. Despite its TDP being rated at 130W, on par with the i7-3960X, the i7-4960X "Ivy Bridge-E" offers significantly higher energy-efficiency, which can be attributed to the 22 nm process on which it's built, compared to its predecessor's 32 nm process. Find the complete preview at the source.


Source: Tom's Hardware
Add your own comment

72 Comments on More Core i7-4960X "Ivy Bridge-E" Benchmarks Surface

#1
matar
Big fail intel Ive Bridge is only a die shrink form 32nm to 22nm Sandy & Ive both have the same Architecture...
What we want is haswell-E
Posted on Reply
#2
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
So its not faster than a 9590 :p
Posted on Reply
#3
drdeathx
by: matar
Big fail intel Ive Bridge is only a die shrink form 32nm to 22nm Sandy & Ive both have the same Architecture...
What we want is haswell-E
there is a bit more to the die shrink
Posted on Reply
#4
Supercrit
Intel does not want to give customers the newest and the fastest at the same time.
Posted on Reply
#5
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
by: matar
Big fail intel Ive Bridge is only a die shrink form 32nm to 22nm Sandy & Ive both have the same Architecture...
What we want is haswell-E
So im guessing you don't know about Intel's Tick Tock road map.....:shadedshu

by: Supercrit
Intel does not want to give customers the newest and the fastest at the same time.
They don't have much of a reason too, what competition do they truly have right now to make them push the envelope.

All I wanted to see from LGA2011 is better power consumption, and looks like Ivy Bridge E will bring that.
Posted on Reply
#6
Jstn7477
by: cdawall
So its not faster than a 9590 :p
Sorry, but being decent in roughly 7 out of 40 tests at Hardware Canucks doesn't bode well for a processor that is clocked 1200MHz above the competition, costs 1.5-3x more unless you are comparing to 3970X, gets poopy frame rates in games compared to a mainstream Intel CPU, and consumes a ridiculous amount of power for the rather lackluster performance you get, although you've already stated that you don't care if your chip takes almost 300w.

Since I am entitled to an opinion just as you are, I'll stick with my relatively quiet computer, fairly cool room and a ~100w processor that provides great, predictable performance across the board because I don't want my HD 7970 and 120Hz monitor being under-utilized in non-DX11 games which already happens even with my processor. Have fun with your FX 9370 or whatever you ordered. ;)
Posted on Reply
#7
Dj-ElectriC
And what exactly people expected?
"ohhh, the differance between 2600K and 3770K is very very small, i bet the 4960X will be much faster than the 3970X"


duhhhhh
Posted on Reply
#8
HumanSmoke
by: cdawall
So its not faster than a 9590 :p
You were expecting the 4960X to be clocked at 4.701GHz+ ? or just out fishing for the big one?
Posted on Reply
#9
buggalugs
And Intel expect us to put this $500-$1000 CPU on a old crippled X79 motherboard with 2 sata 6GB/s ports and outdated components? lol. No thanks.
Posted on Reply
#10
Dj-ElectriC
by: buggalugs
And Intel expect us to put this $500-$1000 CPU on a old crippled X79 motherboard with 2 sata 6GB/s ports and outdated components? lol. No thanks.
Don't worry about that mate, wait for the end of the summer for some news
Posted on Reply
#11
Fourstaff
Definitely better than the SB it replaces in all metric, but as usual not enough to force an upgrade from previous gen. A story we are all familiar with, I'm sure.
Posted on Reply
#12
fullinfusion
1.21 Gigawatts
by: drdeathx
there is a bit more to the die shrink
Ya shrink? :laugh: but ya know it all huh.

I think Intel has just stalled in the water for the time being, till they make another break through in architecture.
It looks good, but to upgrade? Na I don't think so. If anything i think AMD is going to knock our socks off soon and sway the blue team to move back to the red side but that's just my opinion :rolleyes:

Time will tell the story, but for now we just allllll got to wait it out ;)
Posted on Reply
#13
Aquinus
Resident Wat-man
Power consumption numbers look pretty nice to me.
Posted on Reply
#14
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
by: Jstn7477
Sorry, but being decent in roughly 7 out of 40 tests at Hardware Canucks doesn't bode well for a processor that is clocked 1200MHz above the competition, costs 1.5-3x more unless you are comparing to 3970X, gets poopy frame rates in games compared to a mainstream Intel CPU, and consumes a ridiculous amount of power for the rather lackluster performance you get, although you've already stated that you don't care if your chip takes almost 300w.

Since I am entitled to an opinion just as you are, I'll stick with my relatively quiet computer, fairly cool room and a ~100w processor that provides great, predictable performance across the board because I don't want my HD 7970 and 120Hz monitor being under-utilized in non-DX11 games which already happens even with my processor. Have fun with your FX 9370 or whatever you ordered. ;)
The one in hardware canucks was throttling. Thats why it under performed. Although you intel folks don't seem to like any responses othrr than intel is god. This is a maybe 5% performance increase what a waste of a release.
Posted on Reply
#15
LAN_deRf_HA
So performance is up almost solely from the 100mhz speed boost? That's a bit weird. Ivy should have brought at least a tiny bit of IPC improvement.
Posted on Reply
#16
Relayer
I'm wondering how bad the CPU bottleneck is going to be, in games that are demanding of the CPU, with 20nm GPU's next year? The efficiency increase is real nice, but the total lack of performance increase is disheartening.
Posted on Reply
#17
radrok
by: Aquinus
Power consumption numbers look pretty nice to me.
http://www.techpowerup.com/img/13-07-18/143e.jpg
yeah this is the biggest improvement over SB-E so far which will be amazing on the Xeon side because it's probably the reason they can up core count while remaining within a decent TDP.

What keeps me interested is how will this Ivy Hexa overclocks thanks to 22nm shrink and soldered IHS combo.


Also lol at delusional AMD trolls.
Posted on Reply
#18
repman244
Intel doesn't care about the 2011 socket for consumers.
The real deal are Xeon based IB (it should have more cores/cache than SB).

And I also don't get why a lot of people are shocked here, we all knew how will IB 2011 perform.
Posted on Reply
#19
ensabrenoir
by: HumanSmoke
You were expecting the 4960X to be clocked at 4.701GHz+ ? or just out fishing for the big one?
http://www.captionthis.org/pics/052010/1274791640-briefcase-fishing.jpg
:roll:

I can come up with no logical explanation for the situation in that photo.......

on topic:

I know were enthusiast an all but seriously people.... times are changing its all about low power now. The highend hardware is decades ahead of its software requirements. Sandy bridge can pretty much chew through anything now and the next 5 years coming .... Intel focus has shifted. Until the need for uber power returns this is what we get. amd has alot of time to become current...
Posted on Reply
#20
Jstn7477
by: cdawall
The one in hardware canucks was throttling. Thats why it under performed. Although you intel folks don't seem to like any responses othrr than intel is god. This is a maybe 5% performance increase what a waste of a release.
Actually, I used AMD pretty much exclusively until late 2011 when I got my 2600K. I even had a bunch of Phenom II systems last year and still have some although I sold a few off as their PPD/watt sucked. My parents own my FX-8150 which ended up being my last AMD system because the CPU took so much power and ran hot at 4GHz while still getting crappy PPD. I did also buy an i7-870 system last year but sold it earlier this year because it was older 45nm tech like the PII stuff.

Why should I be forced to buy something "worse" for the sake of not being called a fanboy? I mainly use my computer for gaming, and not at 60Hz, which means the CPU better have every ounce of performance and feed my video card the best it can as most of the games I play regularly are equally or more CPU bound than GPU bound (TF2, Planetside 2, Minecraft, Skyrim...). This is why I've also avoided the LGA 2011 platform, as it's rather dated.

Let's not forget that my 4770K is overclocked by 900MHz, and at stock it was dominating all but maybe two game tests where the 9590 has a ~2-5 FPS lead. How else am I supposed to convince you that I want to buy whatever is good at the time? But no, it's not AMD, so Jstn7477 is a "fanboy" just because.
Posted on Reply
#21
lilhasselhoffer
Statement 1: I've got a 3930k. If you want to call me an AMD troll stuff it.

Statement 2: Where are the numbers for a 4930k or the equivalent? The 4960x is interesting, but not double the price (assuming the same relationship of SB-e is maintained in IB-e) interesting.

Statement 3: Haswell-e is a rather pointless endeavor. The same minor CPU performance increases mean that there won't be a lot of performance gains. The big benefit to Haswell-e is going to be a better PCH and host of new features. DDR4, full SATA III, and a few other features are what is going to make Haswell-e a viable platform.

Statement 4: Intel has no competition at this price point. There is almost no market, and the market that does exist is a monopoly. People will pay for these processors, but they don't have to make huge leaps to compare to their competition. This means more development dollars are going to graphics and CPU component integration. It's bad for those that want a calculation beast, but Intel isn't catering to this market any more.


My opinion, I'm not spending money on IB-e. The performance increases over SB-e are minor. The lack of an announced successor to X79 means there isn't going to be better board options, and the options that still exist are pretty depressing. An decrease in the consumed power is great, but it'd take a decade to justify spending $500 on a new processor for it.

I'm really hoping that the 4 core IB-e is worth picking up.
Posted on Reply
#22
MxPhenom 216
Corsair Fanboy
I would take an Ivy Bridge E chip over SD-E for the power consumption improvements alone.
Posted on Reply
#23
haswrong
by: ensabrenoir
:roll:

I can come up with no logical explanation for the situation in that photo.......

on topic:

I know were enthusiast an all but seriously people.... times are changing its all about low power now. The highend hardware is decades ahead of its software requirements. Sandy bridge can pretty much chew through anything now and the next 5 years coming .... Intel focus has shifted. Until the need for uber power returns this is what we get. amd has alot of time to become current...
are you really sure no one can utilize more computational power? you are talking about enthusiast platform. i dont care if intels focus shifted. if they shift it the wrong way, im not buying and intel goes bankrupt. intel clearly doesnt want new money from customers.
Posted on Reply
#24
JThorpe
by: Dj-ElectriC
Don't worry about that mate, wait for the end of the summer for some news
What does that mean?
Posted on Reply
#25
haswrong
by: JThorpe
What does that mean?
i think making new motherboards for ib-e is a losing trade for mb manufacturers. how many will upgrade to ib-e just to lower the consumption? most people who fancy 2011 dont care about consumption that much that it would be their main priority for upgrade. why bother with upgrade, when haswell-e will have a new socket? its a complete waste of money and material for no visible improvement. if intel want me to upgrade, theyd better present me an offer i cant refuse.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment