Sandy Bridge i5 2400 benchmarks

[ebolamonkey3]

Not sure if it's allowed or posted before, but I ran a quick search and didn't find anything.

Seems like the i5 2400 is about 23% faster than the i5 760 on avg and on par with the i7 880 most of the time, and is even faster than the mighty 980X (stock) in some applications!!!

Also, integrated video seems to be faster than the Radeon 5450 most of the time!

This looks very promising indeed.

Source

[xrealm20]

interesting indeed --

I wonder why Intel felt the need to lock down the fsb frequencies

[overclocking101]

so basically it is true you will not be able to overclock the buss speed. that seriously blows. i wont be switching to sandy brindge unless the higher socket X68 has bus overclocking. multiplyer overclocking has proven not as fast as buss speed overclocking time and time again.

[I see SPY!]

I just read New Naming and stopped for a few minutes to rage.
Now I'm gonna go back to read the damn thing and try to understand it

These damn kids with their naming schemes...

[TheLostSwede]

Well, Intel really screwed up, at least when it comes to what they call "enthusiast" users. Not sure what qualifies as an Intel "enthusiast" as apparently you need to be pretty loaded to fit in to that category from now on. Sure, the K models only carry a small price premium, but with only the two top models having a K version, how fun is that.

On the other hand this is a huge opportunity for AMD - IF the spaghetti monster be willing - and they get their new CPUs out on time, to spec and with close enough performance to compete with Sandy Bridge.

The performance enhancements are impressive, but with all of Intel's stupid artificial limitations just to add more product SKUs I really hope AMD can come back with something that can compete on equal terms based on a more sensible platform. It's possible that AMD decides to follow Intel's lead here and screws up just as badly, but let's hope that doesn't happen.

[theonedub]

Performance looks nice, but the short leash on OCing quickly negates that. I want to know more concrete information on this before making my final judgment.

From what I have seen so far though I am more excited about AMD's Bulldozer than Intel's Sandy Bridge. Seems like as time goes on and more news breaks AMD for my next main system is looking more and more likely.

[_JP_]

It certainly is remarkable the performance archived by this new processor, but the fame it is already carrying, regarding OC, plus the fact that the new chipsets won't bring any new features, I doubt it'll have the success Intel is hoping.
The PCI-e increased bandwidth is a nice addition, although I'd like to start seeing 2x16 multiple cpu configs. A few more USB 3.0 ports and more support for SATA3 would have been nice as well, seeing as both are backwards compatible.

[LAN_deRf_HA]

I hope we still have uncore and all the other memory control options. Seems to be the only way to get that amd smooth factor.

[ebolamonkey3]

Well, the whole thing is that this is not supposed to be for enthusiasts right? That's LGA 2011. So I think Intel wants to segregate the market and force enthusiasts to go with either higher placed K processors or go with the premium socket (LGA 2011) altogether. Makes sense from a marketing perspective IMO, but still sucks

[_JP_]

Exactly, marketing is ruining this business, IMHO.
I tought the idea was to buy a powerful mobo that could handle a good OC and then get a lower clocked cheap CPU and raise the voltage on that mofo! Beating higher priced CPUs. Seems it's becoming a thing of the past.

[boulard83]

Originally Posted by ebolamonkey3

Well, the whole thing is that this is not supposed to be for enthusiasts right? That's LGA 2011. So I think Intel wants to segregate the market and force enthusiasts to go with either higher placed K processors or go with the premium socket (LGA 2011) altogether. Makes sense from a marketing perspective IMO, but still sucks

+1 ...

Sadly the futur "I5" wont be able to overclock that much But 2011 is supposed to be similar to 1366 in therm of overclocking.

[TheLostSwede]

Remember that you CAN'T overclock the memory unless you get a P67 board and if you do, then the IGP is just a waste of space... Hopefully it's also disabled, as in switched off when plugged in to a P67 board.

Well, maybe Intel will drop the price on it's LGA-2011 platform to let us all get in on the cheap... yeah right, as if...

[DrPepper]

Remember intel will be releasing unlocked multipliers at several price ranges to make up for the lack of FSB overclocking. Memory can be changed upto 2133mhz I believe and it doesn't say anything about uncore.

[overclocking101]

sandy bridge part 2 is out on anadtech now! http://www.anandtech.com/show/3876/i...bridge-part-ii

[Wrigleyvillain]

Yeah esp just being a gamer and hobbyist overclocker I was going to skip Nehalem all together and wasnt pleased to hear this news re. oc on Sandy Bridge. That combined with losing a using DDR3 775 board pushed me to sell everything and go i5 and I'm glad I did.

Originally Posted by _JP_

The PCI-e increased bandwidth is a nice addition, although I'd like to start seeing 2x16 multiple cpu configs.

Unless you have multiple displays, why?

[wolf]

nice numbers, if only we had bulldozer numbers to tie us over...

[overclocking101]

whatever the bulldozer numbers are i bet they allow for bus speed overclocking!

[Wrigleyvillain]

Originally Posted by overclocking101

whatever the bulldozer numbers are i bet they allow for bus speed overclocking!

+1

[wolf]

that may be so but it concerns me that they are taking so long to give us any inclination of how they perform in current applications, intel IMO are still on a roll that will be really hard for AMD to trump.

[20mmrain]

Originally Posted by ebolamonkey3

Well, the whole thing is that this is not supposed to be for enthusiasts right? That's LGA 2011. So I think Intel wants to segregate the market and force enthusiasts to go with either higher placed K processors or go with the premium socket (LGA 2011) altogether. Makes sense from a marketing perspective IMO, but still sucks

Man Oh Man.... AMD is looking better and better all the time.

If Intel Does this I can tell you that I will leave for sure! Intel is getting too full of themselves!

I have a feeling allot of other enthusiasts would do the same thing too. I mean think about it?

Why go with a company that looks down upon you or is just trying to extort more money from you?

I mean seriously.... this sounds like Sony's Play Station 3 complex. Give our core audience some features that they love and then rip it away from them.

I am sorry this sux!

You know the statement too from a marketing stand point this makes sense.... well it doesn't.
Just the business they loose alone from this will be enough to way out do to the loss of business that they will loose from this.

Meaning I think they would loose more business from this then ... gain people buying the really high end. Especially since Intel enjoys way over pricing their High end CPU's!

Sorry I am really pissed about this move!

[wolf]

Originally Posted by 20mmrain

Man Oh Man.... AMD is looking better and better all the time.

If Intel Does this I can tell you that I will leave for sure! Intel is getting too full of themselves!

I have a feeling allot of other enthusiasts would do the same thing too. I mean think about it?

Why go with a company that looks down upon you or is just trying to extort more money from you?

I mean seriously.... this sounds like Sony's Play Station 3 complex. Give our core audience some features that they love and then rip it away from them.

I am sorry this sux!

You know the statement too from a marketing stand point this makes sense.... well it doesn't.
Just the business they loose alone from this will be enough to way out do to the loss of business that they will loose from this.

Meaning I think they would loose more business from this then ... gain people buying the really high end. Especially since Intel enjoys way over pricing their High end CPU's!

Sorry I am really pissed about this move!

I think I understand your point of view pretty well, but this will not stop many people from going for Intel processors, especially if they stay at the top like they have been for some time now.

I've been enjoying the amazing overclockability since the core2 series, as have many other TPU'ers, but I for one am happy for 'cheap' CPU's with unlocked multipliers, in effect they are making overclocking more accessible to certian markets, and retaining it for the enthusiast crowd at an affordable price. I'm not saying I'm happy they might lock bclk overclocking, just happy they've thrown us a bone.

Lastly, while Intel may well enjoy overpricing its high end CPU's, AMD would do much the same thing in their position, perhaps not to the same extent, but that is all speculation. the fact is whoever has the fastest can charge whatever they want for it, just don't think they are evil for doing it is all.

[DrPepper]

Like I've been saying. You can still overclock using the multiplier. You just need to get a K series cpu which are very well priced and there will be alot. Honestly people just make a fuss over very little. Intel aren't trying to kill overclocking it's just not the same though that you can manipulate the bus speed any more.

[20mmrain]

Originally Posted by DrPepper

Like I've been saying. You can still overclock using the multiplier. You just need to get a K series cpu which are very well priced and there will be alot. Honestly people just make a fuss over very little. Intel aren't trying to kill overclocking it's just not the same though that you can manipulate the bus speed any more.

I have just seen what Intel says is their low priced enthusiast CPU's before. We all have. It is not their entry level Enthusiasts CPU's usually go for around $300 to $400 when first coming out. Sometimes lower.... Okay I will change that even if they went for a price of $270 to $290 for the entry level overclockable edition.
That is still way to high for an entry level enthusiast chip. My point is that Intel has been going up and up with their prices and taking more and more away when they do so! In terms of clock speeds when 200Mhz more costs up to $300 dollars or more.
Sure if the overclockable K series doesn't cost that much.... I might jump on it and everything I say here is irrelevant. But when times are tough to begin with and people are pinching money.... I believe Intel is making the wrong move at the wrong time! People would be more then happy to go with a $300 dollar middle of the line Black edition Bulldozer that you can overclock as much as you like for most likely under the price of what Intel will be selling some of these CPU's at.
Sure AMD will take advantage too of price gouging.... But I don't think it will be as nasty as what we see with Intel. That is just am opinion I have nothing to back that up except just history of pricing.

Hey I could be just getting all bent out of shape for no reason.... But I still don't like it... I wish they would explain themselves a little better as to what they mean.

[hat]

I overclocked my $50 AMD Athlon II x2 240 from 2.8GHz to 3.5GHz without touching voltage.

Bus speed clocking is really the only true overclocking there is. Multiplier clocking is just too easy and noobish for my tastes. I like balancing out all the things that the FSB affects.

[DrPepper]

Originally Posted by hat

I overclocked my $50 AMD Athlon II x2 240 from 2.8GHz to 3.5GHz without touching voltage.

Bus speed clocking is really the only true overclocking there is. Multiplier clocking is just too easy and noobish for my tastes. I like balancing out all the things that the FSB affects.

Changing the FSB is just as easy though.