Monday, July 18th 2011

Sandy Bridge-E Model Numbers, Clock Speeds Surface

Here are details of the first three models of Intel's "Sandy Bridge-E" Core i7 processors in the LGA2011 package. Some of these details were made public as early as mid-April. It was then analyzed that Intel was driving two distinct lines of LGA2011 client processors: Enthusiast and Performance, and within Performance, there were BClk multiplier-unlocked six-core, and locked quad-core chips. With the new series, Intel will move to the 3000 series of processor model numbering, indicating that the new processors will be part of Intel's 3rd generation Core processors, even though they're based on the Sandy Bridge architecture.

Before we move to the model numbers, here's a quick run up of the brand extenders. "X" denotes Extreme Edition, "K" denotes "Unlocked" (BClk multipler unlocked). Leading the pack will be Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition. This six-core (6 cores, 12 threads with HTT) chip has a nominal clock speed of 3.30 GHz, Turbo Boost speed of up to 3.90 GHz, and features the full 15 MB of L3 cache present on the Sandy Bridge-E silicon. Expect this chip to have a four figure price-tag.
Next up, is the Core i7-3930K, with 6 cores, 12 threads, a nominal clock speed of 3.20 GHz, and Turbo Boost speed of 3.80 GHz; but 12 MB of L3 cache compared to 15 MB on the Extreme Edition chip. This chip features an unlocked BClk multiplier, making overclocking it possible.

The most affordable LGA2011 chip will be Core i7-3820, with 4 cores, 8 threads, nominal clock speed of 3.60 GHz, Turbo speed of 3.90 GHz, and just 10 MB of L3 cache. Unlike the other two, this one has its BClk multiplier locked. All three models feature quad-channel DDR3 memory controllers, but it is likely that the lower-end models could also have lower DRAM multiplier limits. All three chips will have other features in common, including a PCI-Express 3.0 root complex that gives out two x16 links to drive graphics.Source: DonanimHaber
Add your own comment

124 Comments on Sandy Bridge-E Model Numbers, Clock Speeds Surface

#1
Benetanegia
Pestilence said:
Pulled from another forum. The source quotes 6 and 8 core processors for 2011 starting at 480+ Euro's. The quad's start out at 250 Euro.

480 Euro = 675.98 Usd
250 Euro = 352.07 Usd
:banghead: Why do people still convert euros to dollars? It does not work that way. (not mad at you, only at the fact so many people do that)

Here's the actual prices for a 2600k:

US: $315 Intel Core i7-2600K Sandy Bridge 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Tu...

EU: 284 € http://www.alternate.es/html/product/Procesadores_Socket_1155/Intel%28R%29/Core_y_trade_i7-2600K/483760/?tn=HARDWARE&l1=Procesadores+%28CPU%29&l2=Sobremesa&l3=Socket+1155
Posted on Reply
#2
Pestilence
Benetanegia said:
:banghead: Why do people still convert euros to dollars? It does not work that way. (not mad at you, only at the fact so many people do that)

Here's the actual prices for a 2600k:

US: $315 Intel Core i7-2600K Sandy Bridge 3.4GHz (3.8GHz Tu...

EU: 284 € http://www.alternate.es/html/product/Procesadores_Socket_1155/Intel%28R%29/Core_y_trade_i7-2600K/483760/?tn=HARDWARE&l1=Procesadores+%28CPU%29&l2=Sobremesa&l3=Socket+1155
Was just throwing it out there bro. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#3
Benetanegia
Pestilence said:
Was just throwing it out there bro. :laugh:
Yeah, I know, it's just that making the conversion is completely misleading*. If they will trully start at 480 €, you can assume $500-ish on North America, not $700-ish.

It just gets to my nerves. :ohwell:

* Plus remembers me how badly we are shafted every single time. :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#4
Pestilence
Benetanegia said:
Yeah, I know, it's just that making the conversion is completely misleading*. If they will trully start at 480 €, you can assume $500-ish on North America, not $700-ish.

It just gets to my nerves. :ohwell:

* Plus remembers me how badly we are shafted every single time. :laugh:
If the lower end 6 core is going to be around 699 then i'll be a very happy man.
Posted on Reply
#5
CDdude55
Crazy 4 TPU!!!
Pestilence said:
If the lower end 6 core is going to be around 699 then i'll be a very happy man.
Really?, that's still very expensive to most. Hell even $400 for a CPU is too much for me. lol
Posted on Reply
#6
Benetanegia
Pestilence said:
If the lower end 6 core is going to be around 699 then i'll be a very happy man.
I think that like in most of latest high-end platform releases, they are going with a $300, $500, $1000 approach or something similar.

A lower-end 6 core at much more than $500 would look horrible in the perf/price department compared to the 2600k. But I'm mostly basing it on previous releases. It worked for them so why change the strategy? The only way I see it changing is to lower prices, and only if Bulldozer is competitive with SB E.
Posted on Reply
#7
Hayder_Master
Ok Intel we now you will beat AMD in performance but what about the prices? Can you win in this round like last time?
Posted on Reply
#8
Pestilence
Benetanegia said:
I think that like in most of latest high-end platform releases, they are going with a $300, $500, $1000 approach or something similar.

A lower-end 6 core at much more than $500 would look horrible in the perf/price department compared to the 2600k. But I'm mostly basing it on previous releases. It worked for them so why change the strategy? The only way I see it changing is to lower prices, and only if Bulldozer is competitive with SB E.
Agreed. I'm not sure why Intel didn't give 1155 a 6 core K model with no HT for 599.99. I would have bought that right up.
Posted on Reply
#9
radaja
Xtreme Refugee
boogerlad said:
even if 3820 is multiplier locked, s2011 isn't bclk locked.
Pestilence said:
Yes it is. Bclk overclocking is dead. SB-E is just like SB. It routes everything through the BCLK
this slide says different,but still just speculation

Posted on Reply
#11
xenocide
I have no issues with bclk ocing going away. And to be honest the price doesn't really bother me that much. Once AMD releases something even remotely close in performance Intel will chop the price down, but until that happens, why not snag upwards of $1000 per CPU from early adopters with deep pockets? I think the current SB CPU's were excellently priced, so if Intel wants to dump a bunch of super expensive CPU's for people willing to spend that much money, more power to them.
Posted on Reply
#12
WarraWarra
Including a PCI-Express 3.0 root complex that gives out two x16 links to drive graphics.
Very nice Intel. +1 for Intel.

Prices usually works at 480 Euro to 480 USD or close to this even though the Euro is worth a lot more on paper and in reality even with half of EU wanting to go belly up.

Why would anyone pay USD480 for the USD310 bracket product ?
"Q9550/i7-920/i7-2600K/i7-3930K"
i7-3960X is supposed to replace the i7-990X for the same USD1000.

Just because Intel created a USD500 bracket does not mean that anyone gives a flying :confused: about this bracket or recognizes that it exists.
It is not like the USD500 bracket items is a laptop 100C cpu that can be used in a desktop and properly overclocked with decent cooling or something special.

What is up with the 15M level 3 cache on 6/12 cores ?
Posted on Reply
#13
seronx
WarraWarra said:

What is up with the 15M level 3 cache on 6/12 cores ?
The CPU is starved on the Cache side

Small L1s, Small L2s, and a shared BIG L3

i7 2600K
L1 32KBx4
L2 256KBx4
L3 8MB/4

i7-3930K
L1 32KBx6
L2 256KBx6
L3 12MB/6

I don't get why the i7-3820 isn't a K or an X Processor

LGA 2011 first tier LETs make it be above a K product and below a K product trololololol

i7-3930K LGA 2011
i7-3820 LGA 2011 TROLOLOLOLOLOL
i7 2600K LGA 1155

I would wait for the release regardless(to see if what is true and what is not) but sometimes these leaks on the Intel side are mostly fact

i7-3960
i7-3820

Should both be extreme products(since there is a disparity between the L3 Caches of K and X products 10MB/4 15MB/6 both come out to be 2.5MB per core)

Intel Core i7-975 Extreme Edition Bloomfield 3.33G...
4C Extreme
Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition Gulftown 3.46GH...
6C Extreme
Posted on Reply
#14
xenocide
It's probably not a K so it can just get dropped into Cyberpower PC's, or Alienware's. Any of those well known custom-build companies would love to have those to encourage people to spend more on getting a pre-overclocked higher-priced setup. At least that's how I see it. That or they just wanted something as an entry-level product to the platform...
Posted on Reply
#16
Pestilence
seronx said:
The CPU is starved on the Cache side

Small L1s, Small L2s, and a shared BIG L3

i7 2600K
L1 32KBx4
L2 256KBx4
L3 8MB/4

i7-3930K
L1 32KBx6
L2 256KBx6
L3 12MB/6

I don't get why the i7-3820 isn't a K or an X Processor

LGA 2011 first tier LETs make it be above a K product and below a K product trololololol

i7-3930K LGA 2011
i7-3820 LGA 2011 TROLOLOLOLOLOL
i7 2600K LGA 1155

I would wait for the release regardless(to see if what is true and what is not) but sometimes these leaks on the Intel side are mostly fact
_
i7-3960
i7-3820

Should both be extreme products(since there is a disparity between the L3 Caches of K and X products 10MB/4 15MB/6 both come out to be 2.5MB per core)

Intel Core i7-975 Extreme Edition Bloomfield 3.33G...
4C Extreme
Intel Core i7-990X Extreme Edition Gulftown 3.46GH...
6C Extreme
Its not cache starved at all. When you compare Bloomfield against westmere which had 12mb of L3 clock fir clock there were no differences in performance
Posted on Reply
#17
bostonbuddy
I'de be very tempted by a $500(not 599) 6core 2011
Posted on Reply
#18
seronx
Pestilence said:
Its not cache starved at all. When you compare Bloomfield against westmere which had 12mb of L3 clock fir clock there were no differences in performance
Sandy Bridge is

Nehalem -> Bloomfield
Westmere -> Gulftown

Nehalem -> Westmere
is a die shrink


As shown in this

You will see on Sandy Bridge the increase of L3 Cache is a booster in performance

The 10MB and 15MB will out perform the 8MB and 12MB products

and Nehalem/Westmere doesn't have 10MB 15MB products
So you can't tell
Posted on Reply
#19
Trackr
bostonbuddy said:
I'de be very tempted by a $500(not 599) 6core 2011
Yeah, see? That's how they get you.

You pay twice as much for 50% more cores because of all the other extras, like four DDR3 slots.

If eVGA ever come out with an SR-3 capable of dual-8-core Xeons, I'm in.

Otherwise, I'm waiting for Ivy Bridge.
Posted on Reply
#20
seronx
Trackr said:
Yeah, see? That's how they get you.

You pay twice as much for 50% more cores because of all the other extras, like four DDR3 slots.

If eVGA ever come out with an SR-3 capable of dual-8-core Xeons, I'm in.

Otherwise, I'm waiting for Ivy Bridge.
It is 33% more cores

A $90 premium isn't bad on that core increase

Unlocked, PCI-e 3.0, Intel name and much more

It's a done deal, and I need to change my system specs
Posted on Reply
#21
phill
I wonder if I'd notice much of a difference upgrading to one of these setups rather than a Sandy Bridge thats out now?
Posted on Reply
#22
seronx
phill said:
I wonder if I'd notice much of a difference upgrading to one of these setups rather than a Sandy Bridge thats out now?
What do you do on your PC?

and at what resolution?

What CPU are you using?
Posted on Reply
#23
Benetanegia
seronx said:
It is 33% more cores

A $90 premium isn't bad on that core increase

Unlocked, PCI-e 3.0, Intel name and much more

It's a done deal, and I need to change my system specs
It's 50% more cores. 6/4 = 1.5 x 100 = 150%

And I don't know where you get the $90 increase either. The cheaper one is 4 cores/8T. The 6 cores will probably start at $500. $200+ more than 4 cores.

Now if it's worth it at all depends on everyone's wallets. On a perf/price basis it is never worth the premium of highest-end CPUs.
Posted on Reply
#24
phill
seronx said:
What do you do on your PC?

and at what resolution?

What CPU are you using?
I game and do the odd bit of photgraphic work and video work - rather rare at the moment...

Minimum resolution is 2560 x 1600, sometimes 8064 x 1600

I have two systems, both with i7 920's in at 4.2Ghz each with HT turned on and 6Gb's of ram. If you would like anything more, please say!
Posted on Reply
#25
btarunr
Editor & Senior Moderator
TheMailMan78 said:
Remember a while back when you people said that even without AMD and the competition they bring we would never see four figured consumer CPU's again? Well there you go. Every fan of Intel better PRAY Bulldozer is a success if they ever want to afford a new CPU here in a few years.
So you want consumers to be a part of a socialist scheme of making AMD a success, just so Intel lowers its prices. Makes perfect sense.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment