Core i7-3960X About 47% Faster On Average Than Core i7-990X: Intel

[TheGuruStud]

It's as if AMD's Bulldozer architecture cried out in terror, and was suddenly silenced.

By a curbstomp.

From a mech.

Believing intel marketing is like believing in sky fairies. None of it's real

Regarding AVX, intel's is flawed. It won't be able to chew through it like bulldozer (theoretically lol).

 

[Platibus]

A month? I can purchase an 990X processor with 1 weeks paycheck. Do you think everyone on TPU works at Mcdonalds?

Do you think everyone on TPU lives in a first world country? Oh wait, most of them do Still, show some respect, man.:shadedshu
And thank for answering my question. I'm hoping to get a SB i5 with a H67 MB for christmas, and if what you say is true I could upgrade to IB on the same platform \m/ Thanks again.

 

[dr emulator (madmax)]

is this chip going to have a intergrated graphics processor built in? if it has i'll stick with what i've got

according to this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LGA_2011 it hasn't

dammit now i want one

 

[nINJAkECIL]

looking at the pics of some lga2011 mobos,they dont has video output, so i'm sure all lga2011 doesnt has integrated gpu.
even if it does,who buys a 1000 dollar cpu and NOT using dedicated gpu? hell they would even goes multi-gpu setup.

 

[ensabrenoir]

Thing is INTEL want your pay checks for a month for their stuff.

Whats turning me of INTEL is noit just the price is they keep changing the sockets every time some one farts.

They have different option to suite your needs. Its as simple as find one that fits and run with it. I choose 1156. I7 860. Haven't found anything it can't handle yet. Will upgrade because I can to 2011. Will give 1156 to wife and it will keep her happy for about ... 10 years.

 

[Wile E]

Wow, you took the results of 4 realistic tests (10-30%), and averaged it out with the results of 4 COMPLETELY UNREALISTIC tests yielding 110% improvement..

Then you postered it as the title of this thread.

CANNOT .. HOLD .. BACK .. FACEPALM

You have no reason to facepalm. If anybody should be on the receiving end of one, it's you. What part of "From these test results" is difficult for you to follow? Seems to me he made it perfectly clear the results were from a very specific set of circumstances.

 

[Jonap_1st]

looking at the pics of some lga2011 mobos,they dont has video output, so i'm sure all lga2011 doesnt has integrated gpu.
even if it does,who buys a 1000 dollar cpu and NOT using dedicated gpu? hell they would even goes multi-gpu setup.

talking about overkill the gpu

 

[swaaye]

Will give 1156 to wife and it will keep her happy for about ... 10 years.

Yeah I'm still helping people with their Athlon XPs and P4s. It's something how we used to think that was speed. Hell, I used to think 486s were inspiring.

 

[bostonbuddy]

Yeah I'm still helping people with their Athlon XPs and P4s. It's something how we used to think that was speed. Hell, I used to think 486s were inspiring.

I'm sure in a few years i7s will be laughable

 

[FordGT90Concept]

Same. I'm about the only one in the area with a Core i7. Most are between Athlon XP/Pentium 4 and early Core 2/Athlon X2 (AM2).

Most people don't game on their computer around here so they have little/no reason to get a high performance nor modern computer. Internet, email, Word, and Excel is all they care about and a Atom processor can handle that.

 

[mastrdrver]

47% = 23.5% in the marketing world.

....and by looking at the slides that 23.5% = ~10% in reality.......of the benchmark world. In other words, the only performance improvement that is seen in actually using a program is because of clock speeds.

 

[ensabrenoir]

Yeah I'm still helping people with their Athlon XPs and P4s. It's something how we used to think that was speed. Hell, I used to think 486s were inspiring.

Dude when i got a p4 with hyper threading you couldn't tell me nothing. But going from that p4 with ht to an i7 with an ssd. .... Gonna take years to capture that feeling again.

 

[Googoo24]

my only question about this is will current H67 and P67 chipsets support Ivy Bridge 1155 chips, or will we need a new 1155 board becuase it has a new chipset.

as for this new i7.... freakin wow. ~47% faster with the same amount of logical/physical cores, and a lower clock speed, bar turbo.

Intel you've done it again.

http://www.thewe.cc/thewei/&/images3/palestine_2004/destroyed_bulldozer.jpe

I'm a bit confused......Why are folks excited that a (more than likely) $800+ Intel CPU is going to better than AMD's $320 offering? Wasn't this expected?

 

[LordJummy]

I'm a bit confused......Why are folks excited that a (more than likely) $800+ Intel CPU is going to better than AMD's $320 offering? Wasn't this expected?

That's not why people are excited. People are excited because the new intel cpu's will be the most powerful single desktop CPU's on the planet. Most of us who like to buy high end intel processors don't care that the AMD processor is much cheaper, because it doesn't compete in performance. A lot of people seem to be unable to realize this...

To some people it's not about cost. It is purely about performance, and if AMD can't compete then I won't use it if it's FREE. Well, I might use it for my wife's PC's....

 

[Googoo24]

If it's not about cost, then of course you would go with this particular Intel CPU. It's guaranteed to be the more powerful product. Why would anyone expect less of an $800 (potentially $1000) Intel cpu? Did anyone really expect AMD's $300 CPU, which they've slated as competition for SB, to compete with this beast? And we still don't know if it even surpasses that.

Unless the conclusion is that Bulldozer will surpass SB, why would anyone be concerned about this thing crushing Bulldozer? That's all I'm baffled about. This product is exciting, but if history repeats itself, I'll be damned if I can afford one.

 

[Steven B]

if AMD is charging $300 for a CPu that stands up to Intel sandybridge then AMD has a problem(B/C a 2600K is less), as Intel will release a market segment at that same price range with better performance like they have done with i7 930.

 

[Googoo24]

if AMD is charging $300 for a CPu that stands up to Intel sandybridge then AMD has a problem(B/C a 2600K is less), as Intel will release a market segment at that same price range with better performance like they have done with i7 930.

AMD's doing the same thing, essentially. There will be 3 products utilizing the Bulldozer name. Next year (whenever) is supposed to see the release of enhanced Bulldozer (running on a new socket, so probably not the same thing as you mention) and an APU using a Bulldozer CPU. They're also releasing newer steppings of the current architecture.

But, meh, the Core i7-3960X will slap anything currently in existence silly.

 

[LordJummy]

If it's not about cost, then of course you would go with this particular Intel CPU. It's guaranteed to be the more powerful product. Why would anyone expect less of an $800 (potentially $1000) Intel cpu? Did anyone really expect AMD's $300 CPU, which they've slated as competition for SB, to compete with this beast? And we still don't know if it even surpasses that.

Unless the conclusion is that Bulldozer will surpass SB, why would anyone be concerned about this thing crushing Bulldozer? That's all I'm baffled about. This product is exciting, but if history repeats itself, I'll be damned if I can afford one.

You are seriously misunderstanding the entire thing.

The point is AMD doesn't, and won't have a processor that competes with the high end intel cpu's, PERIOD. Price is an issue for some, but generally it isn't for those who want the best performance possible. Do you understand that?

I'm not commenting on anything else in this thread or SB vs. bulldozer, etc, etc. I'm simply letting you know that some people care only about having the best performance possible, and they aren't going to sacrifice performance to save $500+. If cost is an issue, then get what suits your budget, but don't bad mouth people who want to spend $1k+ on a processor from intel.

Your whole point is like saying "Why would someone want to buy a BMW M6 when they could get a KIA for so much cheaper, and it drives just fine?" Get my point?

PS: this thread is about an intel processor, and is not about bulldozer even if some people mention it.

 

[Wile E]

You are seriously misunderstanding the entire thing.

The point is AMD doesn't, and won't have a processor that competes with the high end intel cpu's, PERIOD. Price is an issue for some, but generally it isn't for those who want the best performance possible. Do you understand that?

I'm not commenting on anything else in this thread or SB vs. bulldozer, etc, etc. I'm simply letting you know that some people care only about having the best performance possible, and they aren't going to sacrifice performance to save $500+. If cost is an issue, then get what suits your budget, but don't bad mouth people who want to spend $1k+ on a processor from intel.

Your whole point is like saying "Why would someone want to buy a BMW M6 when they could get a KIA for so much cheaper, and it drives just fine?" Get my point?

I'm one of those people. I save my money to buy the fastest at the time I'm ready to purchase. I don't do the routine that most budget enthusiast go thru where they buy a budget product, then buy the next step or 2 up a couple months later, etc., etc. Those people generally spend just as much as me in the long run, but it's compromise after compromise. Unless, of course, they just like testing new hardware, that's different.

I just keep using my old top end hardware until I can afford the new top end hardware. I usually use a tic-toc approach (with one year between tics and tocs). CPU & whatever else needed to make it run on tics and gpu on tocs. Bought my cpu, mobo and ram last year(upgrade from QX9650 2 years prior), bought the 580 this year (upgrade from 4870X2 2 years prior). Next year I'm due for a CPU upgrade, but I'll postpone this one to get a high end 8 core chip

 

[Googoo24]

You are seriously misunderstanding the entire thing.

The point is AMD doesn't, and won't have a processor that competes with the high end intel cpu's, PERIOD. Price is an issue for some, but generally it isn't for those who want the best performance possible. Do you understand that?

I'm not commenting on anything else in this thread or SB vs. bulldozer, etc, etc. I'm simply letting you know that some people care only about having the best performance possible, and they aren't going to sacrifice performance to save $500+. If cost is an issue, then get what suits your budget, but don't bad mouth people who want to spend $1k+ on a processor from intel.

And you are you telling me this, why? My whole point was why are people bringing up Bulldozer in this topic. Period. Did you understand that?

Where did I indicate that people shouldn't be excited about this product, or that the only reason they are excited is because of BD crushing? Hell, I'm excited about this product.

Your whole point is like saying "Why would someone want to buy a BMW M6 when they could get a KIA for so much cheaper, and it drives just fine?" Get my point?

Gee, I don't recollect saying (or indicating) anything of the sort. Here's what I wrote; I'll quote myself for posterity's sake.

I'm a bit confused......Why are folks excited that a (more than likely) $800+ Intel CPU is going to better than AMD's $320 offering? Wasn't this expected?

Notice I didn't say "why are folks excited over this product?," I said, "why are folks excited that a (more than likely) $800+ Intel CPU is going to better than AMD's $320 offering? Wasn't that expected."

Me quoting someone with a toppled Bulldozer gif, and saying "wasn't that expected" should have made my point blatantly obvious.

PS: this thread is about an intel processor, and is not about bulldozer even if some people mention it.

Yeah. I know.

 

[trt740]

I'm one of those people. I save my money to buy the fastest at the time I'm ready to purchase. I don't do the routine that most budget enthusiast go thru where they buy a budget product, then buy the next step or 2 up a couple months later, etc., etc. Those people generally spend just as much as me in the long run, but it's compromise after compromise. Unless, of course, they just like testing new hardware, that's different.

I just keep using my old top end hardware until I can afford the new top end hardware. I usually use a tic-toc approach (with one year between tics and tocs). CPU & whatever else needed to make it run on tics and gpu on tocs. Bought my cpu, mobo and ram last year(upgrade from QX9650 2 years prior), bought the 580 this year (upgrade from 4870X2 2 years prior). Next year I'm due for a CPU upgrade, but I'll postpone this one to get a high end 8 core chip

Willie, I have to say upgrade wise you are smart and disciplined. Didn't you have a rampage with your QX9650. QX9650 is still a beast even today.

 

[Wile E]

Yep, well sort of. Maximus Formula flashed to Rampage. Still have them both. They are now my file/media/mumble server.

 

[trt740]

Yep, well sort of. Maximus Formula flashed to Rampage. Still have them both. They are now my file/media/mumble server.

I miss that board as I recall we had the same set up but in my case for about 6 months and now I have a new intel system and just hit 5.0ghz on average air cooling unreal BD better be a monster.

 

[Wile E]

Yeah, it's a good, stable board with good features.

 

[Lazzer408]

I wish Intel would just pick a f!@#ing socket and stick with it like they did the 775. I can't afford to drop $500 every time they change it. I finally got on the i7 boat and before I knew it there's the 2600k taunting me, now this? >.< In my case their strategy is working against them because I'll wait and see what's going to be next. Watch, one week after this CPU is out they'll change the socket to LGA2012 and it'll be the end of the world when I flip out because I just got a 2011.