• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Intel Ivy Bridge Revised Launch-Schedule Revealed

btarunr

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
47,670 (7.43/day)
Location
Dublin, Ireland
System Specs
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard Gigabyte B550 AORUS Elite V2
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 16GB DDR4-3200
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 4070 Ti EX
Storage Samsung 990 1TB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
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".

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Last edited:
Forget it then, i'm waiting for Haswell. Its only 12months away and at least that will last 2 generations through Broadwell as well.
 
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.
 
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
 
rob49152 said:
What about the new Xeon chips?
Click to expand...

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.
 
happita said:
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
Click to expand...

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
 
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!
 
trickson said:
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!
Click to expand...

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.
 
pjl321 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 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.
 
Octavean said:
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,....
Click to expand...

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?
 
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.
 
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.
 
Last edited:
pjl321 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
trickson said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
borandi said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
trickson said:
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.
Click to expand...


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.
 
TOPPC could only get it to 4.8ghz.
10% improvement over Sandy Bridge overall.
We'll see closer to April what it can do...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top