|
Wedesdo posted:Hum my new h100 is coming. Tempted to jack my 2500K up to 1.42V and see if I can get 5 GHz. You can hear a lot of things. Yes, lower temperature is important because heat adds resistance and that can cause unpredictable behavior and early part degradation (perhaps even more important when said part is 32nm in size ). However, operating voltage is its own concern separate from as well as in conjunction with temperature. High voltage + high temperature is outright dangerous, but high voltage can be dangerous even without high temperature. One thing in your favor if you do want to try some crazy poo poo overclocking, you could just buy the overclocking insurance and if you are able to keep temps down, at least it won't have a burnt mark on it if it fails since it'll just be a failure of the microarchitecture or something else under the heatspreader. But it's been mixed as far as what's "safe" for Sandy Bridge anyway, some people have been running the chips near 1.5V for some time with no issues, but others have definitely fried their processors. 1.38V is considered safe, but the VID specifies... in its peculiar way... around 1.5V. That just happens to seem really damned dangerous in practice. Intel hasn't been super helpful on that front. Your call.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2012 18:28 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 23:56 |
|
Wedesdo posted:Hum my new h100 is coming. Tempted to jack my 2500K up to 1.42V and see if I can get 5 GHz. It is 1.38V if you expect the chip to outlast its warranty. If you're gonna jack it up higher, get the overclocking insurance. $20 for an i5-2500K and you can volt it however high you like.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2012 18:30 |
|
Well, it's at 1.38V and 4.8GHz right now. I shouldn't get too greedy, right?
|
# ? Jan 20, 2012 18:45 |
|
Wedesdo posted:Well, it's at 1.38V and 4.8GHz right now. I shouldn't get too greedy, right? That's really good from what I've read, so if you kill it and get a replacement I wouldn't expect to be able to take the replacement that high.
|
# ? Jan 20, 2012 21:24 |
|
Perhaps there is a better thread for this, but is there any news on general availability of Knight's Corner/Intel MIC?
|
# ? Jan 26, 2012 20:51 |
|
hobbesmaster posted:Perhaps there is a better thread for this, but is there any news on general availability of Knight's Corner/Intel MIC?
|
# ? Jan 26, 2012 21:49 |
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Probably not any time in the near future, if I had to guess. It's dependent on Intel getting their 22nm 3D tri-gate process perfected, which Ivy Bridge seems to be the first commercial guinea pig for. Thats unfortunate, was hoping for a 75W supercomputer. Video cards take so much power... edit: Upon looking that up again, did I imagine 75W?
|
# ? Jan 26, 2012 22:32 |
|
Yesterday VR-Zone published some leaked Ivy Bridge CPU benchmarks, the Core i7 3770K (clocked the same as a Core i7 2700K) beat the Core i7 2600K by ~8.9%, which is about a 6% clock-for-clock improvement when you consider the slight clockspeed advantage. At the same time power usage is going down by ~19%, and we haven't even seen the graphics performance increases and overclocking potential yet.
|
# ? Feb 4, 2012 01:57 |
|
Alereon posted:Yesterday VR-Zone published some leaked Ivy Bridge CPU benchmarks, the Core i7 3770K (clocked the same as a Core i7 2700K) beat the Core i7 2600K by ~8.9%, which is about a 6% clock-for-clock improvement when you consider the slight clockspeed advantage. At the same time power usage is going down by ~19%, and we haven't even seen the graphics performance increases and overclocking potential yet. My hope is that we can hit 5ghz on air pretty easily with IVB. I think 4.5ghz was pretty doable for SNB, so can we get another 500mhz out of IVB?
|
# ? Feb 4, 2012 02:57 |
|
tijag posted:My hope is that we can hit 5ghz on air pretty easily with IVB. I think 4.5ghz was pretty doable for SNB, so can we get another 500mhz out of IVB?
|
# ? Feb 4, 2012 03:15 |
|
hobbesmaster posted:Thats unfortunate, was hoping for a 75W supercomputer. Video cards take so much power... Late 2012. Expect power consumption and theoretical floating-point performance similar to Kepler.
|
# ? Feb 4, 2012 08:06 |
|
theclaw posted:Late 2012. Expect power consumption and theoretical floating-point performance similar to Kepler. If nVidia's roadmaps are to be believed then Maxwell should blow that out of the water a few months later? IPP/MKL integration would be much easier to deal with than CUDA however.
|
# ? Feb 4, 2012 14:22 |
|
Contact of mine @ SuperMicro claims to have IvyBridge Xeons in his lab "and drat they're quick". Can't validate it one way or the other but it's something I like to dream about
|
# ? Feb 6, 2012 05:40 |
|
feld posted:Contact of mine @ SuperMicro claims to have IvyBridge Xeons in his lab "and drat they're quick". Can't validate it one way or the other but it's something I like to dream about They're fast (and cool)
|
# ? Feb 6, 2012 17:12 |
|
I went ahead and bought an Intel DP67-BG3 board, since they were on sale last week at Newegg. After buying it I decided to go ahead and wait for Ivy Bridge rather than pick up an i5-2500k based on what I've read. I saw that Ivy Bridge is backwards compatible with P67 and Z68 boards through a bios update, so that relieved me somewhat on if I had wasted money on a new board. My question is will I be able to do the update without a Sandy Bridge processor in there in the first place? Or should I just return it and grab a new board once the new line comes out?
|
# ? Feb 12, 2012 05:26 |
|
IB is unique as one mfg is shipping bioses with IB cpu support right now. However there is a caveat to IB support: It is not 100% guaranteed. If your motherboard mfg cheapen out on the bios chip, you are SOL. Intel is not above any of this as well. They've shipped motherboards that wouldn't support the next revision of a processor (conroes->wolfdale). I'd recommend getting the 2500k and keeping the board. Its a very respectable board.
|
# ? Feb 12, 2012 06:05 |
|
I'd strongly recommend you just return the board and buy whatever is a good deal when you're ready to build. Buying parts on sale that you don't plan to use immediately almost always means you lose money in the long term. You give up some of your warranty term, too.
|
# ? Feb 12, 2012 06:21 |
|
incomprehensible posted:IB is unique as one mfg is shipping bioses with IB cpu support right now. However there is a caveat to IB support: It is not 100% guaranteed. If your motherboard mfg cheapen out on the bios chip, you are SOL. Endymion FRS MK1 posted:My question is will I be able to do the update without a Sandy Bridge processor in there in the first place? Or should I just return it and grab a new board once the new line comes out? quote:I remember reading something (probably in the IB thread) saying Intel boards wouldn't be compatible with IB like other boards are because they don't have enough space for a BIOS flash or something. Does anybody know if this is correct? In response to that comment, read this post on vr-zone: http://vr-zone.com/articles/the-upgrade-path-to-ivy-bridge-might-be-blocked-by-changes-to-uefi/13513.html Basically, you might be able to drop an Ivybridge chip in it, but it's unlikely that you'd even be able to attempt it without another SB chip to run a BIOS flash (and even then a BIOS update may not allow it as Intel boards have less flash memory to work with, possibly preventing the required UEFI update). Not to mention, if the board is DOA you wouldn't be able to find out within the return window. Return it as Alereon suggested and wait. future ghost fucked around with this message at 19:28 on Feb 12, 2012 |
# ? Feb 12, 2012 06:28 |
|
Ok, thanks guys. Thats what I get for buying on impulse I suppose.
|
# ? Feb 12, 2012 13:43 |
|
I know I've previously said here that Sandy doesn't offer enough benefit over C2Q processors for me to bother and that I'd wait for Ivy, but now that it's almost here... are there any details on Haswell? If there was any bottleneck in my setup, I thought it was mostly the platter storage (system drive just died) and graphics (stock fan just died). So if I replace both of those, I'd buy myself quite a bit more time. Have anyone given any thought to the next "tock"?
|
# ? Feb 13, 2012 17:12 |
|
mobby_6kl posted:I know I've previously said here that Sandy doesn't offer enough benefit over C2Q processors for me to bother and that I'd wait for Ivy, but now that it's almost here... are there any details on Haswell? If there was any bottleneck in my setup, I thought it was mostly the platter storage (system drive just died) and graphics (stock fan just died). So if I replace both of those, I'd buy myself quite a bit more time. Have anyone given any thought to the next "tock"? Isn't this just a cycle where you constantly wait till the next tick or tock then decide to wait until a tock or tick instead and repeat? Forgive me if that sounds a bit crude or whatever. I did have that thought though too (running a C2Q now as well), then I decided to bite the bullet and go for Ivy Bridge. Sooner or later you'll have to actually upgrade instead of keeping on waiting for the next development
|
# ? Feb 13, 2012 17:42 |
|
I dunno, I was running an overclocked Core2 (nothing extreme, probably 3.2ish ghz) when the first Nehalem i7s came out, and the move to an i7-920 OCed to 3.8 ghz was pretty damned impressive, and it's been a fine machine since November 2008 when I put it together. I put in an X-25m later on, and that was an even better upgrade, but the core2s, even OCed ones, are preeety damned creaky at this point. All of our work machines are STILL core2 based (Government, etc etc). My workstation happens to have a 240 gig Vertex2, and even with that, it is not close to my i7-920 in terms of responsiveness on the desktop. Obviously can't say for gaming on the work machine, but yea. With an SSD they're certainly not bad machines, and I would do an SSD upgrade before the processor, but you're still going to be pretty damned happy with a Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge upgrade, even if your Core2 is OCed to hell.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2012 17:48 |
|
mobby_6kl posted:I know I've previously said here that Sandy doesn't offer enough benefit over C2Q processors for me to bother and that I'd wait for Ivy, but now that it's almost here... are there any details on Haswell? If there was any bottleneck in my setup, I thought it was mostly the platter storage (system drive just died) and graphics (stock fan just died). So if I replace both of those, I'd buy myself quite a bit more time. Have anyone given any thought to the next "tock"? There are a bunch of architectural details on Haswell available, but the general gist is that Intel is targeting portables even more aggressively with its design. From what I remember, Intel is pushing to get Haswell down to a 10W thermal envelope, so a lot of the optimizations will be in that direction. I don't expect Haswell to be drastically different from IVB - just a continued evolution of the concepts Intel has already introduced. That said, I'd base any upgrade decisions based on the ability of your current rig. I certainly wouldn't put off a CPU upgrade by 18 months based on a 'what-if' if your Core 2 is getting long in the tooth.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2012 18:00 |
|
mobby_6kl posted:are there any details on Haswell?
|
# ? Feb 13, 2012 18:58 |
|
Well I'm definitely well aware of the "there's a better model in x month" thing, so I'm mainly trying to judge the upgrade based on how my current processor satisfies the performance demand, which is pretty well. I simply don't recall wishing for a faster one very often (maybe when compressing large amounts of data or rendering something, but I don't do that too frequently). I've actually seen the transactional memory article on Arstechnica but didn't really read it properly or connect that it'll be in the next architecture. It does look like something that could make a real difference on utilization of whatever ridiculous amount of cores that these processors will have. It's pretty exciting, really, even if it doesn't instantly take hold on the desktop, just from an amateur programmer's point of view.
|
# ? Feb 13, 2012 20:54 |
|
Standish posted:This is really cool, more of a big deal for servers than desktops though. FMA will also be pretty cool for some applications.
|
# ? Feb 19, 2012 04:42 |
|
So if Gigabyte has completely dropped the ball on their motherboards when it comes to the Vdroop issue, which manufacturer has worked around this issue the best? I'm probably not going to build a new system until Ivy Bridge arrives, but I've grown accustomed to Intel reference boards (I don't do much overclocking at all and I have a habit of keeping the vital components to one manufacturer). However, I'm willing to jump ship in that regard and consider Asus/Asrock or MSI. I've had ASUS boards before but that was a while back and the only thing I notice about them now is the high price. But I suppose that's where Asrock/MSI come in. I don't even know how Intel handles the Vdroop issue with their own motherboards. Maybe they do a decent job?
|
# ? Feb 19, 2012 18:25 |
|
COCKMOUTH.GIF posted:So if Gigabyte has completely dropped the ball on their motherboards when it comes to the Vdroop issue, which manufacturer has worked around this issue the best? I'm probably not going to build a new system until Ivy Bridge arrives, but I've grown accustomed to Intel reference boards (I don't do much overclocking at all and I have a habit of keeping the vital components to one manufacturer). However, I'm willing to jump ship in that regard and consider Asus/Asrock or MSI. I've had ASUS boards before but that was a while back and the only thing I notice about them now is the high price. But I suppose that's where Asrock/MSI come in. I had a Skull Trail a week ago and they did in fact have a Vdroop compensation setting in the BIOS. I never tried it and don't know how well it works.
|
# ? Feb 19, 2012 18:35 |
|
movax posted:They're fast (and cool) Can't wait for the extreme edition 8/10 core IVB where they can keep all the cores enabled while still running within a reasonable thermal envelope at a decent clock speed.
|
# ? Feb 20, 2012 05:38 |
|
EXPreview has some details and graphics benchmarks of the upcoming Ivy Bridge Core i5 3570K. HD Graphics 4000 is between 30-85% faster than HD 3000 in real games, up to more than twice as fast in 3DMark. VR-Zone is also reporting that the previously announced delay for Ivy Bridge will only apply to dual-core mobile chips. Desktops and quad-core mobile chips will launch at the beginning of April as planned.
|
# ? Feb 21, 2012 03:51 |
|
Alereon posted:VR-Zone is also reporting that the previously announced delay for Ivy Bridge will only apply to dual-core mobile chips. Desktops and quad-core mobile chips will launch at the beginning of April as planned. That both makes more sense from a logistics standpoint (clearing those out to oems must be a pain in the rear end, and they are good for nothing afterward) and, surprisingly, from a "let's not squander goodwill with end users and organizations" standpoint for the performers in the lineup.
|
# ? Feb 21, 2012 04:16 |
|
Agreed posted:That both makes more sense from a logistics standpoint (clearing those out to oems must be a pain in the rear end, and they are good for nothing afterward) and, surprisingly, from a "let's not squander goodwill with end users and organizations" standpoint for the performers in the lineup.
|
# ? Feb 21, 2012 04:22 |
|
Anyone have more intel (har har) on Intel's Near Threshold Voltage efforts than AnandTech? clicky The thing is Claremont, derived from an original Pentium and built on 32nm processes with NTV research enhancements. It idles at 3 MHz @ 280mV, and scales all the way up to 915 MHz @ 1.2V. Its lowest power state draws only 2mW. That teeny solar panel is sufficient for the chip to run Windows or Linux. It looks pretty rad.
|
# ? Feb 21, 2012 20:45 |
|
Intel loving owns. They're doing some really excellent stuff. I hope someday I will get a chance to work on some of that.
|
# ? Feb 21, 2012 20:49 |
|
More ISSCC coverage: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4236562/Intel-gives-deeper-look-into-Ivy-Bridge?cid=NL_EETimesDaily
|
# ? Feb 22, 2012 01:59 |
|
If I understand this right, they took the original pentium design and die shrunk it + added new instruction sets?
|
# ? Feb 22, 2012 02:47 |
|
Factory Factory posted:Anyone have more intel (har har) on Intel's Near Threshold Voltage efforts than AnandTech? Is that solar panel really sufficient for it to run windows or just putter around in one of the low energy P states?
|
# ? Feb 22, 2012 02:54 |
|
JawnV6 posted:More ISSCC coverage: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4236562/Intel-gives-deeper-look-into-Ivy-Bridge?cid=NL_EETimesDaily SRQ posted:If I understand this right, they took the original pentium design and die shrunk it + added new instruction sets?
|
# ? Feb 22, 2012 05:51 |
|
JawnV6 posted:More ISSCC coverage: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-news/4236562/Intel-gives-deeper-look-into-Ivy-Bridge?cid=NL_EETimesDaily quote:Specifically the largest die includes four x86 cores and a large graphics block. It can be chopped along its x- and/or y-axis using automated generation tools to create versions with two cores or a smaller graphics block. This owns. I've only ever done chip design small enough for MOSIS to handle.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2012 06:03 |
|
|
# ? May 9, 2024 23:56 |
|
By the by, anyone concerned about competition and innovation in light of AMD's restructuring might take some solace if you read up on Joseph Schumpeter's theories of monopoly and innovation. In a nutshell, he said that monopolies can drive innovation because they have large amounts of capital which can be invested into novel research. As semiconductor design is a highly investment-driven industry, it's a perfect place for such a market dynamic.
|
# ? Feb 22, 2012 06:30 |