Clock for Clock: Ivy Bridge-E vs The Field
When we posted our Haswell review I included some clock-for-clock results of the recent Intel architectures. We took samples from each microarchitecture (Haswell, Ivy Bridge, and Sandy Bridge) to measure how their evolution impacts performance. Features, such as Turbo Boost and EIST, were disabled and each processor was set to the same, fixed, clock speed.
I am including similar data here though of course with the caveat that the Ivy Bridge-E platform has 50% more cores than the other processors listed. In single threaded programs that won't matter but in most where multiple threads can be utilized, there is some obvious advantage of having two more cores. Still, I think it remains a good data point to compare IVB-E to Haswell, etc. when running at exactly the same clocks.
Clearly in our single threaded test results you can see the advantages of the Haswell architecture over Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge. But under a multi-threaded workload of the same application the IVB-E has a 37% advantage over Haswell.
Again the added cores of the IVB-E processor make up for architectural short comings it might have to Haswell.
Finally, in our x264 transcoding test we see advantages of 38% and 30% on each of the two different passes thanks to the added cores of IVB-E.
While clearly these results aren't as interesting as the Haswell, IVB, and SNB results from June, it does allow readers to easily estimate performance deltas of IVB-E over each of those previously released processors when overclocked to similar speeds.
“…a set of three of
“…a set of three of NVIDIA’s GeForce GTX TITANs. At $999 MSRP, the TITAN is the fastest single GPU graphics card on the market and running three of them in SLI gives us a total of 18GB of graphics memory (!!).”
No it doesn’t. VRAM is mirrored in SLI/CF. Therefore, three Titans still effectively have 6GB of VRAM.
IF your a average gamer
IF your a average gamer ….don’t bother.
Love one but just cannot get over the price.
Not to be fanboy ish but shouldn’t gamers be moving to 8 core
AMD. I know intel is faster, but two years down the road into xBONE and PS4 life cycle it might just be an advantage.
8 Core is great, but from
8 Core is great, but from what I’ve heard, most games aren’t well optimized for 8 cores.
Hence why most gamers used to recommend the 2 core CPU (Duo/Dual). Now, 4 cores is preferred. Eventually, most games will be optimized for 8 cores. I do recall seeing some new games that when it detect additional cores, it will utilize them.
However, note that more cores means lower clock-speed (Ghz) per core. So if you can’t use those additional cores, performance is decreased.
As for other usages such as high computing task, 8 cores are recommended (e.i. Adobe software).
Cheers! 🙂
Incredible points. Sound
Incredible points. Sound ɑrguments. Keep up the good work.
My web blog :: clothing manufacturers in india – Dominga –
I’m sure none of the
I’m sure none of the reviewers have wanted to do this, for obvious reasons, and we probably won’t know till more are in the wild, but I’d love to know if these have soldered IHSs or if I need to continue my tradition of de-lidding these things. It will influence my decision to a reasonable degree. I haven’t seen mention of this on any of the reviews so far.
I’ve seen it somewhere..
I’ve seen it somewhere.. Ivy-E is soldered to the IHS.
Any plans to test PCI Express
Any plans to test PCI Express 2.0 vs 3.0 on the “E” platforms?
There just isn’t the single
There just isn’t the single threaded IPC gains that we need for anybody to justify an upgrade from Sandy Bridge onwards. There’s also no gains in overclocking headroom either, which makes the processor a pretty lackluster offering over the last generation from Intel.
What’s up with the slow
What’s up with the slow memory latency of the 4960X? Does having 4 memory channels affect the latency?