Intel's Ivy Bridge Series Thread Options

[nobody813]

Much like mark84's thread on 2nd gen Bulldozer, this thread is all about Intel's upcoming Ivy Bridge processors, namely the mainstream replacement for Sandy Bridge. A new thread may be started with Ivy Bridge-E information, which is slated to be announced/released at the end of 2012

Ivy Bridge is part of Intel's "Tick" process, which means it is a die shrunk version of the current microarchitecture, Sandy Bridge, with some other tweaks also. The key architectural enhancements delivering these improvements are:
- Intel's new 22nm 3D Tri-Gate technology
- Enhanced AVX acceleration
- IGP performance improved by 30% compared to its predecessor
- IGP supports DX11 and OpenCL 1.1
- PCI Express 3.0 x16 interface, including a PCI Express 2.0 x4 controller

Here are some slides showing Intel's roadmap, and some features and improvements of Ivy Bridge compared to older products







Thanks to Moph for those :-)

As for more information on specific CPU's, there have been some leeks regarding this

Intel Ivy Bridge Desktop Processor Models Tabled

Russian website Overclockers.ru claims to have a complete picture of what Intel's upcoming 22 nm Core "Ivy Bridge" desktop (2012 Core Processor Family) looks like. The site compiled model names, extensions, clock speeds, Turbo Boost speeds, L3 cache sizes, and TDP ratings of as many as 18 models, most of which are quad-core.

The table reflects that most clock speeds are similar to today's Sandy Bridge LGA1155 processor models, some have Turbo Boost speeds as high as 3.90 GHz. Since Ivy Bridge silicon is an optical shrink of Sandy Bridge LGA1155, from 32 nm to 22 nm, and since Intel is using a more energy-efficient transistor design, there are significant improvements in TDP ratings.

TechPowerUp

And for those hoping to see how well Ivy Bridge CPU's are expected to perform, here are some supposed "official" slides showing that for us

Ivy Bridge Official Benchmarks – Markedly Better Performance Than Sandy Bridge

Previous preliminary reports have suggested that the forthcoming Ivy Bridge CPUs will have single threaded performance on par with the existing Sandy Bridge CPUs and will mainly deliver improvements to power consumption and integrated graphics - nothing for PC enthusiasts to get excited about. However, in leaked documents sent to partners, Intel have now revealed official performance figures for IB and they look rather good. They've produced a raft of benchmarks, which reveal improvements such as 56% in ArcSoft Media Expresso, 25% in Excel 2010 and a 199% gain in the 3D Mark Vantage GPU benchmark. Unfortunately, they haven't released any benchmarks based on high performance 3D games, but it's probably safe to say that they will be similarly improved. Now, on to the benchmarks, which compare their new 3.4 GHz i7-3770 (4 cores + HT) with the current 3.4 GHz i7-2600, also with 4 cores + HT:





+7% higher overall SYSmark 2012 score
+14% higher overall HDXPRT 2011 score
+15% higher Cinebench 11.5 score
+13% better ProShow Gold 4.5 result
+25% faster performance in Excel 2010
+56% faster performance in ArcSoft Media Expresso
+192% higher overall 3DMark Vantage score
+17% faster performance in 3DMark Vantage CPU benchmark
+199% faster performance in 3DMark Vantage GPU benchmark

TechPowerUp

As you can see, this is quite an improvement across the board, especially with the GPU related benchmarks. For this only being a shrunk and tweaked Sandy Bridge chip, Intel have done a remarkable job

This post has been edited by nobody813: Dec 2 2011, 12:08 PM

[hulk]

As you can see, this is quite an improvement across the board, especially with the GPU related benchmarks. For this only being a shrunk and tweaked Sandy Bridge chip, Intel have done a remarkable job

The GPU related benchmarks aren't all that relevant if you aren't using the onboard video though. Seems a lot less impressive if you remove the graphs showing the huge difference with the onboard GPU :P. At least Intel looks to be going forward in performance rather than sideways like that other major CPU manufacturer ;)

This post has been edited by hulk: Dec 1 2011, 09:39 PM

[.:Cyb3rGlitch:.]

I'm itching to overclock one of these chips to within a micron of its life!

[nesquick]

some good gains there, I think ~10% is a worthwhile gain and up to 200% for the IGPU is very very good.

This post has been edited by nesquick: Dec 1 2011, 10:02 PM

[juggtron]

Its interesting that they're 77W tdp - so there should be plenty of room to overclock :)

[nobody813]

As you can see, this is quite an improvement across the board, especially with the GPU related benchmarks. For this only being a shrunk and tweaked Sandy Bridge chip, Intel have done a remarkable job

The GPU related benchmarks aren't all that relevant if you aren't using the onboard video though. Seems a lot less impressive if you remove the graphs showing the huge difference with the onboard GPU :P. At least Intel looks to be going forward in performance rather than sideways like that other major CPU manufacturer ;)

I do agree with your point, however I'm surprised how far Intel have come with their GPU's. It need to happen, and it looks like they're actually trying to make them half decent ;-)

And, this will be a good indicator for laptop users

[mark84]

I'm somewhat interested in Ivy. Being still on Nehalem, by the time these come out I might be persuaded to upgrade to Ivy or Ivy-E.

Mainly for the 22nm tri-gate goodness. Cooler and less power. Which obvoisly lends itself to better OCing :P And if the rumours of them being socket compatible with Sandy-E X79 mobos, it'll mean there'll be a solid base, mobo wise, already forged.

[nesquick]

As you can see, this is quite an improvement across the board, especially with the GPU related benchmarks. For this only being a shrunk and tweaked Sandy Bridge chip, Intel have done a remarkable job

The GPU related benchmarks aren't all that relevant if you aren't using the onboard video though. Seems a lot less impressive if you remove the graphs showing the huge difference with the onboard GPU :P. At least Intel looks to be going forward in performance rather than sideways like that other major CPU manufacturer ;)

I do agree with your point, however I'm surprised how far Intel have come with their GPU's. It need to happen, and it looks like they're actually trying to make them half decent ;-)

And, this will be a good indicator for laptop users

agreed, for a small base of people who don't care about the GPU its a seemingly minute upgrade, to probably 95% of intels customers however its going to start making low end discrete GPU's redundant,the ones like GT520, HD6470 ect and at the end of the day save them money on the purchase.

This post has been edited by nesquick: Dec 2 2011, 10:17 AM

[Moph]

Edit: (roadmaps now incorporated in OP)

This post has been edited by Moph: Dec 2 2011, 01:08 PM

[nobody813]

Very nice find mate. Can I update the OP with these?

This post has been edited by nobody813: Dec 2 2011, 11:55 AM

[Moph]

Yep ... chuck them in the OP and I'll edit them out of mine.

[nobody813]

Yep ... chuck them in the OP and I'll edit them out of mine.

Thanks mate

I've added a mention of where I got those :-)

This post has been edited by nobody813: Dec 2 2011, 12:08 PM

[smakme7757]

Just saw this today on a norwegian tech site referring to internal Intel documents..

Core i7-3770 VS Core i7-2600
7% Higher score in SYSmark 2012
14% Higher score in HDXPRT 2011
15% Higher score in Cinebench 11.5
13% better performance in ProShow Gold 4.5
25% better performance in 2010
56% better performance in ArcSoft Media Expresso
192% better performance in 3DMark Vantage
17% better performance in 3DMark Vantage CPU
199% better performance in 3DMark Vantage GPU

No system specs were given though.

This post has been edited by smakme7757: Dec 2 2011, 05:31 PM

[philo-sofa]

Is anyone else surprised to see the lack of MHz increases from a shift to 22nm?

[nesquick]

hardly surprising considering tech is shifting towards better power consumption/performance ratios and not just performance/price ratios

This post has been edited by nesquick: Dec 2 2011, 07:41 PM

[philo-sofa]

TBH my guess was the tri-gate thing, which to be fair could be an expression of the 'meh peformance is good enough, let's nail power usage thing you're referring to. But barring some slight design optimisation choices wouldn't power per operation be not as big a concern, wouldn't they push clock speeds up a little at least? I guess a definite answer to that will come when we see how overclockable the silicon turns out to be :)

Personally I'm still hoping for a 5GHz 24/7 (i.e. below degradation voltage) O/C out of these puppies!

[nesquick]

they have no need to up speeds, AMD is making sure of that :|

This post has been edited by nesquick: Dec 2 2011, 11:47 PM

[.:Cyb3rGlitch:.]

They're going for low power to ensure they maintain a large lead over AMD. Clock rate is already quite high, so there's little point increasing it, given that the architecture already improves performance per clock.

[nobody813]

IPC is up, GPU performance is up, and power consumption is down. That's a lot :-P

[mark84]

Note: USB 3.0 finally

This post has been edited by mark84: Dec 5 2011, 03:12 PM