Intel Sandy Bridge-E Debuts: Core i7-3960X Reviewed

Wow, I've had the 2600k for almost a year now and it still making every other option look silly.
Best value processor I've ever seen.

Save the $700, buy a 2600k and put it towards a blazing SSD, you'll see much more bang for your buck.

I stopped reading at $990 so I don't know/care how powerful is this.

wondering how many more years my i7 920 will last before it starts feeling dated. this is for gaming i mean.

I'd expect IB to be somewhere in between SB and SB-E. Probably faster in gaming assuming IB gets a slight speed increase over 2700K, would still be slower than SB-E in productivity/content creation apps. There's no substitute for cores in the latter.

Ivy Bridge-E is likely a drop in replacement for SB-E on the X79 platform so that you should see the same performance delta with IB/IB-E as we are now seeing with SB/SB-E

Larger cache won't impact on many games at "standard" resolutions/single GPU. SB's smaller L3 isn't being fully utilised as it is, so you could in effect say that with most games not fully utilising 4C/8T (at 100% usage) the 3960X and 3930K are at a disadvantage to the 2600K/2700K as they run slightly slower (3.3/3.2G and 3.8/3.9G w/turbo versus 3.4G and 3.8G w/turbo for 2600K). Sandy Bridge 4-core also seems slightly better favoured in memory performance.
I would also factor in the fact that SB-E is likely throttling under load. Most reviews used the Intel branded Asetek all-in-one watercooler or a fairly standard air cooler, and this is a BIG CPU pushing a lot of wattage in comparison with the 2600K.

I would doubt that anyone would look at X79 primarily for gaming, and unless they were going multi-monitor, tri/quad-gpu, custom watercooling and SSD's in RAID 0 you aren't going to see anything significant over SB...they are after all exactly the same CPU, albeit that one has twice the number of cores and a little more than double the L3. For any significant increase over the 2600K you would have to find a situation where the gaming scenario saturated the ability of the SB CPU and the P67/Z68 chipset- and the only likelyhood of that would be saturating the PCI-E bus using quad-CrossfireX or tri-SLI (P67/Z68/X79) / quad-SLI (X79)

Correct me if i'm wrong, but i thought the i5 2500k had the best value. Little to no performance decreases at $100 less.

Best gaming value assuredly.
If your usage leans towards content creation and productivity as well as gaming then the 2600K would edge the 2500K in most metrics (performance/watt, time to complete, multitasking).

Insane PC 'I'm really from Liverpool' arsonist enthusiast....category...:haha::wave:

...there...happy now!?

there is nothing wrong with bench box boys ya know. That is some folks thing.

That's about it...with a caveat:
1. P67/Z68 shares it's platform PCI/PCI-E bandwidth with I/O to the extent that not all features can be run concurrently on most budget/mainstream boards- PCI-E slots sharing bandwidth with I/O controllers (SATA 6GB, eSATA and USB 3.0), so some ports may be not available if the bandwidth is already allocated

P67/Z68 is limited to 16 lanes of PCI-E 2.0/3.0 -which generally means two graphics cards only at x8 speeds, and unless the board has an integrated bridge chip (PLX or NF200 lane extender) most of the other slots become non-functional or downgraded -usually a PCIe x16 running at x4 or a PCIex4 (this third slot often shares bandwidth with a PCIe x1 slot)

It may be a case where the game has an L3 dependency- I stress may, as I do not know for sure and unlike testing an AMD L3/ no L3 situation it could be hard to pin down*. If the game code is asking the CPU to switch data at a very fast rate then a CPU with a lower amount of L3 cache may reach a point where it would need to offload to the much slower use of system memory (RAM)- having a larger third-level cache may mitigate that need.

You would probably need to evaluate on a game by game basis and target games where the CPU workload is high (i.e. using CPU physics engines) such as BF3

I was thinking along the same lines:
1. That level of performance will stay competitive for some time
2. If you select a good quality board then an "upgrade" to the non-neutered 8-core Xeon E5 is an option in future, or...
2A. Ivy Bridge-E (rumoured to be 8 and 10 core) will likely be a drop-in replacement for SB-E if anyone finds that the latter becomes too "underpowered"

EDIT: I'm an idi0t. If you look at reviews of the 3960X and 3930K at the same clockspeed then the only difference between the two is the 3930K's lower L3 cache (12MB instead of 15MB) [bit-tech review here]

Doesn't replicate the excitement of the 1366/i7, which is too bad. Nehalem's debut was a fun time.

I suppose what we can be excited about is how well the consumer/enthusiast grade CPU's like the 2500K perform in comparison. Good work Intel. I hope Piledriver picks up the pace for AMD, though that's wishful thinking, I know.

SB-E is far too overpowered for my actual needs, but I'd be game for a 3930K sometime soon. Perhaps after a stepping revision.

It strikes me that this new CPU is really not much to write about, other than it is quite expensive. I do recognize that the initial offerings here are the top end units, which really doesn't bode well for the later iterations of lower price. Another socket means another board to buy. Yet again Intel dictates a more costly upgrade path for manufacturers as well as consumers. The above noted limitations of the chipset supporting this CPU probably means another chipset or socket change down the road. Keep in mind the rather tepid performance delta of this very costly new unit. The price difference between the CPUs themselves is rather large, somewhat reminiscent of the Pentium 4 Extreme Edition units.

I do wish AMD had produced a more clearly competitive chip but as I see the 3960X as a somewhat more powerful but equally mixed performer (as compared to previous i7 chips) it seems that the lack of a more competitive chip from AMD has let Intel slip back into its old arrogance. I wouldn't buy one of these but then again I didn't buy any other CPU at that price point either. I urge others to think and use a careful analysis of their needs before buying/building a new machine.

and now, a counter point/opposing view.
I an not a big fan of buying the top end, top priced CPU...especially for 'future proofing'. if you are going to spend $1000.00 on a CPU, the following should be of urgent importance and true .
1) Your home computer is used at, or to the point where it is a "time is money" situation.
2) The difference between 2:00 and 2:07 to compress/convert that file is actually important and meaningful to you.
3) you are going to keep the CPU for 3+ years
4) you don't mind the depreciation of an Alpha Romeo.

lets not forget you have gaming as one of your core uses, and it doesn't even offer any improvement in this area. Add to that, in a few months IB will be here with most likely 90%+ performance for about 1/3 the price, and less juice to run it with a 22nm process.
I just think that future proofing with a $1000.00 CPU is going to lead to disappointment. I would bet you a pint, that if you got a picked up an $350 IB CPU,with the intention of replacing it again in a year...you would probably pass on the upgrade. If you did not pass, and purchased/installed a second $350 CPU...you would still be ahead $300, be current generation, have better performance than a $1000 SB now. My advice, get a $350 IB now with an option for a update in a year +/-.
My 2 cents worth.

Yup, if it weren't for the fact that it spanks every other CPU in productivity and content creation it would be pretty much s*!+

The next SKU to launch is the Core i7 3820 at $294

Are you in some kind of hostage situation...forced to wear a vest packed full of plastique that will go boom if you don't get to a Microcenter in time ?

I think the "manufacturers" are loving it...You think that somehow this product launch is costing Intel and the motherboard and RAM makers money ?

Yup, FC-LGA2011 is likely to go EOL sometime in 2014...hardly worth releasing it -maybe everyone should just stay with their present systems until ~2018 when Skymont makes an appearance

Which could be levelled at every new x86 architecture from any vendor since C2D

...and Core 2...

...and the next enthusiast line...Nehalem..

You realize the last time that happened people had to pay $1000+ for an Athlon FX, right?...$1k+ in 2006

Quelle surprise

...dikbozo...sucking the lifeblood out of an enthusiasts hobby, one post at a time.
++++++++++++++++

Me either, although the 3930K at half the price is mighty tempting -OC isn't affected ( 45 multi + BCLK if required). I'd still wait until prices settle down and some concrete info on the next stepping.

Ahh, but followed by Ivy Bridge-E........TEN CORES G! TEN F@(%n CORES!!!

I'd probably echo those sentiments if it were not for the fact that the Z77 chipset looks like it's going to be hamstrung by Intel yet again. If you're going that route then buying a 2600K and a good Z68 board with IB drop-in capability is probably the way to go.
From a personal viewpoint - I drive an M5, I like driving...I appreciate the "getting from A to B" mentality, but I probably won't be buying a Ford Fiesta any time soon even though it does much the same things as the Beemer and costs somewhat less...So I can appreciate the enthusiast excess for the sake of excess.

Here even a new Honda Civic / Accord or Toyota Corolla will loose about 5-6% of its value as soon as you drive it out of the show room, so ................................ this isn't simply an Alpha Romeo issue

Yeah i'm like that with graphic cards....and food....etc..
Hey i am all for the enthusiast thing. i have enthusiast OCD myself.
I just get the impression that Lee-K isn't buying one for an enthusiast vent though...unless he just isn't admitting it
and it has been my experience that the vast majority of folk who try to 'future proof' with a product like this, wish they hadn't.

you don't say... cuz ...that would be dumb...

I understand that Alphas have a higher "as soon as you get off the lot drop" in value. just what I have heard from those should know....I, i said should know

Well, for the bog-standard desktop setup a 2500K/2600K is going to suffice for the majority of people. A 2600K/2700K clocked to 5GHz is still a potent performer. Where the clear cut performance issue isn't clear cut is if you compare low end SB-E vs high end SB...
3820 (4C/8T) @ $294 vs. 2600K (4C/8T) @ $316
Gigabyte X79-UD3 @ £186.34 vs Asus P8Z68 Deluxe @ £192.82 (a reasonable board with PLX chip and similar feature set)
RAM pricing is largely inconsequential.

4-6 months down the track, the upgrade path would be Ivy Bridge (4C/8T) 3600K vs a second hand 3930K (6C/12T). Your upgrade path with Ivy Bridge stops there-barring higher clocked parts, while the X79 still gives the opportunity for secondhand 3960X (or better) and Ivy Bridge-E.

This is pretty much the scenario I'm looking at now...but then, I'm itching to build a balls out system again....X58 for me was good but limiting - Westmere comes too late in the product cycle to consider....and I haven't had a really enjoyable tweaking system since my QX9650 + 790Ultra setup.

That's a crazy fast piece of kit.

However as I only really use my PC to play games.. (as this review demonstrates) my i7 920 still does me very well.

Given the type of computing you do the i7 3930K makes perfect sense, especially when you spread the cost over a number of years. Also agree that it's a better choice than the FX 8120P (20/20 hind sight), as AM3+ will be long gone before SB-E reaches end of life. When I built my X58 rig with a 965EE Nehalem was assuming at least five years of service, so far so good and it more than handles my gaming/OCD enthusiast needs.

According to bit-tech it appears the 3930K has some pretty fair overclocking abilities just in case you decide to scratch that itch now or down the road

For guys like me running an outdated gaming PC ( AMD 955BE/ 790FX MB / 8 GB DDR2-800 / GTX 275 ), a Core i7 2600K/2700K with 8/16 GB DDR3 seems to be the most logical and cost effective upgrade. However, I have this gut feeling that the Core i7 3930K rig, even with the higher upfront cost of the processor, motherboard and memory, might prove to be the better long term investment for someone who does gaming and also some light office work on the same PC.