Ivy Bridge-E delayed until second half of 2013

[Shawn Knight]

A delay in the release of Intel’s Ivy Bridge processor has created a ripple effect that is now said to affect enthusiast-level Ivy Bridge-E parts as well. A leaked Intel roadmap published by ComputerBase reveals that the chip giant isn’t planning to release the new micro architecture for LGA 2011 until at least the second half of 2013.

The slide also indicates that the next generation Haswell micro architecture, the successor to Sandy Bridge, is being pushed back until the first half of 2013. Having Haswell and Ivy Bridge-E overlap could be bad news for those that have invested in LGA 2011 as the former could very well outperform the latter, thus putting an end to LGA 2011's short reign as Intel’s performance platform.

Plans for a Core i7-3980x are in the works but it’s unclear if this will simply be a higher-clocked six-core CPU or if we will see an eight-core chip come to fruition.

Intel launched LGA 2011 as a replacement for LGA 1366 for the performance segment in November 2011. There are currently three Sandy Bridge-E processors available for the platform: an entry-level quad-core Core i7-3820, a mainstream Core i7-3930K with six cores and the top-of-the-line Core i7 Extreme 3960X that boasts a price tag of over $1,000.

Ivy Bridge, Ivy Bridge-E and Haswell are all built using Intel’s 22nm manufacturing process and utilize new tri-gate transistors. As explained in our recent tech guide, tri-gate transistors use a three-dimensional fin that allows Intel to cram more transistors into a smaller space and gives electrons roughly three times the surface area to travel when in the ‘on’ state.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/47849-ivy-bridge-e-delayed-until-second-half-of-2013.html

 

[Guest]

Those at Intel are *******s, they always have pushed back from releasing new products in lack of competition. Only when AMD did released some competitive products back in the days Intel was in a hurry to release some good products as well. Now with AMD tailing way behind Intel in terms of competitive products, Intel is playing the lazy game yet again.

 

[Raswan]

Guest said:
Those at Intel are *******s, they always have pushed back from releasing new products in lack of competition. Only when AMD did released some competitive products back in the days Intel was in a hurry to release some good products as well. Now with AMD tailing way behind Intel in terms of competitive products, Intel is playing the lazy game yet again.

Since when do we need them to release a whole new platform this soon anyway? What are you doing that you need to upgrade every 14 months? Or do you just enjoy throwing money down the drain?

 

[Guest]

Re: Raswan

I think the idea here is that without the necessity(competition) there is less of a need for innovation. While I dont think anyone believes that because AMD is backing off Intel in the desktop world Intel will then keep releasing the i5-2500K but new technologies would come out quicker if someone was pushing Intel to develop them.

 

[Guest]

I would be happy if they hold off even longer!

finally computers will be "new" longer! YEY!

 

[Zilpha]

marinkvasina said:
If noone makes better food that random fast food and u are the only one that has a recipe for healthy food
You don't make it?

Not sure what you are trying to say here.

On-topic - maybe they are playing the 'lazy' game, but it's not like we have this boatload of software that is currently pushing the limits of the hardware we have now and we just can't possibly spend another year on sandy bridge....

 

[EXCellR8]

Hmm, perhaps my 920 will be sticking around awhile longer... i suppose waiting on completely dismantling my machine yet again wouldn't be so bad. i wanted to spend some hard-earned funds on a new graphics this year card anyway.

 

[Guest]

agreed. i had a 920 since they first came out.

not super impressed with any of the SB-E IB-E offerings as of yet.

Sure there are performance increases but its not anything that raises an eyebrow near 50% more than what 1366 already offers.

 

[Lionvibez]

Guest said:
Those at Intel are *******s, they always have pushed back from releasing new products in lack of competition. Only when AMD did released some competitive products back in the days Intel was in a hurry to release some good products as well. Now with AMD tailing way behind Intel in terms of competitive products, Intel is playing the lazy game yet again.

The error in your post is intel still has shareholders to please that demand profit. And I guarantee you they care more about them than they ever did about what AMD is doing.

So my point it yes they may slow down abit but innovation never stops they can't allow it.

 

[Guest]

And the funny part of that statement is they just put the brakes on releasing something because of copetition so in essence the "share holders dividends" are what is holding them back?

I find it a good thing i hope this meanws the nail in the coffin won't be coming for AMD and this gives AMD some time to be more competitive once again, frankly lack of competition is what is stopping innovation or atleast putting the brakes on and slowing it down.

 

[Guest]

The idea is not to waste money every 14 months, but when you did upgrade in 28 months (or whatever), you had 2 generations better than 1 generation better. There has been so little innovation from Intel, I went from upgrading every 12-18 months to 36 months now. I will upgrade memory and GFX during that time, but I leave the CPU alone until I see the market come out with something innovative.

 

[yukka]

Guest said:
agreed. i had a 920 since they first came out.

not super impressed with any of the SB-E IB-E offerings as of yet.

Sure there are performance increases but its not anything that raises an eyebrow near 50% more than what 1366 already offers.

Yep same here. Stock clocked 920 for more than 3 years now and showing no sign of "needing" an upgrade. Not even close

 

[Darth Shiv]

Other thing is it isn't new that new processes have delays. The new transistors are a pretty good reason but it's hard to know if that is the real reason for delay.

 

[Guest]

"Since when do we need them to release a whole new platform this soon anyway? What are you doing that you need to upgrade every 14 months? Or do you just enjoy throwing money down the drain?"

The problem is that the price point will be different in 14 months if the hardware would be released now, but when it's released in a 2013 as new hardware you'll be paying premium for it - because it's "NEW".

To the guy that said it's good if Intel wins, then maybe AMD will come with something new.
Young fellow the problem is AMD is really small compared to Intel, they also can't compare in term of funds that they can invest into new facilities.

They're not really a big competition for Intel but as there is no other company that could even remotely harm Intel in desktop/laptop market.

 

[Guest]

This reminds me the story of POP singer Prince that is keeping hundred new songs in his safe 'just in case' ;]

 

[Guest]

This reminds me the story of POP singer Prince that is keeping hundred new songs in his safe 'just in case' ;]

He in fact has enough finished product in his vault room, that he could release 1-2 albums per year, for 25 years. Mind you that was in the 80's and he is still touring. Shocking is that he's now in his late 50's I think. (Small guy, met him once. But BIG on performance and expectations)

 

[Guest]

Are you sure there is no need to upgrade ? The 920 was part of the first generation of i7 which most people agree was a disaster, while the second generation Sandy Bridge as demonstrated in all the benchmarks completely destroyed the first generation. If I was you I would certainly upgrade to SB, because in the future there will be no worthwhile upgrade as shown by Ivy Bridge. The smaller the die shrinks get, the more problems you will have trying to overclock them and preventing them from overheating. SB, I believe will be the best cpu for a long time.

 

[Guest]

I still have my i7 950 and will not upgrade until intel gives us a real increase in performance out of one of there cpu's. I'm sick of handing out money to intels share holders for second grade silicon.

 

[Guest]

In what world does sandy bridge distory the bloomfield series of cpu's? are you on drugs? lets face it any one how builds there own pc couldn't give a fruit cake about the advantage of built in graphics. thats what dedicated graphics cards are for.

 

[slh28]

The 920 was part of the first generation of i7 which most people agree was a disaster, while the second generation Sandy Bridge as demonstrated in all the benchmarks completely destroyed the first generation.

Erm wut... Bloomfields are up there with the greatest CPUs in recent memory. And SB certainly does not "destroy" Bloomfield in gaming.

 

[Guest]

And that's why AMD's 8 Core Processor sucks compared to An Intel I5 with 4 cores and no hyperthreading, because at Intel, they care about quality, not money

 

[Guest]

Its the amount of profit to the amount of time, resources and money that they put into making the current generation processors, the longer they can keep it on the market as their top end, the more profit they can make off of research that is already done and paid for, it wouldn't make sense for them to release a new line if the old one is still selling and introducing the new line would just reduce the selling prices of the current, it's like throwing away a perfectly good half of a sandwich and making a new one instead of just eating the half you have.

 

[Guest]

I'd like to differ. Granted, if you have a 920, you don't need a LGA 2011 CPU, but you just can not say that the performance of their latest and greatest isn't incredible.