Rumor: Ivy Bridge to offer 20% boost over Sandy Bridge

[Emil]

Intel's latest 32nm Sandy Bridge processors will eventually be succeeded by next-generation Ivy Bridge processors, which will be manufactured using a 22nm process. The latter will offer a significant performance boost over the former, according to internal Intel documents with internal performance estimates seen by VR-Zone:

According to early roadmap details we've seen, Intel is estimating that Ivy Bridge will offer a 20 percent performance advantage over Sandy Bridge which is slightly more than what Sandy Bridge offered over Intel's first generation of Core I processors. On the graphics side we'll see support for DirectX 11 and OpenCL 1.1 and Intel is targeting a 30 percent graphics performance boost compared to Sandy Bridge.

In addition to the raw boosts in speed, Ivy Bridge will offer DirectX 11 support; current Sandy Bridge chips only support DirectX 10.1. Ivy Bridge will also likely support PCI Express 3.0, three independent displays, and HDMI 1.4. So far, it doesn't seem to support DisplayPort 1.2; only version 1.1 is on the table.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/42279-rumor-ivy-bridge-to-offer-20-boost-over-sandy-bridge.html

 

[brianmsu]

hmmm i guess ill have to hold off on a new processor till this comes... i'll get it the day it comes out and be an early adopter, no problem right? coolface.jpg

 

[mcmurphy12]

I wonder what socket they are going to use?

 

[TomSEA]

Oh, it'll be a new socket fer sure, mcmurphy12. That's how Intel and the mobo manufacturer's keep each other in business.

Can't believe they're already talking about the next generation of processors and Sandy Bridge has been out for what - a couple of months? And a faulty release at that.

 

[mcmurphy12]

Darn it! I kind of figured that would happen as they introduced the new socket for the Sandy Bridge series.

 

[Trigrammatron]

Play the waiting game forever!

 

[madboyv1]

Hope they stick with 1155... while I don't buy new computers on a regular basis, getting so tired of a new socket every year... lol. It also costs motherboard manufacturers more to be designing new motherboards every time, while leeching sales from current pre-existing motherboards, though at least they'll always have the early adopters and last place folks buying from both ends. =o

 

[Wagan8r]

I kinda doubt that they will introduce a new socket for Ivy Bridge. They tend to keep sockets for their family of processors. And by family, I mean architecture design, not die shrinks and enhancements.

 

[Raswan]

TomSEA said:
Oh, it'll be a new socket fer sure, mcmurphy12. That's how Intel and the mobo manufacturer's keep each other in business.

Can't believe they're already talking about the next generation of processors and Sandy Bridge has been out for what - a couple of months? And a faulty release at that.

Barely a month Tom. But you're right on both accounts. Having been one on the fence in terms of waiting for SB, I am glad I just picked up an i5-760 for cheap. Though who knows when IB will be coming out.

 

[Mizzou]

As I understand it Ivy Bridge will still be Socket 1155, but there are reports that it will require a different motherboard. Still, a 20% increase over Sandy Bridge is pretty impressive.

Fudzilla

 

[Relic]

As I understand it Ivy Bridge will still be Socket 1155, but there are reports that it will require a different motherboard. Still, a 20% increase over Sandy Bridge is pretty impressive.

Fudzilla

Was about to post that, but you beat me to it . And that is indeed impressive results over an already impressive SB imo.

 

[Archean]

BTW SB have no faults of its own (sans the usual errata) but the real issue was with the possibility of SATA ports failure, and as long as they are replacing motherboards for free, I don't see any issue with it.

Now with sockets, I don't like the situation that Intel is now carrying two sockets for each generation, but except this I see no issue with introduction of new socket with each 'tock'. 30% graphics performance improvement sound more interesting to me, I don't think nVidia/AMD can provide such significant improvement (in the lower segments as well) provided that Intel's claims are true. So, at least in the mobile sector my next notebook won't need any discrete GPU to provide 'reasonably decent' performance.

 

[princeton]

Intel's Tick release is usually compatible with existing boards. The hexacore i7's were. But it is intel after all, nobody will know for sure.

 

[Guest]

This is what I am waiting for as my next upgrade. SB didn't offer enough of an improvement to Nehalem i'm on a 920 @ 3.6

This way I get a 30-40% IPC boost aswell as PCI Express 3.0

I don't bother with incremental upgrades anymore stop doing that once I got into my 20's.

 

[Kibaruk]

Whats the surprise here? The same happened with the i3-5-7 they all came pretty close with different sockets. We are in the technology industry, what surprises me is that you are surprised =P

How many times did you not buy something that at the next month you were kicking yourself because something better, cheaper and meaner came out?

 

[ruben1992]

Thought is was going to be 'Socket 2011' or 1355?

 

[captaincranky]

Thought is was going to be 'Socket 2011' or 1355?

It's supposed to be "LGA2011" for the high end. (Or so says "pixel smashers'; http://pixelsmashers.com/?p=1250 Perhaps 4 channel RAM.

If you take a minute to think about it, it all makes perfect sense. The more you expect the CPU to do, the more wires you're going to have to run to it, to get the more stuff done. That what the extra pins are mostly for in LGA1366, the 3rd RAM channel.

 

[Guest]

Yawn.

Intel and their stupid b$ products just make me sick.

They continuously bring out "new" products that are "sooooo fast". Not to mention the "obvious" percentual increase in performance.

What a laugh riot !

Intel has been selling their pissy 1.8 Celeron as entry level in the "Rest Of World" segment for more than three years !

I can buy an Athlon II 260 at the same price point but nooooo users still buy and support Intel.

'nuff said.

 

[Mizzou]

Was about to post that, but you beat me to it . And that is indeed impressive results over an already impressive SB imo.

Now it appears that Ivy Bridge may be compatiable with H67 and P67 chipsets after all. Per Fudzilla Ivy Bridge 22nm works with H67 and P67.

 

[captaincranky]

Yawn.

Intel and their stupid b$ products just make me sick.

They continuously bring out "new" products that are "sooooo fast". Not to mention the "obvious" percentual increase in performance.

What a laugh riot !

Intel has been selling their pissy 1.8 Celeron as entry level in the "Rest Of World" segment for more than three years !

I can buy an Athlon II 260 at the same price point but nooooo users still buy and support Intel.

'nuff said.

Then you should be out drivin' the old AMD Bulldozer, in the rest of this pipe dream.


And BTW, why is it always phrased that you "can buy"? With the the time it took to pump out all this fanboi bluster, you could have ordered a half dozen from New egg.

 

[fpsgamerJR62]

If Ivy Bridge CPUs are compatible with the P67/H67 platform, I guess we're not going to see the successor of Socket 1366 anytime soon. With the recall of Sandy Bridge motherboards by various manufacturers, I'll probably end up waiting for Ivy Bridge to come out in terms of my next PC upgrade.

 

[princeton]

Now it appears that Ivy Bridge may be compatiable with H67 and P67 chipsets after all. Per Fudzilla Ivy Bridge 22nm works with H67 and P67.

That's what I though. Only the Tock requires a new socket, and there's a reason why. Intel does more then add cores and cache to the same architecture. So why would people complain in the first place?

 

[Mizzou]

That's what I though. Only the Tock requires a new socket, and there's a reason why. Intel does more then add cores and cache to the same architecture. So why would people complain in the first place?

There were reports circulating for a while that a new motherboard would be required, doesn't appear so at this point in time. Should make anyone that has already invested in a socket 1155 motherboard feel a lot better. Saw your earlier post on the subject, looks like you made the right call on this one

 

[captaincranky]

That's what I though. Only the Tock requires a new socket, and there's a reason why. Intel does more then add cores and cache to the same architecture. So why would people complain in the first place?

There were reports circulating for a while that a new motherboard would be required, doesn't appear so at this point in time. Should make anyone that has already invested in a socket 1155 motherboard feel a lot better. Saw your earlier post on the subject, looks like you made the right call on this one

OK, "Ivy Bridge" is primarily about the 22nm process. When Intel jumped from 65nm to 45mn, I believe that some of the later 65nm boards, when fitted with an updated BIOS, accommodated the newer 45nm CPUs.

In any event, I'm not sure why everybody's thinking that it's going to be absolutely one way, (alI Ivy Bridge fits only 1155 sockets) or the other, (All Ivy Bridge gets a new socket). First and foremost, Ivy bridge is about shrinking the manufacturing process but......

Intel LGA1156 and LGA1366 coexist at the present time, each with a specific purpose. LGA 1366's higher calling, is its tri-channel RAM. Nothing on the market approaches it's memory bandwidth. That being said, I'm sure that RAM clock speed is beginning to approach theoretical limits, the same way that CPU clock speed has been for some time. With CPU you have to change the architecture to do more per clock cycle, and drop the clock speed. With RAM the same thing could be accomplished by maintaining the same clock speed, and jacking up the bit access number. This is already being done with graphics memory.

So, rumors of an "LGA 2011" socket are probably as much fact as they are speculation. The extra pins would be needed for the also rumored to be coming >> 4 << channel RAM.

The novel thing that was noted about Sandy Bridge's release, is that it reversed precedent, by offering main stream parts first, with perhaps enthusiast parts to come later.

I frankly don't see why Ivy Bridge wouldn't follow the "same path". Phase in new narrow process CPUs to existing socket / chipsets, then follow up with what would have to be a spectacular jump in available performance, 22nm CPUs hooked up to 4 channel RAM. And yeah, you'd obviously have to change the socket for that.

 

[Guest]

Whats the point of these faster processors? except for a few gameys, researchers etc most (90%?) business users have all the CPU they need .. they could do with better gfx and more /faster I/O,but they are all full up with CPU. Give people a Celeron with 2gb of on chip cache and let the jaws drop.. couple that with PcIE SSD and you have a real Parrot-Dime shift. They gotta keep those money presses rolling.