Sandy Bridge-E Clocks?

[martin_metal_88]

Hye you come to the bar? sorry I'm broke, I have to pay my lease on my new CPU.

[PerryC]

Originally Posted by JJThomp

If I had the money I still think I wouldn't buy it... but then again I don't have money so I guess I'm more frugal than people who have the money.

I hope AMD pulls something crazy out and kicks intel's butt, I believe in best bang/buck and I hate the $600 mark-up for being top of the line that intel puts on everything.

I think alot like JJ does here. The amount Intel wants for their processors is retarded, IMO. A cpu in the $100-$200 range meets or exceeds my needs, so thats what I will get.

I know there are people out there who are chomping at the bit to get one of these, thats their choice, and I am sure we will see these pushed to some real crazy clocks.

[JJThomp]

Originally Posted by PerryC

I think alot like JJ does here. The amount Intel wants for their processors is retarded, IMO. A cpu in the $100-$200 range meets or exceeds my needs, so thats what I will get.

I know there are people out there who are chomping at the bit to get one of these, thats their choice, and I am sure we will see these pushed to some real crazy clocks.

Well bulldozer clocks are looking pretty good... Apparently some guys was able to push his engineering sample to 5.5ghz on air (in the stepping that AMD said wasn't good enough I think B1), but correct me if I'm wrong released samples should go even further considering they are actually complete.

[PerryC]

I am actually considering a bulldozer build...or at least an AM3+ board with an AM3 proc then upgrading sometime next year.

Having said that, there is no doubt in my mind that the socket 2011 procs are going to be amazing chips. They are just completely out of my league cost wise.

[EmptyMellon]

Originally Posted by JJThomp

Well bulldozer clocks are looking pretty good... Apparently some guys was able to push his engineering sample to 5.5ghz on air (in the stepping that AMD said wasn't good enough I think B1), but correct me if I'm wrong released samples should go even further considering they are actually complete.

From what I remember, the problem was not with clock speeds of the Bulldozer Eng Sample but in the wattage. The samples they used were running at 186W, while the final products should be in the 120-140W range (for the high end ones) - also I belelive the CPU voltage of the BDz ES was overly high at default settings, nevermind when they had them OC'ed.

Personally, I am not concerned about the oc'ing abilities of either SB-E or BDz, but more price to performance (in workstation environments). Hopefully, AMD will release at least their Opterons on time to give Intel some competion before the SB-E Xeons come out.

[jurassic1024]

GT7R wrote:
As per core/thread/clock I think SB-E will more powerful than SB
2600K - 3.4 GHZ - 4C/8T - 8M
3820 - 3.6 GHZ- 4C/8T - 10M

Hard to think that for those extra 2M cache and 200MHZ I'll cost 2 or 3 times as much as the 2600K.
I hope Bulldozer will give SB a run for it's money, but it won't be a threat for 2011...


If you think that is the only difference, you're mistaken. They don't design a new socket and 4 chipset variants for some chip with extra cache and a clock bump... sheesh.

[GT7R]

Originally Posted by jurassic1024

GT7R wrote:
As per core/thread/clock I think SB-E will more powerful than SB
2600K - 3.4 GHZ - 4C/8T - 8M
3820 - 3.6 GHZ- 4C/8T - 10M

Hard to think that for those extra 2M cache and 200MHZ I'll cost 2 or 3 times as much as the 2600K.
I hope Bulldozer will give SB a run for it's money, but it won't be a threat for 2011...


If you think that is the only difference, you're mistaken. They don't design a new socket and 4 chipset variants for some chip with extra cache and a clock bump... sheesh.

That's exactly what I was saying there :)

[GT7R]

That's what you call 'power'