bit-tech.net

Intel Sandy Bridge Review

Comments 1 to 25 of 165

Reply
shokwaav 3rd January 2011, 06:07 Quote
i'm surprised... i would think that the i7 - 2600k would be better than the i5 unlocked :S
rizshinigami 3rd January 2011, 06:18 Quote
hmm i'm curious about the overclocked cpu temperature
KevinT 3rd January 2011, 06:22 Quote
WOW, I am so glad I held off on a new PC until now. Those overclocked power consumption numbers made my jaw drop... and prompted me to register just to post this comment.

Thank you for the early review, bit-tech staff! Can't wait to start my build! =)
confusis 3rd January 2011, 06:28 Quote
TBH - for a next gen chip, the performance jump is less than stellar. I'm not very impressed :/
Horizon 3rd January 2011, 06:29 Quote
Well the ball's in AMD's court. @$250 Intel is pretty persuasive atm, lucky for them I don't plan to buy anything for at least another 3 months.
Kojak 3rd January 2011, 06:31 Quote
WHAT! ....No ....No ...No, it can't be?!! I've been dreading this moment, I'm looking at my SR2 with a raised eyebrow! How long has my red & black beauty got doctor?!! :(
Chicken76 3rd January 2011, 06:35 Quote
Quote:
We expect AMD’s Fusion combined CPU-GPU chips early next year...
Do you actually mean 2012, or was this article written last year?
erratum1 3rd January 2011, 07:11 Quote
Why does it get beaten by the 950 in Crysis.
blink 3rd January 2011, 07:26 Quote
I've been out of the CPU market for a few years and never knew that much about them in the first place other than how to install them but is this going to be another case of Intel kicking the crap out of AMD or are AMD's new APU's going to be able to seriously compete? I realize there are differences (the DirectX issue for one) but, in terms of overall performance, what's the best guess as to whether AMD is going to be able to compete in a real way and not just have "decent" APU's at a lower cost?

Just for the record, I am a not a fanboy of either company. ATM, I have one Intel based machine and one AMD based. If the AMD APU's are going to be close performance-wise, I would like to support them (if for no other reason than to help keep them in the game overall) but I don't want to wait only to be disappointed either.
Waynio 3rd January 2011, 07:54 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cpus/2011/01/03/intel-sandy-bridge-review/1

Without doubt the new range of Intel CPUs are incredible - we show you why.

Now this is a bit of tech news I've been eagerly waiting for ;).
Intel Core i5-2500K (4.9GHz)
Hell yes :D & the power usage is even more impressive , very glad I held out since socket 775 & ddr2, saved up & spent a tenner in the steam sales so I might be able to jump over to p67 at launch if prices for other parts are nice :D.

BTW Bindi your bann hammer avatar is speeded up all hyper like a giddy Bindi :D.
Toka 3rd January 2011, 08:04 Quote
what the hell, no overclocking!?!!

oh, wait.
rickysio 3rd January 2011, 08:08 Quote
I still can't decide between an i5-2500S or a standard 2500 for my mITX H67 based build...
Bindibadgi 3rd January 2011, 08:13 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Toka
what the hell, no overclocking!?!!

oh, wait.

No 4.9GHz £80 G6950 any more though :(
GoodBytes 3rd January 2011, 08:35 Quote
graphic performance is still very lacking. An old Geforce 9300M is still faster.
urobulos 3rd January 2011, 09:19 Quote
Honestly, for people who read bit-tech it does not matter at all. Everyone here runs a discrete GPU. And for people who don't game the integrated GPU's offer enough power, and way more than the terrible and old Intel integrated graphics. Although, these numbers are amazing I kind of agree it's a shame we probably won't see amazing OC potential from the successors of the G6950 and the i3 540... Still, can't complain about the numbers for OC'd CPU's. I wonder what Intel is going to do when the K series will start outselling all the others combined.
Fanatic 3rd January 2011, 09:31 Quote
Well I for one am happy to have held off the q6600 upgrade until these reviews appeared. Excellent performance/price ratio - someones going shopping soon :)
docodine 3rd January 2011, 09:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by rickysio
I still can't decide between an i5-2500S or a standard 2500 for my mITX H67 based build...

I'm just going by my knowledge on Intel's previous gen 'S' CPUs, might not apply here.

I'm not sure exactly what Intel locks down in their non 'K' chips, but if you can undervolt and underclock the normal 2500 then it's not worth getting the 'S'.
chrisb2e9 3rd January 2011, 09:45 Quote
yeah me too. still with a q6600. though I abused it so badly that it won't run faster than 2.8ghz anymore...


When are these new cpu's out???
Ph4ZeD 3rd January 2011, 09:50 Quote
The numbers are pretty incredible. The performance of future hexa and octo cores will be frightening.
wuyanxu 3rd January 2011, 10:05 Quote
does P67 boards have graphics IO? i was under the impression that it doesn't, making the graphics parts inside the CPU completely worthless.

loving its power consumption though, that's a real step forward.
SteveU 3rd January 2011, 10:22 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by wuyanxu
does P67 boards have graphics IO? i was under the impression that it doesn't, making the graphics parts inside the CPU completely worthless.

loving its power consumption though, that's a real step forward.

Yep, it says in the review that you need an H67 board to make use of the graphics side of the chip.
pistol_pete 3rd January 2011, 10:25 Quote
Very nice. If my Q6600 fails it looks like there might be a worthy/affordable replacement now!
Blackmoon181 3rd January 2011, 10:25 Quote
is it just the asus board where the titan fenrir isn't compatible on sandybridge ?

after recently buying one of them it would be a shame to waste !
cdb 3rd January 2011, 10:26 Quote
When will you be reviewing p67 motherboards to go with the cpus?
urobulos 3rd January 2011, 10:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by docodine
I'm just going by my knowledge on Intel's previous gen 'S' CPUs, might not apply here.

I'm not sure exactly what Intel locks down in their non 'K' chips, but if you can undervolt and underclock the normal 2500 then it's not worth getting the 'S'.

In theory the 'S' parts are supposedly chosen chips which take a lower performance hit at a lower TDP compared to their big brothers. Though tbh that all sounds like marketing crap intended to push overpriced CPU's.

Since you plan a micro-ITX I am guessing this will be an HTPC. In that case why not just go for for the i3 2100. Should easily have enough performance at stock for anything you can throw at an HTCP unless you have a truly amazing home cinema setup.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums