bit-tech.net

All About Ivy Bridge

Comments 1 to 25 of 26

Reply
McDuff32 10th October 2011, 14:07 Quote
All sounds rather positive :)
Farting Bob 10th October 2011, 14:25 Quote
Im looking forward to power savings of being on the lower process and 3D transistors. In theory it should offer much lower consumption, especially at the lower end of the scale.
improprietary 10th October 2011, 14:57 Quote
perhaps when ivy bridge comes to the market bit-tech will revisit their article on homemade nas boxes ;)
towelie 10th October 2011, 15:51 Quote
Well most of that went right over my head, but interesting stuff none the less specially the security parts.
Nice article
Goty 10th October 2011, 16:17 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by improprietary
perhaps when ivy bridge comes to the market bit-tech will revisit their article on homemade nas boxes ;)

Why would anybody need something like Ivy Bridge for a NAS box?
The Bodger 10th October 2011, 17:34 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goty
Why would anybody need something like Ivy Bridge for a NAS box?

I think the point being made was that with the potentially substantial power savings that tri - gate may provide, you could have a NAS box which was both extremely frugal on power while doing nothing and extremely fast when called upon to upload a video (or many small files for that matter) over your gigabit ethernet cabling. Sure the Ivy Bridge parts coming out soon probably aren't the best choice for a NAS box, but the lower power mobile parts might be pretty well suited to such a role.
BrightCandle 10th October 2011, 18:04 Quote
The low end of Ivy Bridge presumably like the low end of Sandy bridge on MITX makes for a great NAS box. The extra reduction in power consumption at idle and the performance when pushing bytes will make it cheap to run a box capable of maxing out 1 gbit/s.

The NAS boxes I see reviewed rarely max out ethernet, the low end of them barely hit 15MB/s instead of the 120 MB/s the hard drives and the cable is capable of. A Sandy Bridge CPU on MITX will hit peak performance at a mere 20% CPU usage with software raid 5. Its overkill but there is nothing in between the two to deliver the top performance. Ivy Bridge will allow further reductions in power which is always welcome for the low end.
Claave 10th October 2011, 18:27 Quote
If you're building a NAS box, why not use an AMD E-350 M-ITX board? It's plenty fast and will be much cheaper.

Anyway, NAS boxes are a bit off topic for this thread, anyone excited by the new maximum CPU multiplier that's gone from 57x to 63x? Did anyone even hit the 57x limit of Sandy Bridge?
Hustler 10th October 2011, 18:57 Quote
Lol....2 days before Bulldozers public humiliation, more details about Ivy Bridge...

Nice one Bit Tech.
ven 10th October 2011, 19:29 Quote
Does ivy bridge processor is compatible with 6 series chipset.(same socket LGA 1155)?... or will i have to buy a new Mobo?
Arghnews 10th October 2011, 19:35 Quote
Holy "poo" this looks good.
rogerrabbits 10th October 2011, 20:23 Quote
Interesting article, especially how the cs2.00 is 25% indipitive finfet 1a.0 of the ITX ATC / 3 x to the power of gobbldygook.
McDuff32 10th October 2011, 20:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hustler
Lol....2 days before Bulldozers public humiliation, more details about Ivy Bridge...

Nice one Bit Tech.

Info is coming out by the end of the week? Good stuff!
Christopher N. Lew 10th October 2011, 20:50 Quote
Any hint of Ivy Bridge CPUs with more than 4 cores?
edzieba 10th October 2011, 21:45 Quote
It's a shame Intel are still focusing on making Quick-sync faster, rather than improving the encoring quality. It's currently about the same perceptual quality as x.264's "superfast" preset, and largely the same speed (check appendix 1). However, with quicksync fast-but-rubbish-mode is all you have, whereas at least you can vary the encoding quality of x.264 all the way up to lossless depending on how long you want to wait.
PingCrosby 10th October 2011, 22:56 Quote
Personally I can't wait for the Albert Tatlock bridge
Star*Dagger 11th October 2011, 00:53 Quote
Dx11 is the new minimum standard for real Gamers!!
Anfield 11th October 2011, 01:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Christopher N. Lew
Any hint of Ivy Bridge CPUs with more than 4 cores?

Considering there will be a mobile quadcore version of Ivy Bridge with a TDP of 35W they could easily make a 12 core version with a TDP no higher than that of a 6 Core SB-E.

But of course they won't do that, why?

Ivy Bridge is the low end - mid range cpu for 2012 from Intel, it is not supposed to be faster than the highend SB-E due soon or IB-E due later in 2012.

There is a big but though, that being the Xeon branded IB chips.
damien c 11th October 2011, 10:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Star*Dagger
Dx11 is the new minimum standard for real Gamers!!

To bad the game dev's are not interested in using it simply because of the consoles.
Ajhayter 12th October 2011, 11:09 Quote
All seems excellent to me.

I'm particularly excited about manually adjusting the multiplier from within Windows, not from an overclocking standpoint, but an underclocking standpoint.

I can finally clock the CPU right down when I'm just browsing the web, saving on power and heat!
Landy_Ed 12th October 2011, 21:08 Quote
Interesting that it still seems so far away, given that Asus have already released a bios update for my board : http://support.asus.com/Download.aspx?SLanguage=en&m=P8P67+PRO

Bios Ref 2001 - Enable support for Next Gen 22nm Processor
GreekUser 13th October 2011, 16:39 Quote
The questions:
Same amount of electrons move at smaller amount of space creating the same amount of heat as before. How about overheating?
If the total length remains 22nm, 3D or 2D, were does the efficiency advantage comes from? Yes it's smaller, but it moves the same amount of electrons doesn't it?
bobwya 13th October 2011, 23:55 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claave
If you're building a NAS box, why not use an AMD E-350 M-ITX board? It's plenty fast and will be much cheaper.

I am in the market for a Ivy Bridge board for a 24/7 Super-NAS. Personally I need a board with a full PCIe 16x slot for a super-beefy multiport SATA card. AMD's Fusion chipset only has a PCIe 4x slot which doesn't cut the mustard :-) I need that uber-low power consumption as well!!
SpAceman 14th October 2011, 13:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreekUser
The questions:
Same amount of electrons move at smaller amount of space creating the same amount of heat as before. How about overheating?
If the total length remains 22nm, 3D or 2D, were does the efficiency advantage comes from? Yes it's smaller, but it moves the same amount of electrons doesn't it?

There is actually less electrons as the smaller transistors need less power to operate.
It is more efficient because the 3D nature of the transistor means there is a larger surface area the gate is in contact with the silicon substrate. This means the transistors require a lower voltage to switch on and switch on faster when a voltage similar to levels used by the older 32nm planar transistors is used
reneeculver 21st October 2011, 05:17 Quote
I'm happy to see that Ivy Bridge will have the same protection system that the Vax had in 1977.

Renee
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