Intel has allowed Tom's Hardware to preview Sandy Bridge-E processors already. That means not much surprises from Intel left (except for the rumored Core i7 2700K). And yet still AMD is reluctant to release anything, not even a preview or talk much about it. This atmosphere is unlike the earlier Llano launch.

Actually, Intel already has higher clocked Sandy Bridge processors sold as Xeons, such as Xeon E3-1280 (3.5GHz/3.9GHz) and Xeon E3-1290 (3.6GHz/4GHz). That Xeon E3-1280 has the same frequencies as the rumored Core i7 2700K. These are rather pricey.

Speaking of that 4GHz, stumbled upon this in Coolaler forums: XtremeSystems Forums > Non-questions area Hardware > new motherboard AMD CPU and related test »bulldozers to the FX-8120P [B2 latest version of the core differences between the measured Full CPU_NB]. Another FX-8120 (ES), this time overclocked to 4GHz and also with NorthBridge overclocked up to 2.4GHz. Too many screenshot images (3dmark, Cinebench, SuperPi, wPrime, CPUmark), thus check the website yourselves.





Dear fraudmeister OBR again?

This post has been edited by lex: Oct 15 2011, 04:42 AM

You shouldn't reveal a product before launch, read about Osborne Effect.
3.8GHz with your stock voltage, not the average stock voltage that all processors have which varies depending on whether you're getting a lemon or a golden chip. If Intel were to release SB at a higher clock speed, the yield will drop as the bar for standard quality is raised, it has to be at the right range based on their internal batch testing.

You can't compare Intel and AMD directly with IPC as both are using different methods to achieve the same goal. SB has higher IPC but more likely lower clock speed, BD has higher clock speeds to make up for the lower IPC. That is why BD can break the speed record because it is like Netburst, which Intel is no longer pursuing the high clock speed and low IPC type.


Anything OBR says, write or does have to be taken with a large chunk of rock salt, a grain wouldn't be enough.

according to a source (as all story goes)

Launch Date : Mid Oct...Seems Very Sure
Pricing : RM 450 (6 Core???) to RM 800 (Top End)
Performance : Between I5 to I7 (Stock I guess)
Deal Breaker : Throw in a BF3 game for FREE!!!!!

mine is 780G

Well, I already said "not sure if serious". I expect the 8150 to perform better than those scores given, since OBR is a known pro-Intel troll.

Yes,it seems so
http://www.extremetech.com/computing/95633...an-sandy-bridge

http://www.amd.com/us/products/pricing/Pag...er-opteron.aspx
juz convert it to MYR
hope this support your statement

finger's cross this is true....
i cant wait any longer for som performance review & most importantly OC result.

p/s, u clearly dunno wat "deal breaker" means....

what is deal breaker means?
sorry,im a bit lame on this

meaning no matter how good it gets, there is @ least 1 cons that u could not overlook, hence, u dun wan it.

eg, let's say the processor is cheap, performs superbly, very power saving, but cannot OC.
cannot OC would be the deal breaker.

3.8Ghz is actually a very conservative number. Anyone with a SB would know that a SB can go 4.2GHz @ stock volt, thats with IF you are talking lemon/golden chip. You can refer to Lex's comment an official 3.6GHz is already here.

How much higher? SB is already reaching 3.6GHz, Ivy bridge could raise the bar to 4GHz. If the IPC is as low as what the leaked benchmark said(I hope it is not the truth), AMD would need to have a lot higher frequency to cover up the ground to get on par with Ivy performance.

This post has been edited by billytong: Sep 21 2011, 10:22 AM

Not too sure about your SB but on average, most wouldn't go over 4.5GHz for a stable 24/7 OC which is quite near to the 1.375V Intel's recommended max for 32nm. 4.2GHz at stock voltage is on some processors but not the majority number of processors could do 4.2GHz at stock voltage. Let's just say that I am wrong and Intel really could release a chip at 3.8GHz with no problems whatsoever. Would they? I don't think so because if I take a 4.5GHz as a baseline, we're looking at a 1.1-1.2GHz increase from stock clockspeed which is a huge gain compared to a 0.3-0.7GHz with stock being at 3.8-4.2GHz, the WOW factor isn't that great if Intel increases the stock out of the factory. It could be that Intel has intentionally left quite a lot of headroom just to give their users the perception that SB is a great overclocker.

Again, IB might not be 4GHz but within the 3-4GHz range but much closer to 4GHz than SB. IPC for BD is low because it just how it was made and not because it sucks at clock for clock. It is possible to see on average 5GHz++ @ 1.5V BDs which 1.5V is still a conservative range for BD due to it's claimed robustness. It could possibly go as far as 6GHz easily with a proper custom watercooling, 24/7 stable. A SB although could go till 5.7GHz max, nobody would do that on a 24/7 OC as the voltage required will slowly kill it. What BD can't make up for IPC it gains in clockspeed. IB performance is still unknown and most probably we're comparing Piledriver with IB by then.

the question remains is will there be a 5GHz official BD from AMD to deal with 2600K/2700K or Ivy bridge.

SB is already 3.6Ghz, a rough +/-10% extra clock rate is about 4GHz. So I would not call it impossible for Ivy, it still up to Intel if they wanted to up their competitive bar or not. With the OC headroom SB has, Intel is still saving from headroom for BD. if it is performing much better than Intel expecting.

This post has been edited by billytong: Sep 21 2011, 12:01 PM

Most likely there will not be a 5GHz stock BD in the future. It is likely that some minor improvements is made to BD's architecture to improve its performance. AMD's priority now is not the desktop space and not much effort will be placed in a market they can't compete very well and is not that big anymore. AMD's priority is more of the server space, that's why you see the server BD, Interlagos is released way earlier.

I never said that it is impossible for IB to be 4GHz, I just say that it is more likely that Intel wouldn't. Why would they release the first iteration at 3.8GHz with the current price when they can release a new processor with a 200MHz speed bump over the original iteration and call it an upgrade with a higher price. There is no need for Intel to be pushing the limits of their processors and raise the competitive bar when they are not facing much competition from AMD.

nop.
if u look at the history, eg, e7300 -> e7400 or i5 750 -> i5 760 or i7 920 -> i7 930

price remain same, but wit minor speed improvement.
OC wise, just same wit older versaion where both can actually hit the same mark.

the reason for the new version wit speed improvement is that it shows the process really mature up & the yield has gone up significantly since launch.

reason y intel/AMD dun wanna mek a chip wit high stock speed (even when they can) is bcoz of yield issue.
high speed = yield will drop = higher production cost = lower revenue.

The price of Core i7 2600K is not a constant. It has been steadily decreasing since it was first launched and Core i7 2700K when launched will be priced at the original price of Core i7 2600K at release a few months ago, not at the current price of Core i7 2600K hence what I mean by higher price. The quality of the processor can also drop at the end of the lifetime of the product as they shift their attention, equipment and resources for the newer product.

There are many ways to counter yield issues and one of them is setting the standard factory voltage a bit higher. That is why Llano has such high voltages to increase the probability of having a 'good' chip but in actual fact its voltages can be much lower than the original. High stock speeds doesn't matter when you can have processors at a standard voltage that they have come to accept. The method of quality control is never the same and it may be totally different 6 months from now.

Possible pricing and a launch date? techPowerUp: AMD FX Processor Prices Lower Than Expected (taken from original source here: FX processors, AMD's Bulldozer and prices for the official release date!)...

This post has been edited by lex: Oct 2 2011, 06:08 PM

The thing is even with the current SB, Intel still have enough room to launch a 3.6-3.8GHz SB counter BD should BD turn out to be good enough to threaten their SB leading position.

if u ask me I do not have high hopes on BD taking the crown, looking at how much headroom Intel still have under its sleeves, and AMD isnt proud about showing off their BD performance unlike bobcat, Llano.

hmm, 12 october, lets wait and see.

it has always been like this.

yes, voltage is away to ensure stability.
on top of this, it is also architecture related.
some opted for low W, high A, som high W low A.

after seeing the leaked price, i can pretty much see once again, AMD will compete in the price performance ratio.

Will prices in Malaysia be similar to overseas? Hoping it won't be overpriced here