http://www.techpowerup.co...-63.0x-Multiplier.html
 
But then a day later they post this
Core i7-3770K Retail Boxes Pictured, TDP 95W, Overclocks Worse Than Sandy Bridge?

95 TDP huh?  So the truth comes out?

Could be a mis-print, could be true. I guess we should wait to see what they actually pull.

I strongly suggest everyone ignore the pessimistic trolls that doom and gloom Ivy Bridge based on ONE TEST that might have either a bad temp sensor and might not have been the best FPO batch.
 
Every Intel shrink made thus far has had lower temps and lower volts for the same frequency as its predecessor, there is no reason to think otherwise with Ivy Bridge.
 

dukenuke88

95 TDP huh?  So the truth comes out?

TDP is not real heat disspation, it is just a category.  Although, Intel has been known to stick CPUs that don't qualify in the category just to ensure and simplify cooling options for OEM's.  A very good example is Xeon W3503 and W3505, both are 45nm dual-cores with no Turbo or HT that only work in X58 boards, yet they get the same 130W TDP rating that quads and 6-cores get, while they are easily less than 65W each full load.
 
Power consumption is directly related to die surface area, the Ivy APU's are 170mm² while Sandy APU's are 208mm², this means at the same frequency and cores, Ivy consumes at least 18% less actual power.  That French review when FX8150 first appeared showed the power consumption of 2600K as well, at 93W of electricity at stock with integrated GPU running.  Since energy efficiency for electronics haven't really changed in the past 30 years and remain in the range of 15%, that makes 2600K's actual TDP down at 80W-- thus qualifying for the 95W TDP rating, because it is higher than the next lower rating.  Knowing the power drop due to shrink, the estimated actual TDP of 3770K is just above 65W-- it still qualifies for 77W TDP rating, but of course Intel stuck it in a higher category. 

Is it me or does anyone else see something wrong with this sentence

These clock speeds were backed by core voltages such as 1.056V, and cooled by extreme cooling.

if the core voltage was only 1.056 with all 8 threads, then why was extreme cooling needed?

jimmycricket
if the core voltage was only 1.056 with all 8 threads, then why was extreme cooling needed?

Heat waste from a working logic transistor = (Frequency * Voltage)² <-- something like this lehpron probably knows the equation
FinFets also retain more heat than normal planar transistors.

seronx

jimmycricket
if the core voltage was only 1.056 with all 8 threads, then why was extreme cooling needed?

Heat waste from a working logic transistor = (Frequency * Voltage)² <-- something like this lehpron probably knows the equation
FinFets also retain more heat than normal planar transistors.

I think it's frequency * voltage², not quantity squared. Voltage has more effect than frequency.

I just want a no questions asked 5GHz+ cpu

bulldozer broke 8.4ghz on extreme cooling
it means nothing
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2067001
 
lets compare d104's or h100 for fair wage

bulldozer means nothing

warlord420


bulldozer broke 8.4ghz on extreme cooling
it means nothing
http://valid.canardpc.com/show_oc.php?id=2067001

lets compare d104's or h100 for fair wage

On 2 core 2 threads
The 3770k did this with 4 cores 8 threads
So comparing one CPU working on 1/4 it's core count against another working on it's full count count plus double it's thread count doesn't make sense

jimmycricket
On 2 core 2 threads
The 3770k did this with 4 cores 8 threads
So comparing one CPU working on 1/4 it's core count against another working on it's full count count plus double it's thread count doesn't make sense

seronx

jimmycricket
On 2 core 2 threads
The 3770k did this with 4 cores 8 threads
So comparing one CPU working on 1/4 it's core count against another working on it's full count count plus double it's thread count doesn't make sense

Still not a fair comparison
4 core/8 thread against 8 core /8 thread
But yes this is something worth bragging about

jimmycricket
Still not a fair comparison
4 core/8 thread against 8 core /8 thread
But yes this is something worth bragging about

It doesn't actually matter about core/threads.  Sandy/Ivy Bridge has a 14 stage pipeline and Bulldozer has a 15 stage pipeline.  Bulldozer will most likely always out clock Ivy/Sandy.

seronx

jimmycricket
Still not a fair comparison
4 core/8 thread against 8 core /8 thread
But yes this is something worth bragging about

It doesn't actually matter about core/threads.  Sandy/Ivy Bridge has a 14 stage pipeline and Bulldozer has a 15 stage pipeline.  Bulldozer will most likely always out clock Ivy/Sandy.

 
you always come to rescue bro!
 

Anyway back to my point earlier that the 95W TDP category isn't of much consequence to us, here is a quick review of the Xeon E3-1230 V2, which is the Xeon version of 3770K, an Ivy processor.  It clearly shows the total system power is lower by 20W due to the CPU alone compared to a 2600K, both set to 3.5GHz.  So the actual power of the 1230 v2 is around 70-73W draw compared to that french review I linked that compared FX8150 with a 93W 2600K; factor in energy efficency, then its actual TDP of 3770K is in range of 60 Watts.
 
Since in that test the stock value of 1230v2 is around 1.032v, then the 1.056v value may actually be stock and the real extreme voltage for 6.6GHz isn't being read properly.
 
So now we have two test of Ivy that show us the stock Vcore value is 0.2v less than the average 32nm LGA1155 parts-- I do believe whitnasty1 will get his wish., but we need more samples. 

Ahhh lephron your saying that we will be able to achieve the 5ghz probably but not on the usual 1.4 to 1.5 v rather 1.2 to 1.3 volts?  Thus the lower voltage will give us the temps we are looking for?

http://www.tweaktown.com/articles/4618/ivy_bridge_preview_with_gigabyte_z77x_ud5h_intel_z77_and_core_i5_3570k/index1.html
Sad they do not have any benches of the CPUs OC'd yet.  At the end of the article they made it seem they will have benches at the earliest tomorrow or in a few days.  This whole IB not OCing as well as SB is messing with me considering I am building two IB computers for two friends of mine.  Here is a question if anyone can verify if my answer is correct:
How high can you OC the i5-3770?  I think it is 4.2Ghz.
Basically if on a $50 aftermarket cooler I am only going to get these CPUs to hit about 4.6 at most then it doesnt make sense to buy the i5-3770K if what I have heard is true about the i5-3770 OCing to 4.2Ghz. 
 
Edit:  Alright now I am confused even more.  At the end of the review I have linked above they state they basically JUST got a i7-3770K in and will include it in benches to be released soon, as early as tomorrow.  But here is a review they did a week ago which includes an i7-3770k?!?!?!?  http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/4663/asrock_z77_extreme6_intel_z77_with_ivy_bridge_motherboard_review/index1.html

Keeping my fingers crossed!

Looks like I was right about Intel sticking 3770K in 95W TDP even though it still qualified for 77W TDP.
 

huf757

Ahhh lephron your saying that we will be able to achieve the 5ghz probably but not on the usual 1.4 to 1.5 v rather 1.2 to 1.3 volts?  Thus the lower voltage will give us the temps we are looking for?

It is my strong belief yes, but like I said, we need more samples.  Obvious doesn't come from one of two tries from batches we still aren't told what they are.
 
Of course I've had stark contrast opinions from the majority before, being correct has been a statistical draw.  An example of wrong was me thinking X79 wouldn't have LGA2011 (though I wonder if even Intel overestimated Bulldozer as a phantom threat, that my thinking was right had they knew about Bulldozer beforehand), while an example of right was figuring GK104 would be used in GTX680 before everyone else.
 
Historical trend is there too, one need only wander to hwbot.org and look up the submissions of previous max air overclock shrinks like from Core 2 Duo E6850 to Core 2 Duo E8400; there was both a voltage drop and frequency increase.  There is no need for what I regard as pessimistic trolling where people think all historical logic vanishes because of one gloomy test.
 
Almost no one criticizes Tweaktown for the test, even less dare imply there was an AMD fanboism at play to get people riled up for no darn reason...

lehpron

Almost no one criticizes Tweaktown for the test, even less dare imply there was an AMD fanboism at play to get people riled up for no darn reason...

I dunno, I am looking around other forums and there are long time members that claim to be Intel fans stating the same info as Tweaktown from their own tests.  I would think that members of the forums would be calling them out if they were supporting AMD in prior posts and then all of a sudden posting about how Ivy OC isnt running as good as their Sandy OC.  Figure I would find at least one instance of that in the few forum threads I looked at, but it all seems legit.  Think we're going to have to accept Intel pulled a Bulldozer.

boylerya
Think we're going to have to accept Intel pulled a Bulldozer.

No, they pulled a Pentium 4.  They're using a process to try to get higher clocks but failed hard.  Haswell will suffer the same problems that is why it is aimed at the ULP/LP market and not the high-end. 
Bulldozer has been fixed by the 2nd generation.

boylerya
 
I would think that members of the forums would be calling them out if they were supporting AMD in prior posts and then all of a sudden posting about how Ivy OC isnt running as good as their Sandy OC.  Figure I would find at least one instance of that in the few forum threads I looked at, but it all seems legit.  Think we're going to have to accept Intel pulled a Bulldozer.

As long as you don't bandwagon and cheerlead as if you never thought that way if your opinion turned out to be wrong, then I respect your current opinion. 
 
 If Intel intends to EOL 32nm LGA1155 K parts (since they did with 655K and 875K when Sandy came), then I think a redux of that thread I made asking folks if Intel didn't make K processor would come into play if Ivy K doesn't bode well:  Would people keep their 32nm Sandy's, get the Ivy anyway with limited overclocking or go AMD?   I highly doubt they'd go AMD, and all any current 32nm user could do is fish for newer batches of the same thing.  ere is to hoping they don't add more or make further PCIe 3.0 upgrades as they certainly don't mind the losses.
 
But I honestly believe people are building up the negativity based on so few samples, almost as if to set themselves up to be impressed by any little bit of improvement; which is to me proof of being easily pacified.
 

seronx

Haswell will suffer the same problems that is why it is aimed at the ULP/LP market and not the high-end.

Careful, both AMD and Intel have a template design (architecture) but change the specs as needed for each market, they don't aim one product into one segment such that is underperforms in another.  Especially Intel with their excess resources that can afford to cater to multiple segments with more percision.  You should know this given you confidence and faith in AMD's Bulldozer which is also a wide sweeping architecture template applied to multiple segments by varying the specification.

Not bad. I've seen the bad ones do 6.4 or so. Highest I've seen was like 7-7.2 IIRC.

I just dont wanna be criticized by my friend and nephew for making the wrong decision for them by either having them waste money on a CPU that OCs barely any farther on a $50 heatsink compared to the non K version (i5-3570).  Or the other way around where they would have benefited because the K version does in fact OC well.  Gotta make sure these facts are legit by launch day.

I respect that, it would be about your reputation at that point.  However, I don't see the hurry unless your friend and nephew have already been waiting for a while, why not wait for those reviews before geting something?  I've never been an early-adopter within the first week, so I'm ignorant of the long-term benefits.

lehpron


I respect that, it would be about your reputation at that point.  However, I don't see the hurry unless your friend and nephew have already been waiting for a while, why not wait for those reviews before geting something?  I've never been an early-adopter within the first week, so I'm ignorant of the long-term benefits.

They have REALLY crappy PCs currently.  And we have plans to have a Diablo 3 marathon the moment the game comes out.  Since the game comes out May 15th, the possibility of waiting for legit reviews is risky.

when i wake up tomorrow morning, i hope reviews go up :)