Report: Sandy Bridge-E to launch on November 14

As AMD’s Bulldozer processors draw closer to release, so, too, do Intel’s upcoming Sandy Bridge-E chips. According to VR-Zone, we’ll see the first Sandy Bridge-E processors in stores on November 14. The site claims the chips won’t launch alongside Intel’s accompanying DX79SI and DX79TO motherboards; instead, users will have to turn to Taiwanese motherboard makers for their early X79 fix.

Sandy Bridge-E was supposed to roll out much earlier (back at Computex, we were told to expect it in early September), but mysterious delays have pushed back its release. We heard whispers on the IDF show floor that those delays were related to PCI Express interoperability and especially the lack of devices against which to test compatibility.

The upcoming processor for X79 sounds like a powerhouse regardless. The flagship model is reported to have six cores, 15MB of cache, a 3.46GHz base clock speed, a 3.9GHz Turbo speed, and performance 12-15% greater than that of the existing Core i7-990X. Sandy Bridge-E chips will have quad memory channels, with DIMM slots arranged on either side of the LGA2011 socket.

Comments closed
    • WillBach
    • 8 years ago

    [quote=”Cyril Kowaliski”<][...]performance 12-15% greater than that of the existing Core i7-990X[/quote<] Cyril is referring to the Gulftown AKA Westmere-EP CPU that Scott reviewed here: [url=https://techreport.com/articles.x/20486<]Intel's Core i7-990X Extreme processor[/url<] [b<]not[/b<] existing Sandy Bridge parts. The Core i7-990X is already slightly faster than the fastest Sandy Bridge parts available. It will also have twice and many memory channels as current Sandy Bridge chips (4 in Sandy Bridge-E vs 2 in Sandy Bridge) and will probably support more total system memory as well. Is it worth $1000? Do you need anything faster than a Sandy Bridge processor to read Tech Report and write good, well thought out comments? Maybe not. I see Sandy Bridge-E being most useful for bragging and serious development work. Personally, I'll spend the money I save on CPUs on my monitor. Or gas. Who knows. But the lack of understanding demonstrated in the comments below was starting to bother me.

    • Kougar
    • 8 years ago

    For a flagship platform to launch like this just isn’t right. In about four months post launch, SB-E will be using both an outdated architecture and fab process size.

    Intel’s touting of its own 22nm tri-gate fabrication severely curtails any allure to buy into a more expensive platform + processor that won’t offer the latest greatest technology, when much cheaper, more advanced alternatives will almost instantaneously replace it. I bought into X58, but I’ll be sitting out X79, and don’t see any reasons to actually recommend it to the majority of users looking for build advice either.

    • Bensam123
    • 8 years ago

    So is this the new processor that is supposed to face off against Bulldozer?

    • LoneWolf15
    • 8 years ago

    “performance 12-15% greater than that of the existing Core i7-990X”

    The rub of that though, is that the Core i7-2600K is often as fast, or faster, than the i7-990X.

    [url<]http://www.xbitlabs.com/articles/cpu/display/core-i7-2600k-990x.html[/url<] I know that we're comparing a new enthusiast platform to the old one it is replacing, but It'd be far more interested in the comparison of Sandy Bridge-E to Sandy Bridge, than of Gulftown. THG did a preliminary comparison; while they aren't my top review site, the one thing that I take away is that if you can't feed more than four cores, you're not going to see a lot of performance increase. [url<]http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/core-i7-3960x-x79-performance,3026.html[/url<] I think SB-E would appeal to me if I was running a lot of virtual machines simultaneously on the desktop, or doing workstation tasks (e.g., Maya, or video encoding), also because of the ease of going to 32GB of RAM on most X79 boards. If I was running a ton of VMs too, that'd probably be a plus. Since I'm not, I think Ivy Bridge will be where my interest will lie.

      • DarkUltra
      • 8 years ago

      Speaking of comparison, I wish cpu reviews would compare results with more processors. It would be nice to see how my Q6700 @3.35GHz compares to a 3930K.

    • Kent_dieGo
    • 8 years ago

    I hope they can launch this before January or else they will have to add a pin and call it socket LGA2012. That will really delay things…

    • shank15217
    • 8 years ago

    Truthfully AMDs 4000 series Opteron (Valencia) series will blow Sandy Bridge – E out of the water, dual socket and 16 cores and twice the dimm capacity will make those machines at least as fast as the fastest single socket sandy bridge-e and cheaper to boot. The 4000 series also supports unbuffed non ecc ram and has about the same bandwidth as sandy-bridge-e and I am sure the highest end 4000s will be cheaper than the highest end sandy bridge-e

    • michael_d
    • 8 years ago

    I have read on nordichardware that X79 will not include PCI Express 3.0 however some motherboards will include 8 memory slots.

    • Duck
    • 8 years ago

    6 core is meh. Bulldozer will get you 8 😉

      • NeelyCam
      • 8 years ago

      Intel fanbois have no sense of humor.

        • chuckula
        • 8 years ago

        [quote<]Intel fanbois have no sense of humor.[/quote<] We learned it from watching you! (says Intel Fanboi kid to AMD Fanboi father)

        • travbrad
        • 8 years ago

        They have a sense of humor, it’s just that half their attention was on another thread.

    • phez
    • 8 years ago

    I’ve only ever seen Intel compare this to 990X … what about the 2600? Isn’t this supposed to be [i<]Sandy Bridge[/i<]-E, not Westmere-E?

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 8 years ago

      You’re asking for them to tell you it’s 100% faster at things you don’t use a computer for. Now where does that get anyone?

      • sschaem
      • 8 years ago

      It is Sandy Bridge-E. In short its Sandy Bridge with 2 extra memory channel, 2 extra core,minus the GPU.

      This is public info, check it out…. plenty of early benchmark too.

      SB-E at the same clock speed will be 50% faster with 6+ thread apps workload then the 2600K.

    • pogsnet1
    • 8 years ago

    $1000 can’t build a rig with this perhaps more than double that figure. Good luck to deep pocketed people.

    • RAMBO
    • 8 years ago

    Yeah I must say I thought that there would be a 20 to 30% increase because of the new architecture but maybe the benchmarks will show better improvement.

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 8 years ago

      They’re comparing two 32nm, high end CPUs. There is a much smaller difference in L3 cache speed between them than there is compared to the lower end, 45nm CPUs, and little to none in base clock speed.

      • Game_boy
      • 8 years ago

      It isn’t a new architecture. It’s Sandy Bridge with more cores and more cache.

    • slaimus
    • 8 years ago

    Going to be a busy couple of weeks, getting both SB-E and BD reviews out on time.

    • Hattig
    • 8 years ago

    Maybe it won’t be priced at $1000… but that really does depend on final Bulldozer performance and the amount that these processors outperform it. If it’s only 10% faster than the fastest BD then it will be hard to justify an extra $650! But if it’s 30% faster then someone will be willing to pay that sort of premium.

      • Game_boy
      • 8 years ago

      Unless the leaked slides are fake, AMD is not even trying to claim that BD is faster than the 2600K. So if Intel’s fine pricing against the 2600K they won’t change anything for BD.

    • kamikaziechameleon
    • 8 years ago

    I want to know what their 200-300 dollar processor offering will have.

    I’m surprised to see them only talking about a 12 to 15 percent improvement. Kinda not what I was expecting. I could get that and more with a decent over clock on the prior chip.

      • Game_boy
      • 8 years ago

      Cheapest rumoured to be 3.6/3.9GHz quad-core, 10MB of L3, for $294. Minimal IPC improvement from the L3 cache.

    • ish718
    • 8 years ago

    a $1000 bucks for this? O_O

      • flip-mode
      • 8 years ago

      Heh, I was thinking ’12-15% isn’t anything to get excited about.’

      Probably the platform update is more interesting that the processor update.

      • chuckula
      • 8 years ago

      Only if you want to pay that much… you could get a medium range chip for < $600 or the still overclockable quad core for < $300.

      • Action_Parsnip
      • 8 years ago

      Sandy Bridge E is not the new i7 920 then I assume. You’ll have to lay down some serious coin to get anything worthwhile.

        • Game_boy
        • 8 years ago

        Even the six core isn’t worth it for $1000 (I think). Probably should get a Xeon motherboard and an 8-core.

          • maroon1
          • 8 years ago

          There are two six core models. One is priced at $1000 and the cheaper one is $560

        • FuturePastNow
        • 8 years ago

        Don’t forget the X79 motherboards, which you can expect to start at $300.

      • khands
      • 8 years ago

      This particular generation of “enthusiast class” CPUs is going to be practically worthless save for memory dependent apps (or [i<]extremely[/i<] threaded apps) in comparison to Ivy Bridge which will be just a few more months out. They should've released this a long time ago.

        • swaaye
        • 8 years ago

        Yeah true but it’s not like enthusiasts tend to make practical buying decisions. Might as well stick with Core 2 and Phenom 2.

        SB-E customers are probably using those heavily threaded apps.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This