Forum leaks spill Ivy Bridge model details

The folks at CPU World have gleaned new details on Intel’s upcoming Ivy Bridge lineup from information leaked in several forum posts. The information is split between two articles and covers 18 different CPU models. Based on those model specifications, it looks like Ivy Bridge will be a native quad-core design with 8MB of last-level cache, just like its Sandy Bridge predecessor.

As with Sandy Bridge, Hyper-Threading is being reserved largely for pricier Core i7 models. Turbo Boost appears to be available up and down the line, and there’s no mention of Core i3 models at all. Indeed, the only dual-core chip in the bunch is the Core i5-3470T, which can execute four threads via Hyper-Threading.

The top-of-the-line Core i7-3770K will purportedly have a base clock speed of 3.5GHz with a 3.9GHz Turbo peak. Impressively, that CPU is expected to have a 77W thermal envelopeโ€”nearly 20W shy of the 95W TDP applied to the current Core i7-2700K. The i7-3770K’s TDP is the highest in a range that extends down to 35W. Most of the chips are segmented into 77W, 65W, and 45W categories denoted by respective K, S, and T suffixes.

Ivy’s low projected power consumption is certainly impressive, and I’m curious to see what it’ll mean for overclockers. Sandy Bridge CPUs can be pushed to around 4.5GHz without too much effort. Even with modest air cooling, Ivy could go higher.

Comments closed
    • ShadowTiger
    • 8 years ago

    Tic Tock… gotta love it ๐Ÿ™‚

    • guardianl
    • 8 years ago

    Intel spent the process shrink headroom on the GPU (50% more EUs) and lower TDPs. The following link shows that the CPU performance of Ivy is identical to Sandy:

    [url<]http://www.cpu-world.com/news_2011/2011112801_Early_Ivy_Bridge_Sample_Tested.html[/url<] Also, with such a large lead on AMD, Intel is clearly increasing their margins (profit) on Ivy. Lower TDP means cheaper heatsinks. Smaller die means more CPUs per wafer and again, more profit. If you're an Intel shareholder, Ivy is very good news ๐Ÿ˜‰

    • demani
    • 8 years ago

    Oh god there’s details [i<]everywhere[/i<]. There's i7 in my eye, Core in her hair, and 77W is just all over the place. It's like a mofo' fab EXPLODED up in here! Call GreenPeace so they can save the seagulls and penguins. Get the floating barriers in place QUICK! Sorry-"leak" and "spill" just caused a summer flashback.

    • Bensam123
    • 8 years ago

    With the lower power envelope that means 8 cores are now enabled on their Ivy Bridge top of the line model, right?!?!

      • chuckula
      • 8 years ago

      It’s difficult to enable 8 cores when the die only has 4 to begin with…

        • Bensam123
        • 8 years ago

        You can’t overclock your die?

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 8 years ago

      You’re referring to Ivy Bridge E/EN/EX, which isn’t coming out for an entire year. Sandy Bridge E just came out and the Xeons are still months away, silly goose.

        • Bensam123
        • 8 years ago

        Interesting… I didn’t know that. +1

      • PrincipalSkinner
      • 8 years ago

      Wrong. 8 cores is exclusive to XXX Bridge E variants. 8 core IB would defeat the purpose of recently introduced SB-E.

    • gorillagarrett
    • 8 years ago

    3.9GHz at 77w isn’t really a big increase in clock speed considering considering 22nm is full node shrink from 32nm.

      • Game_boy
      • 8 years ago

      TDP is, in this case, not really related to average power consumption. At the same clocks to SB you should expect a much larger decrease in power than that implies.

      Also the graphics section, which consumes a lot of power on SB, is more complex on IB.

    • danazar
    • 8 years ago

    Again, no VT-d for the “K” processors. WTF? I want the highest possible clock and the potential to do virtualization. Intel basically says “you can’t have both, at any price”. That’s highly upsetting.

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 8 years ago

      SBE and the socket 1155 Xeons support VT-d. The latter doesn’t even cost more. You’re just looking in the wrong place.

        • Kougar
        • 8 years ago

        You can buy VT-d, or you can buy unlocked “K” processors. You cannot have both. VT-d is disabled on all “K” series processors, whether they are Sandy Bridge or Ivy Bridge. Xeons are all locked parts anyway. So no, the cost is different.

        Enthusiasts are the most likely to to buy “K” series parts, and the most likely group to make use of VT-d enabled virtualization. Disabling features they would use while charging a premium for seemingly identical models with unlocked cores is disingenuous.

        Especially as is pointed out elsewhere in this thread, desktop Windows 8 will include Hyper-V. “K” Series users are going to get unlocked cores at the expense of virtualization performance.

          • maroon1
          • 8 years ago

          VT-d is not disabled in all K series

          i7 3930K supports VT-d
          [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/63697/Intel-Core-i7-3930K-Processor-%2812M-Cache-3_20-GHz%29[/url<]

        • LoneWolf15
        • 8 years ago

        On current Sandy Bridge E CPUs, VT-d is broken. Won’t be fixed until next stepping.

        [url<]http://www.techpowerup.com/152978/Sandy-Bridge-E-VT-d-Broken-In-C1-Stepping-Fixed-In-C2-Stepping-Shortly-After-Launch.html[/url<]

          • Kougar
          • 8 years ago

          What the hell?! So if it doesn’t work, does the listed VT-x still work?? For that matter, does it work in SB-E?

          If that is true, then Intel is being far more than disingenuous, they’re selling desktop processors with listed features that don’t actually work and never will. Interestingly enough… the Xeons are only listed with VT-x support now.

          • maroon1
          • 8 years ago

          Please felete

      • Farting Bob
      • 8 years ago

      Theres always that SB-E! Thats what Intel want you to do. If you want all the high end features then you have to go for the high end platform. I do think they should do a top of the line K processor with all the features unlocked, it seems backwards to offer them on cheaper, slower chips but not more expensive ones.

      • PeregrineFalcon
      • 8 years ago

      VT-d isn’t required for all virtualization, just IOMMU. XP Mode will still work without it, if that’s the primary concern. If you’re going to build a Xen/ESXi box then it’s annoying.

      Agree that it sucks to have to choose though, and we shouldn’t have to.

        • indeego
        • 8 years ago

        The price difference[s] between hardware virtualization capability is far eclipsed by the software licensing that takes advantage of it.

          • PeregrineFalcon
          • 8 years ago

          Xen, KVM, and VirtualBox are all free, and support IOMMU to varying extents.

          The price difference between SB + LGA1155 and SB-E + LGA2011 is definitely not a negligible amount; and besides, VT-d is broken on SB-E C1 stepping anyhow.

          The point that danazar is making (I believe) is that it shouldn’t have to be that way.

          • bcronce
          • 8 years ago

          HyperV is free and the next version will support:

          Host: 160 CPUs
          Host: 2TB of ram
          Host: 63 node cluster with failover and 4000 guests

          Guest: 32 CPUs
          Guest: 512GB of ram

          etc…etc….

          All of this comes baked in to Win8 Desktop *if* your hardware supports it. One of the requirements is VT-d.

        • bcronce
        • 8 years ago

        I’m more concerned for buying a computer now that will work best with Win8, Since Win8 runs a Type1 hypervisor, which means even your primary OS runs in virtualization.

        I’m not sure I want my games accessing my SSD HD through a non-HW-accel’d layer.

          • Waco
          • 8 years ago

          I’m fairly sure that Microsoft will bake something into the “primary” Windows 8 guest to make it able to directly access hardware.

          At least, that’s my hope.

      • Krogoth
      • 8 years ago

      #1 – Because, Intel can decide how to do its following

      #2 – The crowd that “K” series caters doesn’t care about vitrualization.

      #3- VT-d is meant for prosumers who never do any overclocking. It is way too risky with dubious benefits for their line of work.

        • Firestarter
        • 8 years ago

        Professionals can be enthusiasts too, you know.

        • Beelzebubba9
        • 8 years ago

        I want both overclocking and VT-d. Is that wrong?

          • OneArmedScissor
          • 8 years ago

          It’s wrong to expect a company like Intel to just hand that to you. This is the company that has been known to disable Speedstep on cheap laptop parts. :p

            • Beelzebubba9
            • 8 years ago

            Hey! I’ll pay extra for it!

            …but yeah it is asking a lot of Intel. The same company that disables 64bit addressing on the Atom. ๐Ÿ™‚

    • Stargazer
    • 8 years ago

    [quote<]The top-of-the-line Core i7-3770K will purportedly have a base clock speed of 3.5GHz with a 3.9GHz Turbo peak.[/quote<] No clock speed bump compared to the i7-2700? I guess they don't really need to, but it would have been nice to see *some* increase (especially given how well Sandy Bridge overclocks)...

      • OneArmedScissor
      • 8 years ago

      Sandy Bridge E just came out and they’re not going to outdo it with cheaper parts. Once they have a new stepping, they’ll bump Ivy Bridge up along with it.

        • Stargazer
        • 8 years ago

        I don’t think a 100 MHz bump would make much of a difference there, seeing as SB-E still has the core/memory channel advantage.

        At least the 2500K(-equivalent) got a 100 MHz bump, and if I was looking for a new proc that’s probably what I’d go for anyway (don’t see much of a need to upgrade from my 2500K though, so I’ll wait another generation or two).

          • OneArmedScissor
          • 8 years ago

          It may very well have a 100 MHz speed bump, or higher, considering that the turbo probably works better.

          How often do you use only one CPU core? That’s not anything to judge by, and that’s the only thing you really know didn’t increase.

            • Stargazer
            • 8 years ago

            The quoted “turbo peak” value is the same as the 2700K too, but I suppose it’s possible that instead of using a 4/3/2/1 turbo increase, they’ll have higher turbo peaks for (some combinations of) having more than 1 core in use.

            Doesn’t exactly have the same PR value though. ๐Ÿ™‚

            • OneArmedScissor
            • 8 years ago

            I know what you’re saying and I’m not trying to be nitpicky, just pointing out a possibility.

            But you know what does have PR value? Widening the gap to make your TDP almost half of AMD’s, when AMD had already been chastized for hiking their clock speeds and TDP above Intel’s for years. ๐Ÿ˜‰

            • Stargazer
            • 8 years ago

            And it’s an interesting possibility (there’s definitely enough headroom to maintain a higher turbo boost when using more than 1 core (personally I have the same turbo speed when using 1 and 2 cores)).

            The reduced power consumption is a huge selling point, yup. It’ll be interesting to see what the actual power usage end up being like.

      • StellaArtois
      • 8 years ago

      Please AMD, at least try to give these guys some competition… Boy do they need some.

    • derFunkenstein
    • 8 years ago

    Are we still 4+ months out from Ivy Bridge? Last I heard it was rumored to be targeted in March. I’d like to get off my Phenom II system as quick as I can, which is probably January, but I don’t want to jump 2 weeks before IB comes out.

      • DancinJack
      • 8 years ago

      I think you’re looking at late March/early April.

        • derFunkenstein
        • 8 years ago

        cool. I’d wait 2-3 weeks, maybe a month, but once you get beyond that I’m not really in the mood. Thanks. ๐Ÿ˜€

    • phez
    • 8 years ago

    Dat 77w tdp

    • OneArmedScissor
    • 8 years ago

    I’m more interested in the laptop models, especially the 35w quad-core. They’ll likely raise the boost modes on those, nearly matching the desktop parts. The fastest Sandy Bridge laptop parts are only about 400 MHz slower than the desktop parts as it is.

    EDIT: Well, I guess that’s a given, judging by the Core i7-3770T. A more expensive laptop part will surely hit 3.8 or 3.9 GHz.

      • chuckula
      • 8 years ago

      Ivy Bridge truly is aimed at the mobile sector with the desktop models basically being overclocked chips that have a higher power envelope. The real unanswered question is how much of a performance improvement Intel can put into the GPU in the mobile models, especially the < 20 watt models. Don’t expect the Ivy Bridge GPU on the desktop to be insane or beat Trinity, but the CPU part should probably overclock very well.

        • Beelzebubba9
        • 8 years ago

        I’d guess that IVB will match Llano’s GPU performance (Intel was quoting 60% better than SNB, with DX11 compatibility) and might not be that far off from Trinity’s, but that (of course) remains to be seen.

          • khands
          • 8 years ago

          Within 5% of Llano is probably a good guess. I think AMD really has to book it if they want to keep ahead of Intel, which is going to continue to cannibalize their dedicated GPU market.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This