Intel adds cheaper, dual-core desktop Ivy CPUs

Shopping for an Ivy Bridge processor on a budget has just gotten a little bit easier. Intel quietly updated its price list over the long weekend, and the revised document outlines some new Ivy Bridge desktop processors priced as low as $117—including several dual-core offerings.

The chips aren’t yet included in Intel’s ARK database, so you’ll have to stay tuned for a full set of specs. Information about power envelopes, integrated graphics clock speeds, and hardware virtualization capabilities seems to be unavailable right now. Still, the price list gives us the essentials:

Processor Cores Threads Clock speed L3 cache Price
Core i5-3350P 4 4 3.10 GHz 6 MB $177
Core i5-3330 4 4 3.00 GHz 6 MB $182
Core i3-3240 2 4 3.40 GHz 3 MB $138
Core i3-3225 2 4 3.30 GHz 3 MB $134
Core i3-3220 2 4 3.30 GHz 3 MB $117

The $117 Core i3-3220 represents a pretty big step down from the $184 Core i5-3450, which has been the cheapest desktop Ivy Bridge processor in the list up until now. Budget shoppers will no doubt be pleased. Heck, we’re pleased ourselves. The latest few iterations of the Econobox build from our own system guide have been saddled with the Core i3-2120, a 32-nm Sandy Bridge model. I expect the i3-3220 will make a fine substitute, provided there aren’t more compelling AMD alternatives on offer.

Speaking of AMD, this quiet budget rollout comes barely a week after AMD’s latest round of price cuts. Those cuts affected A- and FX-series desktop processors, and they brought the quickest Llano desktop APU to a buck over $100. The flagship FX-8150, which has eight threads and an unlocked upper multiplier, also fell to $183.

Comments closed
    • Johannesburg
    • 7 years ago

    Could have included the GPU for each, or are they all HD4K?

    • TAViX
    • 7 years ago

    Thank you AMD for $hitty competition…

    • ronch
    • 7 years ago

    The first thing that caught my interest is the Core i5-3330. At 3.0GHz, it’s just a few pennies cheaper than the i5-3470, the Intel SKU I’d buy if I were shopping Intel. I think I’ll stick with the 3470.

    • tootercomputer
    • 7 years ago

    This story is right up there with a page 6 column in the business news reporting that Dodge has released a new mini-van for the end of the 2012 season. I can see where the head of IT purchasing for institutions and companies intent on making large purchases of desktops would be interested in this, but otherwise, this is a yawn for me. End of summer, slow news day I guess.

    • Bauxite
    • 7 years ago

    I really hope they put out a common spec 17W 2C4T+2500 desktop part (3220U or 3220T or whatever) and not pansy out at 35W.

    Right now the only option is a dual core oem xeon with no graphics that is really hard to find, and marked up to be not much cheaper than the 4C8T+4000 45W model. The no graphics kills it for anything but serial console use cases 🙁

    They have embedded stuff that fits (really just mobile variants) but that means you have to go all in on an overpriced cpu+board combo, I want a 1155 socketed version.

      • MadManOriginal
      • 7 years ago

      Do you want to pay $225+? (the 1k quantity tray price for the i3-3217U)

      Just get a 35W T version. The power draw difference in real life isn’t going to be 18W, and the 17W CPUs are seriously downclocked.

        • Bauxite
        • 7 years ago

        Why would I pay that when I can already get this for $184, and it fits in a standard motherboard instead of only coming in a BGA solder package for mobile oems to put on their own motherboards:

        [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/65735/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1220LV2-3M-Cache-2_30-GHz[/url<] If the 35W fit the mold I would get this: [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/53448/Intel-Core-i5-2390T-Processor-3M-Cache-up-to-3_50-GHz[/url<] Of course, its gouged by all the online resellers so after their markup its about the same price as this: [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/65728/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1265LV2-8M-Cache-2_50-GHz[/url<] The 35W are not low enough, its not the power, its the thermals. A modern core (not atom) with the cheapest video output and low TDP isn't too much to ask. The one you linked wastes TDP headroom to have a HD4000, and means buying a custom >$500 motherboard with it soldered on. (or tearing apart a laptop)

          • esterhasz
          • 7 years ago

          I agree that a lower TDP chip would be nice, but by undervolting and underclocking, I got the SB dual core in my HTPC with little effort below 25W. With IB and a strict limit of clockspeed even less than 10W should be possible.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            Is that 25W the total system power draw?

            • esterhasz
            • 7 years ago

            No, it’s about 18W at idle and goes up to about 40W at full CPU load (2.8 Ghz), both with HDD sleeping and a picoPSU. I’m sure that with a bit more effort, one could cut that quite a bit further.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          Well then, get one of the Xeons if you’re so insistent upon having a CPU with a certain TDP. If you know they already exist, what are you complaining about?

          [quote<]its not the power, its the thermals[/quote<] Derp...you do understand what TDP really means and how it's related to power draw and 'thermals' right?

            • Bauxite
            • 7 years ago

            I don’t give a crap about power draw at the wall, or power use over the day. People trying to save kilowatt hours don’t mind if the cpu spikes up to X for a short period, as long as the total power use is low (cheap).

            Thermal Design Power means exactly that, the cpu will not output more than a given amount of heat under real use, so you can [i<]Design[/i<] a [i<]Thermal Solution[/i<] given this data. I [b<]do[/b<] care if a cpu spikes up to 35/65W/whatever for awhile, because will overheat and shut down, or obliterate the computer it is running. There is a considerable difference when designing a fanless system for 17/25/35/45/65 watts of heat from the main component. I've tried the cases out there, they suck, I'm milling my own. I am completely aware that total system power draw is extremely close (barring physics nerds, some non-heat 'work' is done) to total system heat output so you can go derp yourself.

    • guardianl
    • 7 years ago

    Core i5-3350P is already available on Newegg: [url<]http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116782[/url<]

    • dpaus
    • 7 years ago

    [quote<]Speaking of AMD, this quiet budget rollout comes barely a week after AMD's latest round of price cuts[/quote<] Yeah, whadda coinky-dink, hunh?

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      Surely a clear sign of intel’s concerns about AMD taking over the x86 market. 😛

    • derFunkenstein
    • 7 years ago

    In the previous generation 21×5 indicated HD3000 graphics. I suppose that holds true for the 3225? HD 4000?

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      The 3225 does have HD 4000 graphics but I’m not sure if the naming is a steadfast rule however.

      • Bauxite
      • 7 years ago

      Judging by current laptop/desktop models I would say it means this:
      xxx0 = HD2500
      xxx5 = HD4000

      The E3 ivy xeons use xxx5 = gpu present, xxxx0 = no gpu, but I doubt that carries over to i3 as they are already using P for that, and E3 are closer to i7 models anyways.

        • Arag0n
        • 7 years ago

        According to new-egg the i5-3330 & i3-3220 are HD2500

        [url<]http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116781CVF&Tpk=i5-3330[/url<] [url<]http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116775CVF&Tpk=i3-3220[/url<] The i3-3225 is HD4000 [url<]http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116774CVF&Tpk=i3-3225[/url<] So seems to apply the rule of: XXX5 = HD4000 XXX0 = HD2500 That means that the only trinity-worth competitor of the list is the i3-3225, everything else has a pretty crappy iGPU....

          • Deanjo
          • 7 years ago

          [quote<]That means that the only trinity-worth competitor of the list is the i3-3225, everything else has a pretty crappy iGPU....[/quote<] That all depends on what you put more value in, the cpu or the gpu. Trinity might have better graphics but cpu wise the i3 pulls away.

            • Arag0n
            • 7 years ago

            True, but I’m not talking about CPU performance. I understand that Trinity is a platform and that means that potential trinity customers won´t buy a GPU but they expect the integrated one to be good enough for light gaming. The intel HD2500 is totally out of question for that matter so that leaves the i3-3225 as the only one that may have enough GPU-power to play some ligh-games or most games at low-sets. Surely, CPU-wise most of those intel cpu’s should be better or just equal to AMD CPU-wise performance.

    • willmore
    • 7 years ago

    What’s the “P” suffix indicate?

    The otherwise better looking processor is cheaper than one a step slower. Poorer thermals?

      • Deanjo
      • 7 years ago

      No GPU (disabled).

        • BIF
        • 7 years ago

        I’d gladly take a disabled GPU section on an i7 eight-core for a price break.

        Oh that’s right, they don’t make that yet…

          • Airmantharp
          • 7 years ago

          Nope- there’s no reason to, AMD moved backwards with their last design :).

            • Johannesburg
            • 7 years ago

            and the i7 offering is about no compromises. The quick sync feature can still be used on a lot of chipsets, properly configured.

          • Chrispy_
          • 7 years ago

          The real market for people wanting i7 processing power without dedicated graphics must be tiny.

          i7 without a proper GPU is only applicable to Ultrabooks(TM) – and despite the marketing hype, all vendors are reporting that Ultrabooks(TM) have been sales flops. This is backed up by the fact that I almost never see them in the wild, they’re more expensive than intel’s projected prices and very few people actually care how thin something is.

          Maybe I’m not in enough business meetings where everyone wears $5000 suits and image is everything…..

      • ew
      • 7 years ago

      profit

        • willmore
        • 7 years ago

        I am so glad I wasn’t drinking anything when I read that!

        • brucethemoose
        • 7 years ago

        this needs more thumbs

    • jdaven
    • 7 years ago

    T-series low TDP versions are also available.

      • Bauxite
      • 7 years ago

      Give me a U version!

      Unless T is already 17W or 25W for i3…

        • MadManOriginal
        • 7 years ago

        [quote<]DESKTOP Ivy CPUs[/quote<] This isn't the announcement you're looking for... [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/65697/Intel-Core-i3-3217U-Processor-3M-Cache-1_80-GHz[/url<]

          • Bauxite
          • 7 years ago

          Does this look like a laptop cpu?

          [url<]http://ark.intel.com/products/65735/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E3-1220LV2-3M-Cache-2_30-GHz[/url<] I want a low power 1155 socket w/ gpu, and yeah, its for a "desktop".

    • maroon1
    • 7 years ago

    There is also pentium G2120 which is based on ivy bridge
    [url<]http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819116777[/url<]

      • halbhh2
      • 7 years ago

      Interesting. That’s what to compare to the currently $90-$99 Phenom II x4 965 for the very-econo build.
      What is the chance of getting a good review on this comparison anytime soon?

    • Prion
    • 7 years ago

    The 3240 looks like a great processor for MAME, wonder how it overclocks

      • Peldor
      • 7 years ago

      Up to four bins above stock, I expect.

      It would be fun if there was a K series dual-core.

        • MadManOriginal
        • 7 years ago

        No Turboboost (or at least extremely unlikely – only CPUs that can overclock ‘by design’ through Turboboost can be manually overclocked by 4 bins), so no…it’s 3.4GHz flat

          • Meadows
          • 7 years ago

          Right, because people have historically never been able to overclock CPUs to unintended speeds.

            • brucethemoose
            • 7 years ago

            With SB/IB… ya, pretty much.

            I hope “locked” Haswell chips are overclockable.

            • derFunkenstein
            • 7 years ago

            That’s how Sand is, anyway. Anything more than 3-4MHz above the stock 100MHz bus speed would cause instability. I have to assume Ivy Bridge is the same until results from people around the internet say otherwise.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            To elaborate on other comments since it seems like you haven’t kept up with overclocking since Sandy Bridge…

            There are a few ways to overclock Intel CPUs by any appreciable amount:

            1) Unlocked K CPUs – up the multiplier, pretty straightforward.

            2) CPUs with Turboboost – can have their multiplier manipulated up to 4 additional bins. So a 3.0/3.4 Turboboost CPU could be set to run 3.4/3.8.

            And that’s it for anything appreciable. BCLK can be increased but only by a few MHz then it’s unstable. Adds 100 or so MHz, hardly worth it. Since i3 CPUs don’t have Turboboost they can’t even use the +4 bin overclock method. This is due to change with Haswell afaik – back to soimething more like traditional overclocking.

            • Meadows
            • 7 years ago

            I guess.

            I don’t think I’ve purchased an intel CPU in the past 3 years, and I’ve only ever purchased two prior to that, and neither with my own money (I was the go-to guy for assembling the PCs of relatives). To say I “haven’t kept up” is generous.

            • flip-mode
            • 7 years ago

            derp

            • Meadows
            • 7 years ago

            You’re showing signs of mental decline lately. This is very unlike you, flip-mode.

          • Prion
          • 7 years ago

          Guess that answers my question. Sounds like the best processor for top single-threaded/lightly-threaded performance is still whatever the cheapest K model is then.

            • brucethemoose
            • 7 years ago

            [quote<] single-threaded/lightly-threaded performance [/quote<] a.k.a performance in almost everything It's a shame we have to pay $220 for a quad just to get better single threaded performance. It's the opposite of what things were like in the Core2 Duo/Quad days.

          • Peldor
          • 7 years ago

          Drat. You are right of course.

        • brucethemoose
        • 7 years ago

        A unlocked dual core would cannibalize Intel’s i5 and future i3 sales, and basically make AMD’s offerings completely irrelevant. As no-ones putting pressure on Intel, they can leave it locked.

        It would be a monster of a CPU for the price though.

          • derFunkenstein
          • 7 years ago

          That’s pretty much it right there. I’d jump on an i3 3240K in a heartbeat, and I’d only be upgrading from an i3 2100. The potential OC would be plenty for me.

            • MadManOriginal
            • 7 years ago

            That’s the other side of cannabilizing higher-end sales. In your case it’s a lost sale because rather than buy a higher-end i5 in the abscense of a lower priced unlocked CPU you’ll just buy nothing.

      • raddude9
      • 7 years ago

      I don’t see the point. It is only 0.1Ghz faster than the Core i3-3220 but costs $21 more. Save you money and get the cheaper chip.

        • nanoflower
        • 7 years ago

        Did you miss his point that he wasn’t talking about the current 3240 which is locked but an unlocked version. An unlocked version could easily go up by 500MHz and very likely 1GHz without getting into extreme cooling. That would be a significant boost in performance for everything. Perhaps even higher in single threaded performance. Well worth it for the extra 21 dollars (or more) if Intel were to unlock that model. Unfortunately Intel isn’t likely to do that for the reasons listed above.

          • MadManOriginal
          • 7 years ago

          Peldor mentioned he’d like an unlocked version, Prion did not.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This