What is coming after Sandy Bridge?

kaisterkai

kaisterkai

Expert Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2009
Messages
2,153
Reaction score
3
Location
Cape Town
So I'm interested in upgrading..

But when I was reading about I-cores, I saw Sandy Bridge, so Just want to know if there is an info about the next generation of cores? (For intel..)

Thanks :)
 
Don't you guys just love Intel's relentless love for new sockets?
 
In Q4 Intel will launch the LGA 2011 for 6-8 core Sandy Bridge-EX. Ivy Bridge is expected Q1 next year as a replacement for LGA 1155 socket Sandy Bridge CPUs.
 
According to Intel they had no choice but to make a new socket for Ivy Bridge as it needed more pins (2011). It will also be a hell of a lot better than the current Sandy Bridge CPU series with better integrated graphics. (Can't remember where I read that, so no source on this one, sorry)
 
Singularity1 said:
In Q4 Intel will launch the LGA 2011 for 6-8 core Sandy Bridge-EX. Ivy Bridge is expected Q1 next year as a replacement for LGA 1155 socket Sandy Bridge CPUs.
Click to expand...

6/8 cores?

Wow..

mm.. Just thinking now..

So Intel is coming up with this.. Then what about AMD? What are their response? [as in competition wise.. :) ]
 
Libertas Computers said:
According to Intel they had no choice but to make a new socket for Ivy Bridge as it needed more pins (2011). It will also be a hell of a lot better than the current Sandy Bridge CPU series with better integrated graphics. (Can't remember where I read that, so no source on this one, sorry)
Click to expand...

SO say if I want to upgrade.. will it be better to wait till this comes out? Or should I just go for the SB?

I'm also wondering how the price would be comparing to SB... :(
 
O.o Intel really are a bunch of jerks :p Well I'm quite happy with my Sandy Bridge, should last me till the PS4 :)
 
S1ght said:
O.o Intel really are a bunch of jerks :p Well I'm quite happy with my Sandy Bridge, should last me till the PS4 :)
Click to expand...

PS 4?

Sometime I think upgrading too often is really a waste.. but then.. sometime your computer just gets theses moments of "slowness"

And that just makes you want to upgrade.. :)
 
gdiza said:
Bloody Intel! :(
Click to expand...
Intel might have fast proccies, but I think value-wise AMD is hard to beat. They generally have good backwards compatibility and it's rumoured that the first Bulldozer chips will work in current AM3 motherboards with only a simple BIOS update (unofficialy through AMD but it will be deemed 'experimental' on the motherboard manufacturer's side). Intel is chasing away it's biggest market segment, the mainstream users, with these constant socket changes. Some people want to be able to upgrade when they want to and not have to change motherboards and so forth just to do that. Just imagine you splash out on a decent Xfire/SLi board and a 2600K, and a few months down the line you have to do it all over again...not fun especially with the amount of money that goes into it.

I am looking at going for AMD because I can honestly not support a company that doesn't care much for it's users. AMD boards are a lot cheaper than the Intel equivalent and they get my vote. I guess we will have to see what performance the Bulldozer chips bring but I think that although they are a bit behind Intel, they should be quite an attractive offer for mainstream users
 
@wabbit while I agree with everything you say. you have to consider the differences in how intel and amd plan out their roadmaps.

Intel have a habbit of producing great chips for enthusiasts and gamers. it has never been thier game plan to have backwards compatability for sockets and cpus. If i was tasked to buy PCs for an entire office block i would go AMD, but if I was buying a PC for myself, i would go Intel.
 
It's true what you say there. I still remember the pre-Core2Duo chips, and how AMD used to kick ass with their Athlon64 chips. Those chips could pack a punch :D

I work in an IT environment and I find about one AMD system for every 80 Intel systems I work on. I work in a smaller town so that might be the reason, but it seems that to the casual PC user, Intel is the way to go. AMD doesn't seem to show in these parts...but maybe it's a Eastern Cape thing. I think Intel has changed roadmaps quite drastically after the success of their Core series of CPU's. The emphasis was no longer on pure clockspeed but rather on features and arcitecture. Then again, the Core i7's do pack quite a speed, if you think about it. I think AMD had a good formula at the moment, but they seem to be a generation behind Intel.

But on the plus side, the competition is good as it brings prices down :P
 
Here is some actual information...

1) Socket 2011 is intended for Sandy Bridge based Xeon processors and Sandy Bridge-E desktop processors (Top end desktop, supposedly with the X79 chipset).
2) If you know anything about Intel's roadmap, then you will know that they use a tick (die shrink) - tock (new architecture) strategy. Ivy Bridge is a 22nm die shrink of the Sandy Bridge core, like Westmere was for Nehalem, with some physical changes, supposedly using FinFET transistors for the cache, and GPU changes, apparently including on-die GPU DRAM. According to Intel slides, it will be on socket LGA1155 and supposedly backwards compatible with current boards, though I don't know how reliable that last part is. Expect them to be about 20% faster than SB on the CPU side due to the smaller process.
4) Ivy Bridge is scheduled for the beginning of next year, about the same time as Sandy Bridge hit this year, though there are rumours that they might turn up at the end of this year, to compete against AMD's Zambezi chips (Bulldozer).
3) Next new 'generation' (architecture) is Haswell in a couple of years.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X