| Intel Core i7-3960X Extreme Edition CPU |  |
| Reviews - Featured Reviews: Processors | |
| Written by David Ramsey | |
| Monday, 14 November 2011 | |
|
Page 3 of 17
Sandy Bridge Extreme ArchitectureArchitecturally, the Sandy Bridge Extreme CPUs are very similar to the existing Sandy Bridge lineup. Each core in the i7-3960X is pretty much the same as the core in an i7-2700K. The main differences between the Core i7-3960X and the Core i7-2700K are:
Most users will welcome the lack of the weak "iGPU", although its removal does mean that you can't use Intel Quick Sync for video transcoding. The most important new feature, in my opinion, is the 40 PCI-E lanes, which is a vast improvement over the stingy 16 lanes available on LGA1155 Sandy Bridge CPUs. Lane contention on an LGA1155 system with multiple video cards results in diminished performance or even non-functionality of some other interfaces that require PCI-E bandwidth, like USB 3.0 and SATA 6G ports. This won't be a problem with LGA2011. Technically, the new PCI-E lanes meet the PCI-E 3.0 specification, which means that at least in theory they should be able to deliver double the bandwidth of existing PCI-E 2.0 lanes. Some day, when PCI-E 3.0 peripherals actually exist, we might see some performance improvement...although even the beefiest current graphics cards aren't bandwidth-limited. 
Of course, with a new CPU and new socket comes a new supporting chipset, the X79 Express. 
Looking at the block diagrams of the Z68 and X79 chipsets side by side, the X79 seems functionally identical to the Z68, except that it lacks the digital display support and Intel Smart Response Technology. The lack of the latter is disappointing, since our tests with Intel Smart Response Technology showed that its use of an SSD as an intelligent cache to a hard drive could dramatically improve storage performance. As with the Z68 and earlier P67 chipsets, there are 14 USB 2.0 ports and 6 SATA ports, of which only two are SATA 6G. Notably missing is Intel's "Light Peak" (aka "Thunderbolt"), which has been used as Intel's excuse for not supporting SuperSpeed USB 3.0. And it's really odd that only two of the SATA ports are SATA 6G, since 6G devices are becoming more common, especially among SSDs. For a cutting-edge platform, this is impossible to justify. At least AMD gives you a full six SATA 6G ports. Disappointments with the chipset aside, let's get to testing this setup.
|
|
Comments
"For most of us, though, the Core i7-3960X makes as much sense as a 1,000 horsepower street car. It's fun at the dragstrip (running benchmarks), but a Core i7-2700K on a nice Z68 motherboard will be a fraction of the price and just as fast in "real world" terms."
This is a new era in power that will remain almost completely unused and unnecessary for most people, like you say, even us enthusiasts will need to think twice, except those who have money to needlessly burn.
You would think in these economic times, R&D of high dollar items like this would slow down. Interesting. At the same time, my i7 920 cost 1000.00 back in 2008, so the price to power ratio has dramatically fallen too.
But rich fanbois have big egos to satisfy so there will always be market for for stuff priced way out of line with what it is really worth. Useless - if I'm paying $1000 for a CPU it better be a multi CPU server chip in a render farm - something where you can get a return on your money at least. just my 2 cents for an alternate perspective.
I think petty envy speaks always more to one's ego state. Anyone's needs that are "really satisfied" by todays computing power will probably have a "cute device" for their "cute needs" soon enuff. and good riddance.
My needs are far from even close to being satisfied... though cinebench over 12 is at least progressing ( not enough knowing the Ivy Extreme will be released in 2012. And hopefully that benchmark gives more distance )
Catch 22 is really depressing! There is an army of artists whose talent could bring yer boss machine to it's knees given the chance. Instead they compromise to console greed economics. And instead of buying hardware that can push the boundries a market without that entertainment actually believes that we are at "good enuff".
Thanks for the consolitic ball and chain!
Buy it and they will make it/ Make it and they will buy it.
What do "most" users do with their computers that does not desperately need more computing power? Don't they have an app for that yet?
Also, if by FPS you're referring to frames per second, I suggest you do a bit MORE reading here at Benchmark Reviews... so you'll learn that the CPU has very little to do with frame rates.
Look on the bright side: now that Intel's Core i7-3960X has significantly raised expectations, you might soon find AMD processors selling in the blue-light section over at K-Mart. I understand they fired their entire marketing staff of 1400 workers after Bulldozer launched, so the only people saying anything good about them these days are the fan boys, and even they're unhappy.
You're right about frame rates with some games, and I over-simplified my statement. Battlefield 3 is one such game, and DirectX-11 effects drive all processor cores to nearly 50% usage even when played with a GTX 590. Obviously, there are times when the CPU will make a difference in game performance, but that requires advanced technology at a time when most developers are keeping to console (a la Modern Warefare 3).
Amatures ... This David R guy sounds like he has it together though ...
This was a very comprehensive review. It left me with no questions about the comparison of power.
FSX: enough said.
For example, my 2600K at 4.9Ghz + water can run the SPECapc rendering suite in 443 seconds. From your chart in the review it shows an overclocked 3930X does it in 408 seconds.
Simply put, that would be a 10% improvement from what I have now for a 300% price tag. :-)
I just wanted to say the fact you include this test in your reviews is very helpful to me, so thanks again. :-)
So yes, you pay 300% more, but that is a one time cost compared to getting that 10% every single time you run a model.
I believe the 3d ivybridge will be a better bargain than these.
Idont know if ivybridge extreme will be compatible with x79 mobo but P67 mobos will all for ivybridge upgrades making the 2600k chips a better deal from the getgo.
If you're asking about six core non-extreme Sandy Bridges, well, there aren't going to be any.
The NVIDIA Maximus announced release sounds pretty sexy ( quadro and tesla sandwich please!). Kind of makes me wonder if the mercury engine might deserve a second look.
Would appreciate a review if could score a copy.
geforce.com/Active/en_US/shared/images/articles/x79/3way.jpg
Still will probably wait for ivy bridge - E as the cinebench numbers do not justify dropping $1500 for x79 porn. But if the 3 way scaling is even close to the truth then I am very happy that the IVY Bridge solution will most likely do as much.
Makes waiting a few more seasons for my new dragster pretty hard though.
I must say I am very satisfied!