Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 23rd Apr 2012 20:26 UTC
Intel AnandTech puts Intel's new Ivy Bridge through its paces. "While it's not enough to tempt existing Sandy Bridge owners, if you missed the upgrade last year then Ivy Bridge is solid ground to walk on. It's still the best performing client x86 architecture on the planet and a little to a lot better than its predecessor depending on how much you use the on-die GPU."
Thread beginning with comment 515431
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Not worth it for me
by Luke McCarthy on Mon 23rd Apr 2012 21:31 UTC
Luke McCarthy
Member since:

Still comfortable with Core 2 Quad Q9550. Not worth spending just to get maybe 30% better performance. I'll wait and see if Haswell is any good, and hopefully they'll release some 8-cores.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Not worth it for me
by JuEeHa on Tue 24th Apr 2012 05:55 in reply to "Not worth it for me"
JuEeHa Member since:

And really not worth for me. I am still comfortable with Pentium III and I really don't understand why some people need two (or three or four) core processors even if they don't play games, edit movies or do 3d rendering.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Not worth it for me
by bnolsen on Tue 24th Apr 2012 12:12 in reply to "RE: Not worth it for me"
bnolsen Member since:

Compilation scales linearly. Other computational workloads as well. Time is money in some cases. Making these powerhouses more efficient per watt is even more win.

Edited 2012-04-24 12:14 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: Not worth it for me
by BiPolar on Tue 24th Apr 2012 15:42 in reply to "RE: Not worth it for me"
BiPolar Member since:

I guess I'm on the same boat. My trusty K7@900 (w/256 MB of RAM) never feels short of power, unless I intend to transcode some videos.

Heck, coupled with a GeForce MX 4000 I've even played HL2!

Music/Movies/TV/Programming/Games it does it all. I'll surely shed a few tears when(if!) this baby goes down.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: Not worth it for me
by HangLoose on Tue 24th Apr 2012 09:35 in reply to "Not worth it for me"
HangLoose Member since:

I have same processor as you and I was wondering if there is somewhere that you could point me to benchmarks between Ivy and ours.

thanks dude...

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE: Not worth it for me
by bassbeast on Wed 25th Apr 2012 05:05 in reply to "Not worth it for me"
bassbeast Member since:

This is something I've argued with the gear heads, that for the vast majority PCs have been "good enough" since they went dual cores. I haven't seen any improvements on the desktop when i went from quad to hexacore and even with both boys loving to game (one on a hexacore, the other my quad handed down) frankly even the games rarely stress more than 2 cores, heck i found that for my mobile needs that a Bobcat dual core is more than plenty for watching HD videos, surfing, webmail, etc.

The problem is the reason why we see Microsoft killing themselves to get onto cell phones and tablets, because PCs simply haven't had a "killer app" that can take advantage of the frankly insane power both Intel and AMD have given us. I will give Intel credit though, after AMD's previous CEO backed the company into a corner (Killing Thuban, killing the next version of Brazos called Krishna) and bet the farm on Bulldozer which turned out to be not even as good as Thuban Intel could have just sat back and reaped the profits so the fact that they are still sticking to their tick tock strategy, even though it will cost a ton of money, just shows they aren't willing to rest on their laurels.

I just hope AMD can come up with something better because as we have seen a monopoly is NEVER a good thing. I have to wonder if Intel would help out AMD to keep from ending up in that situation, as Microsoft did with Apple in the 90s? After all they can afford to give up the low end market (which is tight margins anyway) to AMD a lot easier than they can afford a bunch of governments watching them like hawks.

Reply Parent Score: 2