Im confused, how much faster is the SB CPU likely to be compared to that of the current arrandale? I've been reading reviews pointing towards 30% (which is huge), but is this figure comparing with arrandale?
30 to 40 to 50 to 75 to 100 depending on your configuration.
Ok, thanks for being so vague but I guess it was up to me to formulate the question more precisely so here is my second attempt:
30 to 40 to 50 to 75 to 100 depending on your configuration.
When comparing similar clocked CPU's ( i7-975 vs the high end i7-2600k ), there is hardly any difference between the 2 in performance.p
On certain Apps the SB does perform really good like Photoshop. But for most stuff like Office, it performs the same ( ok, 0.9 second faster over a 11 second operation, but I find that insignificant )
So unless Apple will come with Quad cores, I'm not interested![]()
About 15% clock for clock increase in performance.
Hmmm, so what is all the hype about? Anand seems to be super excited!
Hmmm, so what is all the hype about? Anand seems to be super excited!
On average or for specific tasks? Source?
In all but the heaviest threaded applications, Sandy Bridge is the fastest chip on the block—and you get the performance at a fairly reasonable price. The Core i7-2600K is tempting at $317 but the Core i5-2500K is absolutely a steal at $216. You're getting nearly $999 worth of performance at roughly a quarter of the cost. Compared to a Core i5-750/760, you'll get an additional 10-50% performance across the board in existing applications, and all that from a ~25% increase in clock speed. A big portion of what Sandy Bridge delivers is due to architectural enhancements, the type of thing we've come to expect from an Intel tock. Starting with Conroe, repeating with Nehalem, and going strong once more with Sandy Bridge, Intel makes this all seem so very easy.
It has a GPU and offers high-end Nalehem performance for a lower price. It's also more energy efficient since it's 32nm. Maybe later this year new Sandy Bridge will come however that are more impressive.
But I think Anandtech forgot that you need to buy a new Motherboard for PC users who wish to upgrade to Sandy Bridge, so it's not exactly cheap.
edit: If you got an old computer and it needs to be replaced ( also motherboard ), then it's a pretty good upgrade for the money you pay for it.
The fact is, Sandy Bridges are faster but your usage must be able to take advantage of that extra processing power. It's up to your usage.
Average of course. Anand has been saying that since his early tests. SB brings you 999$ performance for <300$, that's why it's cool.
In the mobile market it's going to be a different story I think. The Sandy Bridge dual cores are clocked at 2.5 ghz up to 2.7 ghz while the Arrendales are clocked from 2.4 ghz to 2.8 ghz.
Since we see from Nalehem that clock vs clock, it can keep up with Sandy Bridge in most things ( such a Nalehem CPU costs alot, but not for Arrendales which are also on 32nm ).
So if you got an i7 2.8 Dual core MBP, I don't think the 2.7 ghz i7 2620M will offer a big jump of improvement at all.
A 2.3 ghz Core i7 2820QM Quad core however, is going to be a big jump in performance.
that's what i was thinkingprism said:mark28 said:It has a GPU and offers high-end Nalehem performance for a lower price. It's also more energy efficient since it's 32nm. Maybe later this year new Sandy Bridge will come however that are more impressive.
But I think Anandtech forgot that you need to buy a new Motherboard for PC users who wish to upgrade to Sandy Bridge, so it's not exactly cheap.
edit: If you got an old computer and it needs to be replaced ( also motherboard ), then it's a pretty good upgrade for the money you pay for it.
Isnt arrandale 32nm?
Isnt arrandale 32nm?
Sandy Bridge is much faster for something like, compressing a large video file.
I've seen speed tests that show the 2630QM to be MUCH faster compressing video than the 640M.
Sandy Bridge has a much much faster... It gets a new turbo
Sandy Bridge has a much much faster memory access and Cache than Arrendale. It gets a new turbo and by default higher clocks.
That is good for a much bigger speed up than you see from old to new quad core SB on desktops.
Here this is the best comparison that you can get.
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/289?vs=143
That is basicly comparing an Arrendale and a Sandy Bridge Dual Core at very similar clocks without any Turbo.
The new Turbo only helps when opening or starting something as a very short boost thus the difference cannot really be put in numbers it is more of a subjective thing that you probably wouldn't be able to distinguish.
I just wish Anand would over relative values or svg graphics or some java script script so could switch to relative. You can calucalte the realtion by hand. If you want a average mean take into account how important each bench is for your real life usage.
With winrar you can see what fast memory access can do with apps that need it.