The Sandy Bridge Previewby Anand Lal Shimpi on August 27, 2010 2:38 PM EST
Update: Be sure to read our Sandy Bridge Architecture Exposed article for more details on the design behind Intel's next-generation microprocessor architecture.
The mainstream quad-core market has been neglected ever since we got Lynnfield in 2009. Both the high end and low end markets saw a move to 32nm, but if you wanted a mainstream quad-core desktop processor the best you could get was a 45nm Lynnfield from Intel. Even quad-core Xeons got the 32nm treatment.
That's all going to change starting next year. This time it's the masses that get the upgrade first. While Nehalem launched with expensive motherboards and expensive processors, the next tock in Intel's architecture cadence is aimed right at the middle of the market. This time, the ultra high end users will have to wait - if you want affordable quad-core, if you want the successor to Lynnfield, Sandy Bridge is it.
Sandy Bridge is the next major architecture from Intel. What Intel likes to call a tock. The first tock was Conroe, then Nehalem and now SB. In between were the ticks - Penryn, Westmere and after SB we'll have Ivy Bridge, a 22nm shrink of Sandy.
Did I mention we have one?
While Intel is still a few weeks away from releasing Sandy Bridge performance numbers at IDF, we managed to spend some time with a very healthy sample and run it through a few of our tests to get a sneak peak at what's coming in Q1 2011.
The naming isn’t great. It’s an extension of what we have today. Intel is calling Sandy Bridge the 2nd generation Core i7, i5 and i3 processors. As a result, all of the model numbers have a 2 preceding them.
For example, today the fastest LGA-1156 processor is the Core i7 880. When Sandy Bridge launches early next year, the fastest LGA-1155 processor will be the Core i7 2600. The two indicates that it’s a 2nd generation Core i7, and the 600 is the model number.
|Sandy Bridge CPU Comparison|
|Base Frequency||L3 Cache||Cores/Threads||Max Single Core Turbo||Intel HD Graphics Frequency/Max Turbo||Unlocked||TDP|
|Intel Core i7 2600K||3.4GHz||8MB||4 / 8||3.8GHz||850 / 1350MHz||Y||95W|
|Intel Core i7 2600||3.4GHz||8MB||4 / 8||3.8GHz||850 / 1350MHz||N||95W|
|Intel Core i5 2500K||3.3GHz||6MB||4 / 4||3.7GHz||850 / 1100MHz||Y||95W|
|Intel Core i5 2500||3.3GHz||6MB||4 / 4||3.7GHz||850 / 1100MHz||N||95W|
|Intel Core i5 2400||3.1GHz||6MB||4 / 4||3.4GHz||850 / 1100MHz||N||95W|
|Intel Core i3 2120||3.3GHz||3MB||2 / 4||N/A||850 / 1100MHz||N||65W|
|Intel Core i3 2100||3.1GHz||3MB||2 / 4||N/A||850 / 1100MHz||N||65W|
The names can also have a letter after four digit model number. You’re already familiar with one: K denotes an unlocked SKU (similar to what we have today). There are two more: S and T. The S processors are performance optimized lifestyle SKUs, while the T are power optimized.
The S parts run at lower base frequencies than the non-S parts (e.g. a Core i7 2600 runs at 3.40GHz while a Core i7 2600S runs at 2.80GHz), however the max turbo frequency is the same for both (3.8GHz). GPU clocks remain the same but I’m not sure if they have the same number of execution units. All of the S parts run at 65W while the non-S parts are spec’d at 95W.
|Sandy Bridge CPU Comparison|
|Base Frequency||L3 Cache||Cores/Threads||Max Single Core Turbo||Intel HD Graphics Frequency/Max Turbo||TDP|
|Intel Core i7 2600S||2.8GHz||8MB||4 / 8||3.8GHz||850 / 1100MHz||65W|
|Intel Core i5 2500S||2.7GHz||6MB||4 / 4||3.7GHz||850 / 1100MHz||65W|
|Intel Core i5 2500T||2.3GHz||6MB||4 / 4||3.3GHz||650 / 1250MHz||45W|
|Intel Core i5 2400S||2.5GHz||6MB||4 / 4||3.3GHz||850 / 1100MHz||65W|
|Intel Core i5 2390T||2.7GHz||3MB||2 / 4||3.5GHz||650 / 1100MHz||35W|
|Intel Core i3 2100T||2.5GHz||3MB||2 / 4||N/A||650 / 1100MHz||35W|
The T parts run at even lower base frequencies and have lower max turbo frequencies. As a result, these parts have even lower TDPs (35W and 45W).
I suspect the S and T SKUs will be mostly used by OEMs to keep power down. Despite the confusion, I like the flexibility here. Presumably there will be a price premium for these lower wattage parts.
Post Your CommentPlease log in or sign up to comment.
View All Comments
starx5 - Tuesday, September 7, 2010 - linkAnd why didn't you ran 2560x1600(or higher resolution like eyefinity) benchmark either?
Is this because sandybrige is not that good?
wut - Friday, September 10, 2010 - linkSo you're expecting eyeinfinity out of a single integrated graphics connection out the back of a motherboard?
Are you okay?
gundersausage - Tuesday, October 26, 2010 - linki7-950 vs i7-2500K... So which will be faster and a better gaming chip? anyone?
WillyMcNilly - Thursday, October 28, 2010 - linkFantastic preview! I am definetly getting sandy bridge now. Apparently the Gigabyte P67-UD7 will have a geforce n200 chipset and support full 16X/16X sli AND crossfire! It will make a significant upgrade from my Phenom 2 and I cannot see myself waiting for bulldozer which has apparently been delayed (gee what a surprise!) until Q4 2011.
Chrisch - Wednesday, November 24, 2010 - linkwhich sample did you use for your tests?
QDF Q12W = GT1 (850-1100MHz)
QDF Q12X = GT2 (850-1100MHz)
techeadtrevor - Thursday, December 30, 2010 - linkHey guys, checkout this review of the i7-2600k... I think its bogus...tell me what you think of it on here.
( http://en.inpai.com.cn/doc/enshowcont.asp?id=7944 )
psiboy - Sunday, January 2, 2011 - linkCatalyst 8.12... WTF! 2 year old drivers? How much did intel bribe you to use drivers that old for their competition? That is a really bad path to guy down... Tom's did weird stuff like that a while back and lost readers because of it.... You just lost my respect Anand....
kmidm - Thursday, January 6, 2011 - linkI don't think an entire product line of CPU's with on-board graphics is anything really to get excited about, especially for us geeks. I guess I'm just old-school. The Sandy Bridge ,like Clarksdale, has similar benefits from a single-chip chipset which is very appealing from a throughput and control standpoint.
katleo123 - Tuesday, February 1, 2011 - linkTake nother look at Sandy bridge
hapeid - Friday, March 10, 2017 - linkWow Intel owns when it came to converting video, beating out much faster dedicated solutions, which was strange but still awesome.
I don't know how AMD's going to fare but i hope their new architecture will at least compete with these CPU's, because for a few years now AMD has been at least a generation worth of speed behind Intel.
Also Intel's IGP's are finally gaining some ground in the games department.