Intel Core i7-3960X (Sandy Bridge-E) And X79 Platform Preview
Table of contents
- 1. Sandy Bridge-E And X79 Are Almost Ready
- 2. Sandy Bridge-E: Combining Two Pretty Popular Worlds
- 3. X79 Express And Another New Processor Interface
- 4. Overclocking Sandy Bridge-E
- 5. Hardware Setup And Benchmarks
- 6. Benchmark Results: PCMark 7
- 7. Benchmark Results: 3DMark 11
- 8. Benchmark Results: Sandra 2011
- 9. Benchmark Results: Content Creation
- 10. Benchmark Results: Productivity
- 11. Benchmark Results: Media Encoding
- 12. Benchmark Results: Metro 2033
- 13. Benchmark Results: F1 2010
- 14. Benchmark Results: Aliens Vs. Predator
- 15. Sandy Bridge-E: More Speed On The Desktop, But A Bigger Deal To Servers
It's always interesting to get hands-on time with unreleased hardware. We were recently able to benchmark Intel's upcoming Core i7-3960X CPU, comparing it to Core i7-990X, Core i7-2600K, and AMD's Phenom II X6. Will you be in line for Sandy Bridge-E?
There was a lot to like about Intel’s Sandy Bridge launch earlier this year. Single-threaded performance increased significantly at any given frequency. Quick Sync demonstrated commanding dominance over GPU-based transcoding from AMD and Nvidia. And, although I wasn’t over-enthused about paying extra for a K-series SKU, a mature 32 nm process easily facilitated clock rates approaching 5 GHz on air cooling.
Combined, all of those attributes took the spotlight off of Intel’s old (but still flagship) LGA 1366 interface. Even the subsequent Core i7-990X refresh, which threw six cores and a higher clock rate into the ring, wasn’t able to outperform the Core i7-2600K in enough test scenarios to warrant its £800 price tag. The very fastest (and most expensive) Sandy Bridge-based chip could satisfy 95% of enthusiasts at less than half of the cost.
The Gulftown design’s real redeeming quality was its core count advantage, which shone most brightly in well-threaded workstation apps. But really, that was pretty much it. We even went to great lengths to show the X58’s 36 lanes of PCI Express 2.0 weren’t a real advantage over Sandy Bridge’s 16 lanes in multi-GPU configurations through an exhaustive three-part series.
At the end of the day, we had to scratch our heads and wonder how many folks would be willing to spend almost over £550 more on Core i7-990X when Core i7-2600K was already so fast, and priced at £240.
But what if it was possible to cram what originally made Gulftown sexy into the Sandy Bridge mold? That’s exactly the premise behind Sandy Bridge-E, set to become the next enthusiast-oriented platform, replacing Gulftown and its LGA 1366 infrastructure.
More important than what Sandy Bridge-E is going to do on the desktop is what it’ll become in the server space. Truly, this is a design destined to drive Intel’s Xeon E5 family, comprised of 1P-, 2P-, and 4P-capable parts.
A Naming Convention, Revised
For the time being, Sandy Bridge-E is expected to reach enthusiasts in three different trims: the Core i7-3960X, the Core i7-3930K, and the Core i7-3820.
| Second-Gen Core i7 Processor Family | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Processor | Base Clock | Max. Turbo Clock | Cores / Threads | L3 Cache | Memory | Interface | TDP |
| Core i7-3960X *Unlocked | 3.3 GHz | 3.9 GHz | 6/12 | 15 MB | 4-channel DDR3-1600 | LGA 2011 | 130 W |
| Core i7-3930K *Unlocked | 3.2 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 6/12 | 12 MB | 4-channel DDR3-1600 | LGA 2011 | 130 W |
| Core i7-3820 *Partially Unlocked | 3.6 GHz | 3.9 GHz | 4/8 | 10 MB | 4-channel DDR3-1600 | LGA 2011 | 130 W |
| Core i7-2600K *Unlocked | 3.4 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 4/8 | 8 MB | 2-channel DDR3-1333 | LGA 1155 | 95 W |
| Core i7-2600 | 3.4 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 4/8 | 8 MB | 2-channel DDR3-1333 | LGA 1155 | 95 W |
| Core i7-2600S | 2.8 GHz | 3.8 GHz | 4/8 | 8 MB | 2-channel DDR3-1333 | LGA 1155 | 95 W |
Although the model names suggest that Intel might consider this a third iteration of its Core micro-architecture, the press decks I’ve seen clearly list the three new Sandy Bridge-E parts as “second-generation Core i7s.”
By now, we’ve had increasingly confusing names beaten over our heads by so many companies that the inelegance of “Core i7-3960X” bounces right off. Intel Core i7—OK, that part’s easy enough. The “3” is a generational reference, and the “960” is the actual model number. Incidentally, 960 doesn’t seem to compare favourably to the outgoing Gulftown-based 990. But Intel didn’t really give itself much room to manoeuvre there.
Even the letter suffixes are familiar by now. The “X” at the end of -3960X represents Intel’s Extreme Edition family—a designation generally reserved for one SKU at any given time at the top of the desktop stack. The “K” at the end of -3930K denotes lower-end, but still multiplier-unlocked models, also geared to enthusiasts. And the fact that the -3820 bears no modifier suggests it’ll follow in the footsteps of Core i7-2600 and i5-2500, offering limited overclockability (a handful of 100 MHz bins over and above the top Turbo Boost frequency, if history is any indication).
- Intel,
- Hardware,
- AMD,
- core-i7-3960x ,
- x79 ,
- performance
Latest CPU News
- 24/05 – Nvidia to Push Tablet Prices to $199 With Kai Platform
- 23/05 – AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel
- 22/05 – AMD Hitting The Casino Floor With Embedded R-Series
- 22/05 – Does Your AMD FX Platform BSOD with Steam? Read This.
- 20/05 – Intel To Support Cheap Ultrabooks With Low-Cost Celerons
Latest CPU reviews
- 24/05 – Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- 22/05 – Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- 15/05 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 14/05 – Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
- 23/04 – Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up From Sandy Bridge

It's a shame Deus Ex: Human Revolution wasn't included in the benchmark testing since we know CPU plays a very big role in the FPS the game can deliver. Other than that, interesting article
On the "Hardware Setup and Benchmarks" page, please correct the "Active cores" row with the rest of the table. It should be 1/2 active cores have 6 TB bins and 5/6 have 3 TB bins. After all, it's with 1 active core that 3.9GHz is allowed.
Bad luck I can't afford to buy any of these Sandy-E chipsets yet. The Benchmarks ain't too bad either.
too bad its likely to cost three to four times what the current sandy bridge setup costs (a 2600K for example...)
Hrm, so basically a little bit of improvement, but mostly extra pci-express lanes, and 2 extra cores, along with additional power draw... Think i'll stick to my 2600k until ivybridge comes out and see what that brings.
Hrm, so basically a little bit of improvement, but mostly extra pci-express lanes, and 2 extra cores, along with additional power draw... Think i'll stick to my 2600k until ivybridge comes out and see what that brings.
You forgot about the additional 2 chanels of RAM. Consider 4 identical modules. With LGA1155, the additional 2 modules (3 and 4) offer only additional RAM, but do not affect performance. On LGA2011, the additional 2 modules also increase memory access speed (think about a 4-lane highway vs 2-lane).
You forgot about the additional 2 chanels of RAM. Consider 4 identical modules. With LGA1155, the additional 2 modules (3 and 4) offer only additional RAM, but do not affect performance. On LGA2011, the additional 2 modules also increase memory access speed (think about a 4-lane highway vs 2-lane).
That's cool, except I have 2 sticks of 4gb's, I still can't see a need to go beyond 8gb (at home at least). Despite this though, looking at the benchmarks is incredibly disappointing, clock for clock it's generally the same as the 2600k, the only improvement is if something requires 6 cores... For gaming, we all know the additional pci express lanes even in crossfire makes very little difference, maybe a bit more in quadfire, but still, not sure if it's worth it
I am more concerned if I should start my milling machine for a new copper brick matching the new socket and lineup. We are back at 130W TDP guys. The last generation on that TDP was less than forgiving on air cooling. Or, should it be no concern? Still, that i7-2600k is still crushing the bang-per-buck charts. The new chip should be smashing the previous ones with over 20% difference; instead they are trading punches here and there.
From my POV, the 2600k is still the best upgrade right now.
You forgot about the additional 2 chanels of RAM. Consider 4 identical modules. With LGA1155, the additional 2 modules (3 and 4) offer only additional RAM, but do not affect performance. On LGA2011, the additional 2 modules also increase memory access speed (think about a 4-lane highway vs 2-lane).
Hey dude,
Hate to break it to you but if you don't need all that memory bandwidth then it's like buying a Ferrari to pootle about town - at 30mph.
Don't forget that for regular Desktop CPU stuff (web browsing, gaming, etc.) it's memory latency that counts - not bandwidth...
CPU Architecture #101
Large amounts of RAM is great for HD Video editing and even more so for the big sample libraries people who make music on their PC use (eg. NI Kontakt, Vienna Symphonic Library, Synthogy Ivory).
It would be great if all future CPU benchmarks included the DAWbench benchmark. Especially those that feature products not targeted at gamers but at creative people.
Hey dude,
Hate to break it to you but if you don't need all that memory bandwidth then it's like buying a Ferrari to pootle about town - at 30mph.
Don't forget that for regular Desktop CPU stuff (web browsing, gaming, etc.) it's memory latency that counts - not bandwidth...
CPU Architecture #101
Except that the examples you gave, even memory latency does not affect it much. It's hidden pretty good behing cache.
But turn to compiling a big project on an SSD(like Android 4 which they say requires 16GB or RAM), and the additional 2 channels give a nice boost. Also video compression scales good with bandwidth.
And those that have the money and go for "Extreme", those would drive a Ferrary in town at 30mph (ok, maybe 60 if traffic is light).