
Using the same GeForce GTX Titan as our Haswell launch coverage, we see that Ivy Bridge-E doesn’t do anything for single-card graphics performance in 3DMark 11 (which is what we’d expect, given that both platforms yield a full 16 lanes at 8 GT/s).
In contrast, the processor-bound Physics module demonstrates a small bump in favor of the Core i7-4960X over -3970X. More pronounced is the -4960X’s 30%+ improvement over Core i7-4770K.

There’s very little gain over the Sandy Bridge-E flagship in SiSoftware’s Sandra Arithmetic sub-test.

The same goes for the Multimedia benchmark. In fact, Core i7-4770K yields better numbers in the integer component thanks to its AVX 2 support.

It’s possible that we could get more memory bandwidth from Core i7-4960X using a quad-channel DDR3-1866 memory kit. However, we only had access to 1600 MT/s for this story, so we used the same G.Skill kit from our Core i7-4770K launch piece. We already know this platform isn’t particularly bandwidth-constrained on the desktop, though, so we don’t expect any real-world benefit beyond this 41 GB/s mark.

When we sort by L1 cache throughput, the Haswell architecture’s doubled theoretical max yields almost 1 TB/s, while Ivy Bridge-E ducks in under 800 GB/s. On paper, Haswell should also push twice as much L2 bandwidth as well. We haven’t observed this yet, though. In contrast, Core i7-4960X, sporting six cores with 256 KB of L2 each, pushes more aggregate bandwidth, nearly hitting 500 GB/s. The extra cores also help with shared L3 bandwidth, given more stops along the ring bus.
Way to look mature and professional Intel. Make some real performance advances and you'll get more positive reviews.
I do suggest you do some homework. This would be a good start.
I do suggest you do some homework. This would be a good start.
Thanks for posting - really interesting read! I wonder how many developers are using the patched compiler... and I wonder if big developers like Gearbox get any encouragement from Intel to not use the patched compiler. Obviously it's beneficial for any developer if their software can reach a wider audience. I've neutralised the thumbs down on your first post by the way with a thumbs up :-)
I do suggest you do some homework. This would be a good start.
Yeh, the Intel compiler continues to be a big issue... AMD CPUs will continue to be very popular for Linux users...
last night I DOWN clocked my old C2Q9650 to 2Ghz (1333fsb, 6x multiplier) from it's overclock of 4Ghz. speedstepping takes that down further to a reported 1.3Ghz.
power, heat, noise, are all much reduced.
in yet skyrim, farcry3, yadda yadda are all fine?
i've not actually run the numbers regarding frame rate, but 20% cpu useage on all cores, and 97% GPU useage on a GTX670. i think i see my bottleneck. and it doesn't seem to be the CPU.... i guess from my point of view, my CPU upgrade days are over?
I'm not too sure about that. The next generation of games will be optimized for eight threads due to the relatively weak AMD CPU in the XBOX1 and PS4. But hey, it could be that all you really need is a quad core made in the past few years.
We'll see.
The GNU compiler is slightly better value...
Intel Linux Compiler Comparison chart