Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Results: Synthetics

Intel Core i7-4960X Preview: Ivy Bridge-E, Benchmarked
By

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.

Ask a Category Expert

Create a new thread in the UK Article comments forum about this subject

Example: Notebook, Android, SSD hard drive

Display all 13 comments.
This thread is closed for comments
  • 1 Hide
    MajinCry , 17 July 2013 10:44
    I wonder how the AMD proccies will perform in the synthetic benchmark when the CPUID has been masked with an intel CPUID. Wouldn't surprise me if the 8350 went neck and neck with the top i7.
  • 0 Hide
    mi1ez , 17 July 2013 12:23
    Wow. That was quite a disclaimer!
  • 0 Hide
    sam_p_lay , 17 July 2013 12:57
    Can the 5 watt saving really compensate for the huge cost of the upgrade? It would take a long time to pay that off.

    Quote:
    In fact, starting with our Haswell preview, the company started a policy of excluding us from certain discussions.


    Way to look mature and professional Intel. Make some real performance advances and you'll get more positive reviews.
  • 0 Hide
    JPNpower , 17 July 2013 15:04
    Maybe silicon is nearing the limit.
  • 1 Hide
    MajinCry , 17 July 2013 15:36
    @ Whoever thumbed my first comment down:

    I do suggest you do some homework. This would be a good start.
  • 0 Hide
    sam_p_lay , 17 July 2013 16:12
    Quote:
    @ Whoever thumbed my first comment down:

    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 :-)
  • 0 Hide
    bobwya , 18 July 2013 13:12
    Quote:
    @ Whoever thumbed my first comment down:

    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...
  • 0 Hide
    sam_p_lay , 18 July 2013 14:14
    Can the Intel compiler not be used to compile Linux binaries?
  • 0 Hide
    darksun9210 , 18 July 2013 14:53
    from a gaming point of view, i'm starting to wonder what i'd get out of an upgrade.
    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?
  • 0 Hide
    MajinCry , 18 July 2013 15:04
    @darksun9210

    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.
  • 0 Hide
    bobwya , 18 July 2013 22:24
    Quote:
    Can the Intel compiler not be used to compile Linux binaries?


    The GNU compiler is slightly better value... :pt1cable: 

    Intel Linux Compiler Comparison chart
  • 0 Hide
    sam_p_lay , 18 July 2013 22:52
    Haha wow. I assumed a compiler would be a free tool.
  • 0 Hide
    mironso , 5 September 2013 11:34
    Well, after reading this, seeing charts, this couple of seconds does not urge me to switch from i7-3970X to i7-4770K. Call me stupid, but I want more to be ready to make a switch.