Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Intel Core i7 3770K Ivy Bridge Linux Performance

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by fuzz View Post
    I'm excited to see how the Piledriver and Trinity CPUs work out against this!
    i have high hopes on those piledriver cores since they should pack more raw horse power to deal with sandy/ivy bridge and crappy windows apps wich will translate in a huge boost for properly optimized applications and if you mix in there GCN that should provide a nice workhorse CPU for heavy compute apps using opencl.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by birdie View Post
      Without SB 2700K this comparison just doesn't make sense, because IB 3770K is its direct competitor in terms of price and CPU features (HT & frequency).
      HardOCP has the review you're looking for. Their conclusion? You can't put a piece of paper between the two.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
        bd problem is most software outhere is poorly threaded and/or with crappy cache management and/or barely uses SIMD at all(this applies to SB too though)
        Also, it probably doesn't help to market it as 8-core cpu, since it has worse performance than the previous generation 6-core cpu in most tests. Maybe they should have called it 4-cores with Instruction Hyper Multiplexing Turbo Parallel Power ModeTM or some other fancy marketing name. Look at it now: it's sold as an 8-core CPU at 3.6GHz and it's slower or equivalent to a 4-core i7. In some tests (games mostly) it's slower than i3 and that's dual core.

        Comment


        • #19
          CPU selection

          Thanks for the article!

          I found some of the article a bit unclear though. Some feedback on how it could have been clearer:
          1. I think there was an excessive number of CPUs being compared. Given that this site is not focused on over clocking, those variants should have been dropped. The excess number made some of the coloured graphs very difficult to read.
          2. As noted by others, it would have been good to have a 2700k as it is a more direct generation comparison
          3. I don't think the 3960X was not useful to have in the benchmarks with it's extra cores as it just confused the sandy bridge vs Ivy bridge results
          4. I would have liked a table of supported/unsupported CPU/chipset features under Linux to make support status clearer

          Thanks!

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by devius View Post
            Also, it probably doesn't help to market it as 8-core cpu, since it has worse performance than the previous generation 6-core cpu in most tests. Maybe they should have called it 4-cores with Instruction Hyper Multiplexing Turbo Parallel Power ModeTM or some other fancy marketing name. Look at it now: it's sold as an 8-core CPU at 3.6GHz and it's slower or equivalent to a 4-core i7. In some tests (games mostly) it's slower than i3 and that's dual core.
            well i give ya that AMD marketing team aren't the brightest bulb of the box(could be a management or upper dogs issue tho) but like i said when you properly optimize your code to use AVX/FMA4/XOR/aes-SI/etc bulldozer fulfill most of his promises and the performance is outstanding for 200$ or less (i would love bandwith memory fixes and maybe a bigger l2 cache).

            AMD bulldozer is an excellent processor for heavy duty task and was designed for that, the problem is 95% of the apps outthere are barely threaded and almost none of that 95% uses SIMD let alone proper cache usage and in the other 5% most apps use Intel C/C++ compiler witch (intentionally) select the most fucked up trashy unoptimized compile route possible on AMD processors. So AMD is in a pretty bad position here since AMD processor need a lot more horse power to reach a comparative level of performance in the apps it can shine <----(don't ask me links use google you will be impressed of how nasty is the performance hit when using intel compiler showing and AMD cpu and when you hack it to mask you AMD cpu as an intel CPU)

            the way i see it BD is a future proof design and i infere AMD is looking to get ride of many slow/legacy crap from the x86 world from their cpu's but since most apps still heavily the 486 parts of the CPU and not the latest much more optimized route due the reasons previously mentioned they need to mantain acceptable levels of performance for both worlds hoping that this trend will change and apps will adapt to use these new much more efficients techs in the mainstream market.

            so yes today SB/IB will be faster than BD/PD in most workloads but is not cuz a crappy design but more the reasons i stated, but if you take the time to code some optimized example in SB and BD you will see another picture entirely.

            in the case of games you are 150% wrong if you even believe mainstream games are state of art code uber optimized to exploit the latest drop of performance of your PC (CPU/GPU), at the contrary is probably the most hackish crappy code you will see in your life, let alone proper scalability or threading/etc.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
              and in the other 5% most apps use Intel C/C++ compiler witch (intentionally) select the most fucked up trashy unoptimized compile route possible on AMD processors. So AMD is in a pretty bad position here since AMD processor need a lot more horse power to reach a comparative level of performance in the apps it can shine <----(don't ask me links use google you will be impressed of how nasty is the performance hit when using intel compiler showing and AMD cpu and when you hack it to mask you AMD cpu as an intel CPU)
              Yup I've read about it... weren't several lawsuits filed (and won) against Intel because of this? I think it's still happening, but Intel has enough money to cover it up. Intel can be very, very evil.

              EDIT:
              And it's not just for AMD CPUs. The Intel compiler would limit code on all non-Intel CPUs, including VIA, etc.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by jrch2k8 View Post
                when you properly optimize your code to use AVX/FMA4/XOR/aes-SI/etc
                Truth be told, when you properly optimize your code to any of those extensions, you get amazing results on any processor that supports them .

                Comment


                • #23
                  @jrch2k8 I have to agree with most of what you said especially since console games are ported something ugly to PC not to mention we're using Interpreted code for everything horraayy!

                  I would of loved to see my lowly 3870k stomp the hell out of these new processors with a IGP only shootout

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    How did you get an Ivy Bridge CPU so early??? Lucky bastard!

                    I can't even find one online. ANYWHERE! They literally are not in stores.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by allquixotic View Post
                      How did you get an Ivy Bridge CPU so early??? Lucky bastard!

                      I can't even find one online. ANYWHERE! They literally are not in stores.
                      The hardware review press generally gets sent free samples before anyone can actually buy them. This allows them to do exactly what Michael did, which is to publish articles on release day extolling how great the hardware is, so people like us start drooling and getting ready to fork over cash as soon as possible after release (which is when the prices are the highest and there are no sales or deals at all).

                      Marketing is a wonderful, powerful, evil thing.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        It's not fully correct. You could already buy it for >1 week or so. Some dealers just sold em as soon as they got the chips But now it should be easy to get those chips.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by elanthis View Post
                          The hardware review press generally gets sent free samples before anyone can actually buy them. This allows them to do exactly what Michael did, which is to publish articles on release day extolling how great the hardware is, so people like us start drooling and getting ready to fork over cash as soon as possible after release (which is when the prices are the highest and there are no sales or deals at all).

                          Marketing is a wonderful, powerful, evil thing.
                          Actually, while I am extremely excited about geeky things like tri-gate transistors and PCI-E 3.0 and USB 3.0, I'm still not convinced that moving to a "Mainstream" Ivy Bridge box right now would be a good move for me. Ivy Bridge rings false to my ears, at least this initial release; I think I need to wait for Ivy Bridge-EP which are their "Enthusiast Performance" chips due (much ) later this year.

                          Michael's Windows-side Release Day Review Site Competitor, Toms Hardware

                          Originally posted by Toms Hardware
                          The bottom line for enthusiasts is that Ivy Bridge’s IPC-oriented improvements alone are not compelling enough to warrant an upgrade from Sandy Bridge chips running at similar frequencies. {emphasis theirs}
                          Well, let me take a step back and state where I stand.
                          • Desktop system, full ATX but a "mini tower" (I don't need 9 hard drive bays with a full ATX tower)
                          • I use just about every piece of software that exists. Windows, Linux, games, video encoding, word processing, compiling large codebases, watching HD video, watching stereoscopic 3d video, you name it. Spend about 6 days of the week on the Linux side of the house (always a very recent / beta distro ), but I have been dual booting for years because I can't quite fully eliminate Windows.

                          Hardware spill:
                          • Core i7 920 "Bloomfield" (first-generation Core i7; falls into the "performance" category but not the "enthusiast" category)
                          • 16GB 1066 MHz Dual-Channel DDR3, although I'd be willing to re-purchase triple-channel or quad-channel memory when I next upgrade
                          • Asus P6T Deluxe, which is the Intel X58 Express chipset -- basically an enthusiast high-end mobo
                          • A smattering of Western Digital SATA 3Gb/s HDDs, variously connected by internal SATA or eSATA to an external enclosure. All 7200rpm with 32MB or 64MB cache, sizes varying from 2TB to 500GB (currently only using a 2TB and a 1.5TB for most tasks). About five disks in total, I think, but most of them are idle 95% of the time. I have my main Linux desktop on the 2TB, and my main Windows desktop on the 1.5TB. Naturally I can mount NTFS-3g from Linux, but I can't mount EXT4 with extents from Windows.
                          • Corsair HX-1000 PSU, which fully supports PCI-E 2.1 (dunno about 3.0) and is powerful and reliable enough to probably run GTX 680 in SLI. Super reliable and the most expensive PSU on the market when I bought it 3-4 years ago
                          • Brand new Sapphire Radeon HD7970, picked it up about a month ago now? Couldn't have been much longer since it just launched recently...

                          Things that make me happy about my current system:
                          • Absolutely powers through games, because most games go easy on the CPU but aren't afraid to tax the GPU. That's fine; I've got probably the best single-chip GPU out there, so bring it on.
                          • GPU gets very good OpenCL performance on benchmarks, especially workloads tuned to primarily torture the GPU and not really the CPU or memory or disk.
                          • Daily computing tasks such as anything web browser-related, word processing, etc. work as well as I want them to, and I know that faster specs won't make this any more enjoyable or productive because it's already lightning fast.
                          • Virtualization performance with VMware Workstation is good, as long as I'm not doing anything crazy in the guest. I've been known to play with kernel code in a VM, because I'm loathe to have my disks repeatedly parking their heads as I turn the system on and off due to my bad coding practices (I'd be rebooting/power cycling a lot if I were doing kernel devel on the physical box)

                          Things that make me about my current system:
                          • Realistic OpenCL workloads are bottlenecked by the non-GPU parts of the system: for I/O bound (disk, memory) or CPU bound workloads, the GPU basically sits there snoring at 0 - 10% utilization while the rest of the system catches up. My GPU completely outclasses everything else in my system. I want to change that.
                          • My 1.5TB and 2TB commodity SATA 3Gb/s hard disks are nothing special, at your typical 7200rpm and in a JBOD configuration (I don't have a hardware RAID controller and I dislike software RAID). I/O performance is very limited for some of my more special workloads, like video encoding and live capture.
                          • My memory bandwidth sucks! I wanted a lot of RAM for virtualization and video processing, but I couldn't shell out the cash for 1600 MHz triple channel RAM, which both my current CPU and motherboard support. So I'm getting pretty poor performance out of video encoding because of that, combined with the poor disk throughput.
                          • I want USB 3.0! A packetized protocol that can go faster than SATA II... wooooow. I'm salivating. I might splurge for an SSD or a hybrid disk and do my video processing on that, to eliminate the disk bottleneck. Just a thought.
                          • I want PCI-E 3.0! My video card supports it, but it's downgraded to PCI-E 2.1 compatibility mode right now, because my mobo/CPU doesn't support PCI-E 3.0.

                          Things that make me about the first batch of Ivy Bridge:
                          • Don't want no integrated graphics, mmkay? This is a workstation/power desktop. I don't have room on my CPU die for integrated graphics. I have a $580 graphics card dedicated to graphics. I don't need more graphics. I need CPU throughput, and ridiculous amounts of it. Even if I could get the graphics core of Ivy Bridge simultaneously executing my OpenCL workload alongside my GPU, it wouldn't amount to a fart in a collander in terms of performance, because the 7970 sooooo incredibly out-classes Ivy Bridge's graphics core in terms of compute power.
                          • I want at LEAST triple channel RAM for the memory bandwidth, if not quad channel. Trust me, compiling and video encoding -- two tasks that are becoming increasingly common for me -- will gobble that dual channel memory bandwidth right up. Why have a super-fast CPU if it spends all of its time waiting for space on the memory controller? These first Ivy Bridge chips are exclusively dual channel.
                          • Couldn't they have at least splurged for a 6-core in the initial release? 4 really powerful cores is well and good, but I can actually use a larger number of threads, you know. Compiling is an obvious one, so is video encoding, and -- heck -- the way Chrome's going these days, you may as well give each tab the better part of a core. I've got background tabs right now eating up 1-3% CPU apiece, idle. Whew. Oh, and being able to actually multitask on the host with a guest VM doing something interesting is going to take more power than I've got -- right now I pretty much have to choose between a busy host and a busy guest, can't have both.
                          • As shown by Michael's benchmarks, any workload that scales well with threads is going to cause the previous-generation Sandy Bridge EP processors to obliterate these first Ivy Bridge chips.

                          Things that make me in general:
                          • While a Sandy Bridge EP processor like the 3930K would be right down my alley in terms of price, L3 cache, memory bandwidth and number of cores, it falls short in the arenas of USB 3.0 and PCI-E 3.0. So even if I got one of those motherboards that supports USB 3.0 and PCI-E 3.0 through an on-board chipset, I've found those chipsets to be generally buggier and slower than having these critical components on-die with the CPU. I trust Intel with these important tasks much more than I trust an Asus or Asrock. Put them on the CPU, pleez. Oh, wait -- that's Ivy Bridge
                          • The 3930K would be my "right now" processor, but I'd have massive Ivy Bridge EP envy when it lands. Have you guys heard of the engineering sample 10-core CPU with hyperthreading? That's 20 threads! And I'm sure each one is sizzling hot with at least a 130 W TDP (like Sandy Bridge EP), quad channel DDR3, and all the goodies. That's what I really want. But it isn't here, yet.

                          I guess I can hold on with my Bloomfield box until Ivy Bridge EP arrives, but I've got money now, and an established familial hand-me-down system, and the person who is going to be the recipient of my Bloomfield is chomping at the bit to get rid of his (by now) antiquated Core 2 Quad box with a GT200-era mid-range GeForce.

                          Also, I'm a little worried that the price gouging on the Ivy Bridge EP stuff is going to be so intense that I might not be able to afford it until it's already well into its sweet spot of the lifespan. I'm thinking, you know, $400 motherboards, $800 CPUs (and not even the top-end one), and RAM that you can throw away another $800 - $1000 on. I'm keeping my GPU, so that's a load off my shoulders, but this stuff is really going to bleed me dry if I go Ivy EP.

                          So, with this insanely long and rambling post coming to a close, what are your opinions? Do you think I should jump ship and get Ivy Bridge now, which would basically mean buying a 3770K and a Panther Point mobo? Should I settle for the dual channel and save a few bucks, maybe the better to spend on a SATA 6Gb/s SSD?

                          Or, should I wait until god-knows-when to grab the Holy Grail of workstation computing in our time, also known as Ivy Bridge EP?

                          Do you think I'll be able to resist my impulsive urges to buy Ivy now, or will I just order it and beat myself up over the dual channel RAM as I patiently wait for videos to encode and compiles to finish for the next 2-3 years?

                          TELL ME THE ANSWER TO THIS TERRIBLE CONUNDRUM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Most users oc the i7-920, you did not? When you don't use the integrated gfx you don't get much from faster ram, so you could still use your ddr3-1066 rams. But your chipset was definitely NOT for dual channel, but for triple channel optimizied, so you lost speed with only 2 modules. Next thing: you can certainly access ext4 (readonly) using win and

                            http://www.ext2fsd.com/

                            For my usecases this is enough, but depends on what you do. For PCI-E 3.0 a new Nv GTX 680 could use it, but in your example you said you would like to use SLI. The Z77 chipset can use only 8 lanes then, but your X58 chipset provides 2 x 16x so in SLI mode the X58 definitely provides the same bandwith.

                            Then usb 3.0 on Z77 and so: the difference to a very cheap 2-port nec addon card is not worth to get it. i have got nec 2-port and via 4-port addon cards. the via ones are definitely much more painful, dont get those 4port.

                            If you already oc your i7-920 i see no real reason to change the system. Replacing the gfx cards and adding a 3rd ram module and maybe an addon card for usb 3.0 would be smarter.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Ivy Bridge contains DRM. Still

                              Is it only me who cares about "DRM inside" "feature" of Ivy Bridge?
                              Intel calls it "Intel Insider", but it is no more than marketing cover.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Kano View Post
                                Most users oc the i7-920, you did not?
                                Nope, my 920 isn't OCed. Maybe I should burn it up before I hand it down, I'm sure it's got plenty of life left in it if I don't OC it Wonder how much more perf I can get if I OC it and whether it's worth the risk... I only have the standard CPU fan on it although my case's cooling fans are many and large (240mm and several 120mm).

                                Originally posted by Kano View Post
                                When you don't use the integrated gfx you don't get much from faster ram, so you could still use your ddr3-1066 rams. But your chipset was definitely NOT for dual channel, but for triple channel optimizied, so you lost speed with only 2 modules.
                                I know. When I first got my i7-920 and this motherboard, I slotted 6 GB of DDR3 1066 Triple-Channel. They didn't have capacities back then like they do today, so getting more wasn't really feasible (or at least not economical). Nowadays it's dirt cheap to get 16GB of dual channel, but still expensive to get 16GB of triple channel (about twice the price!).

                                Originally posted by Kano View Post
                                Next thing: you can certainly access ext4 (readonly) using win and

                                http://www.ext2fsd.com/
                                Oh, this does support extents now? Used to be that if you enabled extents, ext2fsd wouldn't be able to read your filesystem, or would break it if it did...

                                Originally posted by Kano View Post
                                For PCI-E 3.0 a new Nv GTX 680 could use it, but in your example you said you would like to use SLI. The Z77 chipset can use only 8 lanes then, but your X58 chipset provides 2 x 16x so in SLI mode the X58 definitely provides the same bandwith.
                                I don't actually want to use SLI, I was just saying that I can technically support it with my PSU, and there's room in my case. But no. And I'm not changing away from my HD7970

                                Originally posted by Kano View Post
                                Then usb 3.0 on Z77 and so: the difference to a very cheap 2-port nec addon card is not worth to get it. i have got nec 2-port and via 4-port addon cards. the via ones are definitely much more painful, dont get those 4port.

                                If you already oc your i7-920 i see no real reason to change the system. Replacing the gfx cards and adding a 3rd ram module and maybe an addon card for usb 3.0 would be smarter.
                                Thanks, I'll think about maybe getting the NEC one. What's so bad about the VIA one? Crap drivers? (This would be about what I'd expect from VIA...)

                                I don't OC the 920, but I could try it and see if it doesn't die on me. I'm not going to replace my HD7970 for a loooong time so that's out of the question.

                                What really annoys me is that if I get triple channel RAM for my current platform now, I would have to upgrade to quad channel again when I eventually upgrade to Ivy Bridge EP... right? And I don't want to go to Sandy Bridge EP because it doesn't have the killer features I want. So I'm kind of stuck in the Bermuda Triangle here, where anything I do (even doing nothing at all) is annoying and detrimental. For this reason I'll probably just do nothing until Ivy Bridge EP, then upgrade to that.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X