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
DrRap - Friday, August 27, 2010 - linkIt's Anand "intel" lal Shimpi.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, August 27, 2010 - linkI agree that single threaded performance is important to keep in mind. Sandy Bridge had a larger ILP boost than I expected. Final silicon with turbo enabled should address that even more.
We got into trouble chasing the ILP train for years. At this point both AMD and Intel are focused on thread level parallelism. I'm not sure that we'll see significant ILP gains from either party for quite a while now.
The socket move is silly, unfortunately there's nothing that can be done about that. AMD takes better care of its existing board owners, that's something we've pointed out in prior reviews (e.g. our Phenom II X6 review).
I'm not sure I'd call Sandy Bridge a kiddie chip however. It looks like it'll deliver great bang for your buck when it launches in Q1 regardless of how threaded your workload is.
Value scatterplots are a great idea, Scott does a wonderful job with them. We're going to eventually integrate pricing data with Bench (www.anandtech.com/bench) which should help you as well :)
ssj4Gogeta - Saturday, August 28, 2010 - linkI'm guessing USB 3.0 support will be introduced later with a chipset upgrade. Why are you so concerned with GHz when Sandy Bridge delivers more IPC? I think having better IPC instead of more GHz is better as you'll get potentially lower power consumption.
asmoma - Friday, August 27, 2010 - linkLets just hope AMD trhows in 80 gpu cores into ontario to bring this SB igp to shame(almost the same performance but less than 10w tdp). And lets also hope they throw in those 400 cores into Llano we have been hearing about.
mfago - Friday, August 27, 2010 - linkAny news on OpenCL support? I image Apple may hold off on a purely integrated GPU unless that is supported.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Friday, August 27, 2010 - linkSandy Bridge's GPU does not support OpenCL. This is strictly a graphics play, Intel doesn't have an announced GPU compute strategy outside of what it's doing with Larrabee.
DanNeely - Friday, August 27, 2010 - linkIs intel actually still doing anything with Larrabee on the gfx side? I thought they killed it on that end entirely and were looking at it strictly as a compute platform now.
Anand Lal Shimpi - Saturday, August 28, 2010 - linkCorrect - as of today the only Larrabee parts are for the HPC market. Didn't mean to confuse there :)
JonnyDough - Friday, August 27, 2010 - link"Correction, you'll be able to buy it next year, but you'll get to meet her today."
Sandy could be a boy too!
JonnyDough - Friday, August 27, 2010 - linkBy the way, is it a an it, or a girl? You can't have it both ways!