My guess is he meant VT-d - virtualization for directed I/O, which almost certainly will not be in the K versions of Ivy just as it is not in the K versions of Sandy.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Prices of Ivy Bridge Desktop CPUs
- Thread starter HardOCP News
- Start date
My guess is he meant VT-d - virtualization for directed I/O, which almost certainly will not be in the K versions of Ivy just as it is not in the K versions of Sandy.
mzs_biteme
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2001
- Messages
- 1,595
Non-K parts have, and will continue supporting VT-x and VT-d, so they're not losing anything to AMD.....
![Zarathustra[H]](https://cdn.hardforum.com/data/avatars/m/9/9298.jpg?1715876891){kind=avatar}
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 39,064
If gaming is what you are interested in, then why are you concerned with core count?
When Ivy bridge - E comes out we will have 6 cores, and possibly 8 if they have gotten power consumption under control enough from the SB-E.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 39,064
The leaked benchmarks on stock parts I have seen thus far all show just over a 5% gain in IPC, with any remaining gains coming from increased turbo speeds (which don't really matter if you plan on overclocking)
I'm cautiously optimistic for 5+Ghz overclocks on these parts, but we will have to wait and see, cause it is - after all - a new type of process with a new type of tri-gate transistor. At this point its tough to tell how good the production process is and if that will allow early parts to hit high overclocks or not.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 39,064
Non-K parts have, and will continue supporting VT-x and VT-d, so they're not losing anything to AMD.....
Even so, I think there are very very very few people - comparatively speaking - who use virtualization, especially VT-d on non server-grade parts.
I occasionally fire up a VM to test a new OS and stuff like that, but I don't think I'd really miss it if it were gone.
Something that occurred to me recently as a couple folks I know informed me in a very enthusiastic manner about their newly purchased 6 core desktop. Of course further investigation and those desktops are AMD, as suspected. This makes me think though about just how many "regular" folk will pass over intel machines when they are looking at retailers, whether online or B&M, and pick an AMD 6 core over an Intel Sandy or Ivy Bridge quad core.
My bro-in-law took it rather personally when I told him he probably did not make the wisest purchase getting that AMD 6 core desktop.
It will be interesting to see if this actual impacts sales to a significant degree over the next year.
My bro-in-law took it rather personally when I told him he probably did not make the wisest purchase getting that AMD 6 core desktop.
It will be interesting to see if this actual impacts sales to a significant degree over the next year.
Users would gain a much more noticeable performance increase just going to a ssd rather then upgrading their current i7/i5 to ivy bridge. I just don't know how anyone should expect much upward movement, we are like in the end of p4 days but with 4 cores. The only path is more cores again as SBE tries to do, just need lower powered cores.
The only slow crap on my computer is bloated single threaded programs which probably have wait statements in the code.
The only slow crap on my computer is bloated single threaded programs which probably have wait statements in the code.
Zarathustra[H]
Extremely [H]
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2000
- Messages
- 39,064
If IB can hit 5ghz+ like SB can hit 4.5ghz+ with minimal effort, then I'll get myself a drop in upgrade 3770k. That way I'll be gaining some clock for clock performance, overclock performance, and 4 threads. Overall 15-20% improvement along with HT would sell me. From there I'd probably be on LGA1155 for a few years.