Sandy Bridge-E, the I7-3960X would be 47% faster than the I7 - 990 X


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Two charts published by the Donanimhaber.com site reveal the performance of the model of the future Sandy Bridge-E platform.Sandy Bridge-E will be the next round of top processors range from Intel using the new socket LGA-2011 from replace the set of processors on socket LGA-1366 for call back.


Currently high-end consists therefore of the I7-990 X EE (Extreme Edition). It is composed of six hearts with the support of the Hyper-Threading, or twelve Threads. He is running at 3.460 Mhz and monte 3.730 Mhz in Turbo Mode supported by 12 MB L3 cache. The memory controller manages the DDR3 on three channels at a frequency of 1066 Mhz. All for a TDP of 130 Watts.The leak is the I7-3960X EE (Extreme Edition). It will be with respect to him composed of six hearts with the support of the Hyper-Threading or twelve Threads also. He will be running at 3,300 Mhz and will rise to 3.900 Mhz mode Turbo, or nearly 4 GHZ! Backed up by a 15 MB L3 cache. The memory controller always bear the DDR3 but on four channels at a frequency of 1333 Mhz. The HRT will be the same or 130 Watts.
Tests on the first chart show that on Cinebench 11.5 the I7-3960X EE would be 13% more efficient than the I7-990 X, 12% more efficient on POV - Ray 3.7, 36% on the physics of 3D Mark 11 test score and finally 15% better on ProShow 4.5.The second graph shows a growth of 34% in Integer and 65% in decimal floating on SPEC CPU 2006, which measures the bandwidth memory.


It also shows that on the AVX instruction set tested by Sandra 2011 benchmark performance would be an increase of 92% in multimedia.
Regarding bandwidth memory, Sandra 2011 view Quad-Channel 111% higher performance than the Triple-Channel.The average of all these gains represent 47.25% of additional performance.


Still waiting for the end of the year, there was more than expected temperatures to warm us up with some less synthetic benchmarks, and see what would be the daily earnings.


busy

0 Comments:

Post a Comment