Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 39

Thread: Intel Core i7 3770K Ivy Bridge Linux Performance

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Posts
    14,914

    Default Intel Core i7 3770K Ivy Bridge Linux Performance

    Phoronix: Intel Core i7 3770K Ivy Bridge Linux Performance

    Intel is finally announcing the first Ivy Bridge processors this morning. I have been extensively testing out the Intel Core i7 3770K, the current high-end Ivy Bridge processor, for the past few weeks under Ubuntu Linux. I have been extremely pleased with the Intel Core i7 Ivy Bridge processor under Linux with its phenomenal performance, power efficiency, and new features. This article is the first of many looking at the Linux performance of the new Intel Ivy Bridge processors.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=17282

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    449

    Default

    Excellent and extensive Michael - I'm looking forward to the graphics benchmarks!

    Thank you!

  3. #3

    Default

    The graphics article will be up in 2~3 hours. My battery is dieing and I still have about an hour en route to Seattle so once I'm on the ground and find a Starbucks I'll get to posting that.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    958

    Default

    Maybe it's better that way, the server can't stand for more load right now
    ## VGA ##
    AMD: X1950XTX, HD3870, HD5870
    Intel: GMA45, HD3000 (Core i5 2500K)

  5. #5

    Default

    What's up with all the Intel marketing slides (4 pages or so!), and why so much praise in this article? It's just a CPU, of course it's going to work well with Linux. And for most people modern CPUs have reached levels of performance that they don't really care about that anymore.

  6. #6

    Default

    wow I never realized bulldozer was so good just goes to show you windows and application code is just optimized for intel. Bulldozer was within usually 30% of ivy ridge with march native, pile driver is supposed to be a 25% improvement closing the gap significantly. Coupled with better graphics I'd say AMD is killing intel (at least on source linux distros) I can't wait to get a trinity notebook and install gentoo

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    6,634

    Default

    The selection of cpus to compare just miss one: i7-2600K or better i7-2700K (or i7-2600K @ i7-2700K clock speed). When you compare against i7-2700K it would be a 4% gain and against i7-2600 about 10%. It is not really good when you compare only against i5-2500K as that cpu has got no HT enabled. K cpus should be really easy to OC, other cpus can only raise the turbo multis +4 and a bit bclk. I would like to benchmark my i7-3770S but my board died - all i did was changing the boot order. (It was running at stock speeds, nothing oc.) One other aspect: the power usage was only tested together with a dedicated gfx card, that should be tested without for all cpus with integrated gfx core as well. Btw. it is also possible to OC the graphics core, my i7-3770S was set at 1150 by default, 1350 was possible without extra voltage, 1450 with 0.2v more. max clocks for my cpu have been 105.2*40 (40 only used for 3-1 core at full speed) without extra voltage, with 0.2v more i could use the full 105.2*43 (still only 39 for 4 cores the same time). But my cpu cooler was not good enough for permanent oc with extra voltage. One interesting aspect is when you set just the turbo modes for 4,3 and 2 cores active to the maximum you gain already a bit speed, but that resulted in +10C more heat (on full load) with my AC Freezer 7 Pro v2. So better use something bigger

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    492

    Default

    A disappointment, as expected. If it wasn't labeled, you couldn't tell Ivy Bridge apart from its predecessor. Same IPC rate, same power consumption. Better graphics, maybe, but I never use that.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    52

    Post

    Intel should really start making discrete GPUs. I'm sick and tired of waiting on AMD and especially Nvidia for their extremely sluggish, maimed, or nonexistent FOSS driver support.

  10. #10

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kano View Post
    The selection of cpus to compare just miss one: i7-2600K or better i7-2700K (or i7-2600K @ i7-2700K clock speed). When you compare against i7-2700K it would be a 4% gain and against i7-2600 about 10%. It is not really good when you compare only against i5-2500K as that cpu has got no HT enabled. K cpus should be really easy to OC, other cpus can only raise the turbo multis +4 and a bit bclk. I would like to benchmark my i7-3770S but my board died - all i did was changing the boot order. (It was running at stock speeds, nothing oc.) One other aspect: the power usage was only tested together with a dedicated gfx card, that should be tested without for all cpus with integrated gfx core as well. Btw. it is also possible to OC the graphics core, my i7-3770S was set at 1150 by default, 1350 was possible without extra voltage, 1450 with 0.2v more. max clocks for my cpu have been 105.2*40 (40 only used for 3-1 core at full speed) without extra voltage, with 0.2v more i could use the full 105.2*43 (still only 39 for 4 cores the same time). But my cpu cooler was not good enough for permanent oc with extra voltage. One interesting aspect is when you set just the turbo modes for 4,3 and 2 cores active to the maximum you gain already a bit speed, but that resulted in +10C more heat (on full load) with my AC Freezer 7 Pro v2. So better use something bigger
    The comparison was limited to the other CPUs available...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •