Don't like the snow? You can make a bookmark with the following text instead of a url: javascript:snowStorm.toggleSnow(). Clicking it will toggle the snow on and off.
Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Sandy Bridge - Just how sandy are they?

FrugusFrugus PodcasterRegistered User regular
I ordered an XPS 17 (XPS 1701X) no later than Thursday and then I heard about how a newer model (XPS 1702X) was just around the corner. In fact, maybe even tomorrow.

One of the bigger changes is that it will use Sandy Bridge Processors which are claimed to be 17% faster clock for clock. At least that's what WiKi said, and of course, the internet has been known to lie. Whatever the case is I obviously don't know what I'm talking about.

My purchase was made with considerable instant savings and I'm not entirely sure they will apply once the new model is released. The question is, is it worth the wait? Is it worth the extra money? Etc...

At the very least I'll go to bed knowing a little more. Google has not provided much 'insight' if you know what I mean, but then again this looks like it's a very recent development and has only been (barely) available to the public, so I'm forced to ask around on forums.

Frugus on

Posts

  • noobertnoobert Registered User
    edited January 2011
    In reality, I doubt most people would even notice the performance difference.

    What kind of things are you using this laptop for? 17% may matter if you are doing a whole load of encoding/decoding, but for gaming/general use, I wouldn't worry about it.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Also doesn't Sandy Bridge have some DRM bullshit built right into the chipset?

  • TychoCelchuuuTychoCelchuuu ___________PIGEON _________San Diego, CA Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    They're fairly sandy. They are comprised largely of silicon (sand), in fact.

  • SpudgeSpudge Registered User
    edited January 2011
    Sandy Bridge is pretty f'n awesome

    Trust me on this

    Play With Me
    Spoiler:
  • FrugusFrugus Podcaster Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    Spudge wrote: »
    Sandy Bridge is pretty f'n awesome

    Trust me on this

    What would make it that awesome exactly?
    noobert wrote:
    In reality, I doubt most people would even notice the performance difference.

    What kind of things are you using this laptop for? 17% may matter if you are doing a whole load of encoding/decoding, but for gaming/general use, I wouldn't worry about it.

    I'll be gaming a lot, unless I happen to end up further in my programing class (going back to college thing).

  • SpudgeSpudge Registered User
    edited January 2011
    Frugus wrote: »
    Spudge wrote: »
    Sandy Bridge is pretty f'n awesome

    Trust me on this

    What would make it that awesome exactly?

    Other than the fact that apparently a design flaw has stopped production, there's a lot of things that make SB a lot better than Nehalem. Better architecture, support for more cores and threads, stronger voting algorithms, etc. It's evolutionary more than revolutionary, but still the chip is pretty awesome

    As far as SATA degradation, I've been testing some of these chips for [REDACTED] hours on [REDACTED] and haven't noticed any issues with SAS/SATA

    Play With Me
    Spoiler:
  • amnesiasoftamnesiasoft Thick Creamy Furry Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    It's the chipset, not the CPU itself causing these problems.

    steam_sig.png
  • Monster Robert!Monster Robert! Registered User
    edited January 2011
    Lets put it this way. Do you notice any differences between a 2.1ghz Mac vs a 2.4ghz model that you paid $400 more for?


    Get the one that saves you the most money. The extra "bump" in performance isn't worth the extra money.

  • SyphonBlueSyphonBlue Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
  • MuridenMuriden Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    SyphonBlue wrote: »
    Given the timeline of discovery, Intel didn’t delay getting around to actually letting its partners know about the problem. On the bright side that means Intel and its partners weren’t plotting against its end users to sweep this under the rug. On the down side, OEMs and motherboard manufacturers can’t be happy about this - they woke up to news of the recall at the same time you and I did.

    That has to be a hell of a way to wake up. "Wait we shipped defects on our boards and we didn't even do anything?

    MrGulio.332 - Lover of fine Cheeses. Replays
    301787-1.png
  • November FifthNovember Fifth Registered User regular
    edited January 2011
    I just canceled an order with Cyberpower. Kinda surprised since Intel has been sitting on Sandy Bridge for a while.

    Oh well, at least I can bump up to a gtx 560 once the new boards are ready in March.

    steam_sig.png
  • doczerodoczero Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    After reading up on the bug I think i would have bought one as is. How many people would really be affected if 3% of the 3GB sata ports failed within 3 years? (no laptops, very few desktop users.) The problem only cropped up in B stepping chipset silicon and only under high temperature, high voltage testing designed to simulate an aged transistor in an extreme environment. Of course that is if it is being represented factually. (most likely).

    So they pulled it all off market. Durn it, just sell me the "bad" motherboard for 20 bucks of so I can get folding on a 2600!

    =
    Where there is no love,
    Nothing is possible.
    =
  • Dark ShroudDark Shroud Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    I'm loving my new Core i7 2600k. If you already have an i7 the new Sandy Bridge CPUs aren't worth it. If you can wait until Ivy Bridge I would recommend that or at least until z68 chipset is out.

  • electricitylikesmeelectricitylikesme Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    doczero wrote: »
    After reading up on the bug I think i would have bought one as is. How many people would really be affected if 3% of the 3GB sata ports failed within 3 years? (no laptops, very few desktop users.) The problem only cropped up in B stepping chipset silicon and only under high temperature, high voltage testing designed to simulate an aged transistor in an extreme environment. Of course that is if it is being represented factually. (most likely).

    So they pulled it all off market. Durn it, just sell me the "bad" motherboard for 20 bucks of so I can get folding on a 2600!

    Businesses don't like buying hardware with a definite failure rate. 3% of system hard drives losing all performance is going to fuck with failure rates of a lot of RAID systems.

  • FreiFrei Registered User regular
    edited February 2011
    My system using sandy bridge only uses the 6gb ports so I am completely unaffected and extremely satisfied with the CPU. SHRUG.

    here comes a feeling you thought you'd forgotten.
  • noobertnoobert Registered User
    edited February 2011
    Frugus wrote: »
    noobert wrote:
    In reality, I doubt most people would even notice the performance difference.

    What kind of things are you using this laptop for? 17% may matter if you are doing a whole load of encoding/decoding, but for gaming/general use, I wouldn't worry about it.

    I'll be gaming a lot, unless I happen to end up further in my programing class (going back to college thing).

    I wouldn't worry about it then. The current chip will be more than enough for any college level programming, and I doubt it will be bottle-necking your graphics card when it comes to gaming.

Sign In or Register to comment.