new Intel Sandy Bridge cpus

[kenmo]

The new Sandy Bridge cpus from Intel look promising... Currently three of my 4 computers are AMDs the most powerfull being an AMD X3 710...

I'm thinking of purchasing this cpu from Newegg... I5-2500k for $229.00

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=19-115-072

And this one for $214.00 (although they seem like the identical chip)

http://www.newegg.ca/Product/Product.aspx?Item=19-115-073

Anyone know how the on board Intel graphics (contingent on the purchase of a mobo supporting onboard graphics) would compare with my exisiting graphics card Nvidia GeForce 8500 GT?

I mostly use my computer for digital painting (Artrage, Painter), photo editing (Photoshop lements) and 3D modeling/rendering (Vue Complete ver 9, Sketchup, Hexagon 2.5, Wings3D, 3DCoat)... I play very little games...

[jman98]

Previous discussion here may be of interest to you.
https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/330298-Intel-SAndy-Bridge-manna-from-Heaven-or-monster-from-Hell

[jagabo]

All the benchmarks I've seen only compare Sandy Bridge to other integrated graphics. You'll have to piece those together with some reviews of the same programs with your 8500 GT. Tom's Hardware is probably a good place start. Unfortunately, the 8500 is old enough that it will be hard to find benchmarks with the same program. I suspect you'll find the performance of Sandy Bridge is roughly equivalent to the 8500 GT though.

[kenmo]

Forgot one thing... 3DCoat utilizes CUDA so it appears the onboard Intel graphics maybe a non-issue....

[mrswla]

I'm thinking of purchasing this cpu from Newegg... I5-2500k for $229.00
And this one for $214.00 (although they seem like the identical chip)

The 2500K is an unlocked chip. That basically means it's easier to overclock.

[Poppa_Meth]

I'm in desperate need of a new PC so I've been waiting for this latest chip to come out. Of course the next generation of the new architecture is due out later in the year so I'm in a real dilemma now. The one thing that worries me is all the talk about what basically amount to DRM built right into the new chips.

[deadrats]

The one thing that worries me is all the talk about what basically amount to DRM built right into the new chips.

do yourself a favor, stop listening to people that spread FUD about drm with SB, drm is implemented in software, the hardware is just used to enforce it. drm already exists in any modern OS and video card that supports hdcp for the playback of protected blu-rays.

buy a sandy bridge as soon as you can and never look back.

[jagabo]

We've long been on the slippery slope. What's one more step?

[mrswla]

buy a sandy bridge as soon as you can and never look back.

I'm considering it too, but there are a couple of things holding me up from doing it. I've heard that the unlocked chips (k branded) are only able to be overclocked on P67 mainboards. The H67 boards can use quick-sync to speed up encodes. Why can't there be the best of both: overclocking the cpu and enabling quick-sync for the fastest possible encodes?

Am I misinformed? If so, please enlighten me.

[Poppa_Meth]

I'm not listening to the talk about DRM yet. I've just heard mention of it. No time to really research it yet. Now what mrswla says gives me something else to look at.

[deadrats]

I'm considering it too, but there are a couple of things holding me up from doing it. I've heard that the unlocked chips (k branded) are only able to be overclocked on P67 mainboards. The H67 boards can use quick-sync to speed up encodes. Why can't there be the best of both: overclocking the cpu and enabling quick-sync for the fastest possible encodes?

here's the deal, the new P67 chipset features a discrete gpu (i.e. there's a gpu built into the motherboard), thus it doesn't support the integrated hd3000/2000 gpu. quick sync video requires that the integrated gpu be enabled (it seems to be intel's IPP encoder, accelerated by dedicated hardware built into the gpu). this means that it requires a chipset sans discrete gpu, which currently means H67 chipset.

as to why intel wouldn't enable/allow overclocking on the platform meant for video encoding, the answer should be obvious: overclocking and video encoding do not a good team make. intel is targeting everyone with QS, from the consumer markets to the pros and thus stability during an encoding session is of the utmost importance. pros don't o/c their systems, they just wait for the job to be done.

in all honesty, it's not that big a deal, o/c is for the hobbyist that uses software based encoders, o/c your cpu wouldn't do jack for encoding with QS, in fact i would expect the dual core i3's to perform identically to their quad core brethren.

if video is your primary concern, forget what you knew about overclocking, forget about software based encoders and get ready for the future of video.

[wulf109]

Intel will release a new Z68 chipset in the 2Q of 2011 that will allow overclocking with QS. Maybe you should wait for that.

[deadrats]

that thought you guys would be interested to hear that main concept has jumped on the QS bandwagon:

http://www.mainconcept.com/products/partner-products/intel/h264avc-encoder-sdk.html

[Poppa_Meth]

I'm considering it too, but there are a couple of things holding me up from doing it. I've heard that the unlocked chips (k branded) are only able to be overclocked on P67 mainboards. The H67 boards can use quick-sync to speed up encodes. Why can't there be the best of both: overclocking the cpu and enabling quick-sync for the fastest possible encodes?

here's the deal, the new P67 chipset features a discrete gpu (i.e. there's a gpu built into the motherboard), thus it doesn't support the integrated hd3000/2000 gpu. quick sync video requires that the integrated gpu be enabled (it seems to be intel's IPP encoder, accelerated by dedicated hardware built into the gpu). this means that it requires a chipset sans discrete gpu, which currently means H67 chipset.

as to why intel wouldn't enable/allow overclocking on the platform meant for video encoding, the answer should be obvious: overclocking and video encoding do not a good team make. intel is targeting everyone with QS, from the consumer markets to the pros and thus stability during an encoding session is of the utmost importance. pros don't o/c their systems, they just wait for the job to be done.

in all honesty, it's not that big a deal, o/c is for the hobbyist that uses software based encoders, o/c your cpu wouldn't do jack for encoding with QS, in fact i would expect the dual core i3's to perform identically to their quad core brethren.

if video is your primary concern, forget what you knew about overclocking, forget about software based encoders and get ready for the future of video.

So if my primary concern at this point is video encoding I'd be better off with the i7-2600 since i won't be overclocking, and the H67 board since I'd benefit from QS? Is this correct or am I reading this wrong?

[mrswla]

So if my primary concern at this point is video encoding I'd be better off with the i7-2600 since i won't be overclocking, and the H67 board since I'd benefit from QS? Is this correct or am I reading this wrong?

That's what I thought too. But according to some tests I've seen, the k chip on a p67 board overclocked provides quicker times.

And here. Except using MediaShow Espresso.

But my question is, how did they get QuickSync to run with a K chip on a P67 board?

[deadrats]

So if my primary concern at this point is video encoding I'd be better off with the i7-2600 since i won't be overclocking, and the H67 board since I'd benefit from QS? Is this correct or am I reading this wrong?

that's exactly what i'm saying, every major video encoding suite is set to feature QS support: roxio (quite possibly the best under $100 video software available), tmpg, cyberlink, arcsoft, main concept, sony, sorenson squeeze 7, corel, the list goes on.

@mrswla:

the benchmarks you linked to are all software based, they do not support QS thus clock speed will make a difference, though for the sake of stability you really should not be overclocking the cpu during encoding.

[DarrellS]

Seems to me that overclocking the CPU would be better for encoding H264 than overclocking the GPU. I would think that the 2500K on a P67 board would be better than a 2500 on a H67 board. If you want a cheap machine for watching HD then the H67 would be a good choice. For encoding, the unlocked overclocked 2500K on a P67 MB makes more sense to me.

As mentioned before, it would be ideal to be able to overclock both the GPU and the CPU.

I have no stability issues overclocking my Q6600 to 3.2Ghz and get much better encode speeds than running it at stock speed.

[mrswla]

though for the sake of stability you really should not be overclocking the cpu during encoding.

Stability of what? The CPU or the Encode?

[deadrats]

Stability of what? The CPU or the Encode?

with minor overclocking like the cpu does automatically, there shouldn't be a problem.

with aggressive overclocking however, i have seen systems that could reliably loop wprime, prime95 and 3dmark, choke during long encodes, to the point where the system hangs, the application freezes up or just flat out blue screens.

[Poppa_Meth]

I've done a little reading on the Z68 chipset and I think I may wait for that. It's not that far around the corner anyway. A few more months is worth the wait for the flexibility IMO. I've never overclocked much in the past but it's nice to have the ability should I choose to use it.