Intel Core i7-3770K

[Otto-matic]

Surprised there isn't a topic about this already.

With a lot of benchmarks flying around today, this one is looking very good. Seems to be a bit above the i7-2700K, but with less power usage and better on-board graphics (if you bother).

Wonder when they will start hitting our fair shores?

[tranquil]

Read about this chip on Anandtech this morning http://www.anandtech.com/show/5771/the- ... 70k-review

Does look pretty good. Goes well against the 3930K in discrete GPU benchmarks and is half the price. Not really worth an upgrade from a 2500K though, i thought they were going 8-core with Ivy but it seems that will be only for Ivy Extreme.

[steve_rogers42]

interesting reading so far, but i want to see more z77 board comparisons, i think anand had one up of a 2600k and a 3770 running of the same board and the differences....

Sad thing is it looks as if you have a highly clocked 2600k you dont have a reason to upgrade... Ivy doesnt cope well with heat/voltage.

[Otto-matic]

Dunno about the overclock. Bit-tech got both the 3770k and 2600k up to 4.8 GHz, neither would go higher.

I agree that it's not really worth it if you already have a 2600k or 2700k, but if you are building something new I would say they are better based on initial reviews.

[steve_rogers42]

Yea seems better and somewhat cheaper.

The cpu from the Anandtech overclocking/undervolting review showed that anything above 4.8 was a struggle heat/voltage wise.

It seems ivy doesn't respond as well to voltage as sandy did. The diagrams at the bottom where a voltage increase from 1.1 to 1.3 only netted 0.3ghz doesnt bode well, it does seem that the correct voltage for the processor will lead to an ok increase in mhz, just looks like finding that voltage might be a bit more tricky...

As for reasons why it might not OC as well, Overclocking has always been about getting the most out of the processor within reason. Gains is always the first to be put into perspective and putting the 3770 next to the 2600k it looks like this:

2600k: Standard 3.4ghz Turbo 3.8ghz 8mb cache and HT

3770K: Standard 3.5ghz Turbo 3.9ghz 8mb cache and HT

Now the 2600k is known to overclock to 4.8 around ~1.4volts from stock voltage around ~1.2. So for a 1Ghz increase over the Turbo speed only required 0.2v difference.

Anand's 3770K got to 4.8 around 1.3 volts from stock voltage of around ~1.1. This makes it a 900mhz increase over Turbo speed but requiring 0.2v to do so.

To add to the fact its at a 100mhz loss is the Heat factor. @ 4.8 the 3770 was reaching 95+ degrees, where as the 2600k was not.

I dare say it will turn out that Ivy will have a 'sweet spot' for voltage that will offer the greater returns for Mhz increase over heat/voltage.

Meanwhile its a hard decision to make a call on the 3770k, if your not overclocking the 3770K will do fine, but whats the point of getting a k series processor if the previous generation, the 2600k can overclock to the point that the new technologies in the 3770k cant make up for the difference?

onto the next review <3

[steve_rogers42]

Its seems its about on par with the move from a 920 to a 930...

interesting, Guru puts it as around ~10% difference up from the 2600K, hmmm

Want someone to do a clock for clock review of a 2600k and a 3770K on both z68 and z77... that might be interesting.

[PalZer0]

What I want to know is how the K series i5 compares against the 2500k.

Sent from my Transformer Prime TF201

[Disruptor4]

http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?mai ... 7_346_1184

They have ivy in stock, just not the 3770k.

[Otto-matic]

That's pretty expensive given wholesale is meant to be around the same as the 2700k.

Also looks like Overclockers.com has a good theory on why Ivy gets so much hotter than Sandy when overclocked. Instead of solder to the heat spreader, they used thermal paste.

[PalZer0]

That's really stupid of Intel. Why change what was working?

My guess is that it's not worth the expense to go from Sandy to Ivy.

[tranquil]

What I want to know is how the K series i5 compares against the 2500k.

Some reviews here:
http://hexus.net/tech/reviews/cpu/38421 ... vy-bridge/
http://www.techradar.com/reviews/pc-mac ... cleContent

Hardly any improvement over the 2500k, but would be a good choice for those wanting to build a new budget gaming PC now though, imo.

[steve_rogers42]

That's really stupid of Intel. Why change what was working?

Its Intels tick/tock scheme. Its Sandy at a lower fabrication process means it wont get as hot, unfortunatly it doesnt OC as well due to this, but what your getting is an overall better performer for watt per ghz at stock.

Its a bit of a disappointment to those looking to move to IB after skipping SB, but only if your are not overclocking. If your looking for a low power, good performing cpu, this one is the one to go for, if your looking to OC, give it 6-8 months.

[PalZer0]

I bet Intel won't be using thermal paste on the heat spreader again.

[Disruptor4]

That's really stupid of Intel. Why change what was working?

Its Intels tick/tock scheme. Its Sandy at a lower fabrication process means it wont get as hot, unfortunatly it doesnt OC as well due to this, but what your getting is an overall better performer for watt per ghz at stock.

Its a bit of a disappointment to those looking to move to IB after skipping SB, but only if your are not overclocking. If your looking for a low power, good performing cpu, this one is the one to go for, if your looking to OC, give it 6-8 months.

Actually IVB runs hotter at lower power rating.
I also really don't think waiting 6-8 months (for different steppings I assume) will fix/change much. If your system still handles well you may as well wait for haswell.
IVB is a good upgrade if it's not goin well however. Unless you're into serious overclocking, then not much point going SB over IVB