Sandy Bridge overclocking

[KemoKa]

I was wondering...

Any particular reason why Sandy Bridge processors have been famous for just insane overclocking? I mean, is it just a superior thermal interface that they used, or what did they do?

[AlwaysFSX]

They were tougher chips, you could shove more power through em.

[yttrium]

were ... could

 

Are, and can.

 

:mellow:

 

Anyway, specifically, they run at slightly higher voltages, meaning you have a little more room to go under and over. They use fluxless solder under their heat spreader instead of the thermal paste found on Ivy Bridge and Haswell chips (heaven knows why they went back to paste after so many years). They aren't clocked very high to begin with, meaning they can be pushed further compared to stock than others.

 

Also, they just ran really cool. That can be attributed to process node, heat spreader insulation, and a number of other smaller factors.

 

Just a great series overall. The 2500k was the second coming of the Q6600.

[KemoKa]

Are, and can.

 

:mellow:

And really really want to...

[AlwaysFSX]

Are, and can.

 

:mellow:

Extinct, past tense.

[yttrium]

Extinct, past tense.

 

But they're not extinct, and still relevant. This isn't even a matter of someone trying to argue an old Core 2 Quad being relevant; you can still actually _buy_ Sandy chips brand new at Newegg and Amazon. First-party. And new motherboards are still manufactured that work with them. Ivy era chipsets, but they still support Sandy processors.

[AlwaysFSX]

But they're not extinct, and still relevant. This isn't even a matter of someone trying to argue an old Core 2 Quad being relevant; you can still actually _buy_ Sandy chips brand new at Newegg and Amazon. First-party. And new motherboards are still manufactured that work with them. Ivy era chipsets, but they still support Sandy processors.

LGA 1155 is has hit the end of its life cycle, and has already been replaced by two, almost three generations. Yes they're still relevant but there's no point of buying a Sandy chip because clock for clock they're still slower.

[yttrium]

clock for clock they're still slower

 

A very interesting article was published recently that basically boiled the performance difference down to less than 5% between top of the line Haswell and Sandy chips in regular workloads - and sometimes Sandy actually outperformed Haswell, not clock-for-clock but simply because it can clock higher. I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

Also, EOL is not extinct. The ability to buy them brand new at physical stores is exactly the opposite of extinct. It isn't feasible to sink the money into a brand new Sandy build, of course, but they still aren't extinct yet.

[swifty7]

yep!!  I'm still using the good'ol  2500k.  I might upgrade when Broadwell hits the market.

[AlwaysFSX]

A very interesting article was published recently that basically boiled the performance difference down to less than 5% between top of the line Haswell and Sandy chips in regular workloads - and sometimes Sandy actually outperformed Haswell, not clock-for-clock but simply because it can clock higher. I'll see if I can dig it up.

 

Also, EOL is not extinct. The ability to buy them brand new at physical stores is exactly the opposite of extinct. It isn't feasible to sink the money into a brand new Sandy build, of course, but they still aren't extinct yet.

It's a dwindling market and the generation does not have as many features as they do now.

[yttrium]

It's a dwindling market and the generation does not have as many features as they do now.

 

I'm not arguing someone should buy one today, I'm just saying they aren't extinct. It's an argument of terminology, not concept.

 

Anyway here's the article: http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1185〈=english

Turns out it's not very recent but it's still factually correct. They took the top of the line i5 and i7 chips from Sandy, Ivy, and Haswell, and compared them in a variety of benchmarks at both stock and 4.5GHz. The Sandy chips are, on average, around 5% slower than Haswell, but this doesn't account for the fact that Sandy can very easily be clocked up to 5GHz, which would boost its performance a fair bit, probably a little more.

 

Although, this is in a gaming scenario, favoring per-core performance rather than mass number of threads and other features like PCI-E 3.0. A pure CPU benchmark will find the Haswell chips in favor because of this, but even so, this is still a very interesting article.

[Ruostunut kokis]

This reminds me that I should get off my ass, get an aftermarket air cooler, and finally overclock my 2600K until it bluescreens. I've had that chip for 3 years now, still at stock clocks... Yeah... Though I don't need any extra CPU power, and maybe selling it without ever OC'ing it might get more money from it (in case I decide to get a new motherboard and a case to move towards mATX form factor)

[Pomfinator]

Hehe my 2500k...the moment I got that CPU, I set the multiplier to 45 and left everything at auto...my 4670k can't do that.

[harrynowl]

I think it was just the process they used on 32nm (Hi-K MG?) being more tolerable than 22nm Tri-Gate when it came to scaling. And they could tank more volts anyway.