The Lineup

I don’t include a lot of super markety slides in these launch reviews, but this one is worthy of a mention:

Sandy Bridge is launching with no less than 29 different SKUs today. That’s 15 for mobile and 14 for desktop. Jarred posted his full review of the mobile Core i7-2820QM, so check that out if you want the mobile perspective on all of this.

By comparison, this time last year Intel announced 11 mobile Arrandale CPUs and 7 desktop parts. A year prior we got Lynnfield with 3 SKUs and Clarksfield with 3 as well. That Sandy Bridge is Intel’s biggest launch ever goes without saying. It’s also the most confusing. While Core i7 exclusively refers to processors with 4 or more cores (on the desktop at least), Core i5 can mean either 2 or 4 cores. Core i3 is reserved exclusively for dual-core parts.

Intel promised that the marketing would all make sense one day. Here we are, two and a half years later, and the Core i-branding is no clearer. At the risk of upsetting all of Intel Global Marketing, perhaps we should return to just labeling these things with their clock speeds and core counts? After all, it’s what Apple does—and that’s a company that still refuses to put more than one button on its mice. Maybe it’s worth a try.

Check Jarred’s article out for the mobile lineup, but on desktop here’s how it breaks down:

Processor Core Clock Cores / Threads L3 Cache Max Turbo Max Overclock Multiplier TDP Price
Intel Core i7-2600K 3.4GHz 4 / 8 8MB 3.8GHz 57x 95W $317
Intel Core i7-2600 3.4GHz 4 / 8 8MB 3.8GHz 42x 95W $294
Intel Core i5-2500K 3.3GHz 4 / 4 6MB 3.7GHz 57x 95W $216
Intel Core i5-2500 3.3GHz 4 / 4 6MB 3.7GHz 41x 95W $205
Intel Core i5-2400 3.1GHz 4 / 4 6MB 3.4GHz 38x 95W $184
Intel Core i5-2300 2.8GHz 4 / 4 6MB 3.1GHz 34x 95W $177
Intel Core i3-2120 3.3GHz 2 / 4 3MB N/A N/A 65W $138
Intel Core i3-2100 2.93GHz 2 / 4 3MB N/A N/A 65W $117

Intel is referring to these chips as the 2nd generation Core processor family, despite three generations of processors carrying the Core architecture name before it (Conroe, Nehalem, and Westmere). The second generation is encapsulated in the model numbers for these chips. While all previous generation Core processors have three digit model numbers, Sandy Bridge CPUs have four digit models. The first digit in all cases is a 2, indicating that these are “2nd generation” chips and the remaining three are business as usual. I’d expect that Ivy Bridge will swap out the 2 for a 3 next year.

What you will see more of this time around are letter suffixes following the four digit model number. K means what it did last time: a fully multiplier unlocked part (similar to AMD’s Black Edition). The K-series SKUs are even more important this time around as some Sandy Bridge CPUs will ship fully locked, as in they cannot be overclocked at all (more on this later).

Processor Core Clock Cores / Threads L3 Cache Max Turbo TDP
Intel Core i7-2600S 2.8GHz 4 / 8 8MB 3.8GHz 65W
Intel Core i5-2500S 2.7GHz 4 / 4 6MB 3.7GHz 65W
Intel Core i5-2500T 2.3GHz 4 / 4 6MB 3.3GHz 45W
Intel Core i5-2400S 2.5GHz 4 / 4 6MB 3.3GHz 65W
Intel Core i5-2390T 2.7GHz 2 / 4 3MB 3.5GHz 35W
Intel Core i5-2100T 2.5GHz 2 / 4 3MB N/A 35W

There are also T and S series parts for desktop. These are mostly aimed at OEMs building small form factor or power optimized boxes. The S stands for “performance optimized lifestyle” and the T for “power optimized lifestyle”. In actual terms the Ses are lower clocked 65W parts while the Ts are lower clocked 35W or 45W parts. Intel hasn’t disclosed pricing on either of these lines but expect them to carry noticeable premiums over the standard chips. There’s nothing new about this approach; both AMD and Intel have done it for a little while now, it’s just more prevalent in Sandy Bridge than before.

More Differentiation

In the old days Intel would segment chips based on clock speed and cache size. Then Intel added core count and Hyper Threading to the list. Then hardware accelerated virtualization. With Sandy Bridge the matrix grows even bigger thanks to the on-die GPU.

Processor Intel HD Graphics Graphics Max Turbo Quick Sync VT-x VT-d TXT AES-NI
Intel Core i7-2600K 3000 1350MHz Y Y N N Y
Intel Core i7-2600 2000 1350MHz Y Y Y Y Y
Intel Core i5-2500K 3000 1100MHz Y Y N N Y
Intel Core i5-2500 2000 1100MHz Y Y Y Y Y
Intel Core i5-2400 2000 1100MHz Y Y Y Y Y
Intel Core i5-2300 2000 1100MHz Y Y N N Y
Intel Core i3-2120 2000 1100MHz Y N N N N
Intel Core i3-2100 2000 1100MHz Y N N N Y

While almost all SNB parts support VT-x (the poor i3s are left out), only three support VT-d. Intel also uses AES-NI as a reason to force users away from the i3 and towards the i5. I’ll get into the difference in GPUs in a moment.

Introduction Overclocking: Effortless 4.4GHz+ on Air
Comments Locked

283 Comments

View All Comments

  • mosu - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    If I want to spend every year a big lot of money on something I'll sell on eBay at half price a few months later and if I'd like crappy quality images on my monitor, then I would buy Sandy Bridge... but sorry, I'm no no brainer for Intel.
  • nitrousoxide - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    It really impressed me as I do a lot of video transcoding and it's extremely slow on my triple-core Phenom II X3 720, even though I overclocked it to 4GHz. But there is one question: the acceleration needs EU in the GPU, and GPU is disabled in P67 chipset. Does it mean that if I paired my SNB with a P67 motherboard, I won't be able to use the transcoding accelerator?
  • nitrousoxide - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Not talking about SNB-E this time, I know it will be the performance king again. But I wonder if Bulldozer can at least gain some performance advantage to SNB because it makes no sense that 8 cores running at stunning 4.0GHz won't overrun 4 cores below 3.5GHz, no matter what architectural differences there are between these two chips. SNB is only the new-generation mid-range parts, it will be out-performed by High-End Bulldozers. AMD will hold the low-end, just as it does now; as long as the Bulldozer regain some part that Phenoms lost in mainstream and performance market, things will be much better for it. Enthusiast market is not AMD's cup of tea, just as what it does in GPUs: let nVidia get the performance king and strike from lower performance niches.
  • strikeback03 - Tuesday, January 4, 2011 - link

    I don't think we'll know until AMD releases Bulldozer and Intel counters (if they do). Seems the SNB chips can run significantly faster than they do right now, so if necessary Intel could release new models (or a firmware update) that allows turbo modes up past 4GHz.
  • smashr - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    This review and others around the web refer to the CPUs as 'launching today', but I do not see them on NewEgg or other e-tailer sites.

    When can we expect these babies at retail?
  • JumpingJack - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    They are already selling in Malaysia, but if you don't live in Malasia then your are SOL :) ... I see rumors around that the NDA was suppose to expire on the 5th with retail availability on the 9th... I was thinking about making the leap, but think I will hold off for more info on BD and Sk2011 SB.
  • slickr - Monday, January 3, 2011 - link

    Intel has essentially shoot itself in the foot this time. Between the letters restrictions, the new chipset and crazy chipset differentiations between a P and a H its crazy.
    Not to mention they lack USB 3.0, ability to have an overclock mobo with integrated graphics and the stupid turbo boost restrictions.

    I'll go even more and say that the I3 core is pure crap and while its better than the old core I3 they are essentially leaving the biggest market the one up the $200 dollars wide open to AMD.

    Those who purchase CPU's at $200 and higher have luck in the 2500 and 2600 variants, but for the majority of us who purchase cpu's bellow $200 its crap.

    Essentially if you want gaming performance you buy I3 2100, but if you want overall better performance go for a phenom II.

    Hopefully AMD comes up with some great CPU's bellow the $200 range that are going to be with 4 cores, unlimited turbo boost and not locked.
  • Arakageeta - Tuesday, January 4, 2011 - link

    It seems that these benchmarks test the CPUs (cores) and GPU parts of SandyBridge separately. I'd like to know more about the effects of the CPU and GPU (usually data intensive) sharing the L3 cache.

    One advantage a system with a discrete GPU is that the GPU and CPUs can happily work simultaneously without largely affecting one another. This is no longer the case with SandyBridge.

    A test I would like to see is a graphics intensive application running while another another application performs some multi-threaded ATLAS-tuned LAPACK computations. Do either the GPU or CPUs swamp the L3 cache? Are there any instances of starvation? What happens to the performance of each application? What happens to frame rates? What happens to execution times?
  • morpheusmc - Tuesday, January 4, 2011 - link

    To me it seems that marketing is defining the processors now in Intel rather than engineering. This is always the case but I think now it is more evident than ever.

    Essentially if you want he features that the new architecture brings, you have to sell out for the higher end models.
    My ideal processor would be a i5-2520M for the desktop: Reasonable clocks, good turbo speeds (could be higher for the desktop since the TDP is not that limited), HT, good graphics etc. The combination of 2 cores and HT provides a good balance between power consumption and perfromance for most users.

    Its desktop equivalent price-wise is the 2500, wich has no HT and a much higher TDP because of the four cores. Alternatively, maybe the 2500S, 2400S or 2390T could be considered if they are too overpriced.

    Intel has introduced too much differentiation in this generation, and in an Apple-like fashion, i.e. they force you to pay more for stuff you don't need, just for an extra feature (eg. VT support, good graphics etc) that practically costs nothing since the silicon is already there. Bottomline, if you want to have the full functionality of the silicon that you get, you have to pay for the higher end models.
    Moreover, having features for specific functions (AES, transcoding etc) and good graphics makes more sense in lower-end models where CPU power is limited.

    This is becoming like the software market, where you have to pay extra for licenses for specific functionalities.
    I wouldn't be surprised if Intel starts selling "upgrade licenses" sometime in the future that will simply unlock features.

    I strongly prefer AMD's approach where all the fatures are available to all models.

    I am also a bit annoyed that there is very little discusison about this problem in the review. I agree that technologically Sandy Bridge is impressive, but the artificial limiting of functionality is anti-technological.
  • ac2 - Tuesday, January 4, 2011 - link

    Agreed, but, apart from the K-series/ higher IGP/ motherboard mess up (which I think should be shortly cleared up), all the rest of it is just smart product marketing...

    It irritates readers of AnandTech, but for the most people who buy off-the-shelf it's all good, with integrators patching up any shortcomings in the core/ chipset.

    The focus does seem to be mobile, low-power and video transcode, almost a recipe for macbook!!

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now