Sandy Bridge vs Ivy Bridge - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 09:29 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
ncarty97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Time to rebuild my HTPC (at 4 years, its getting a bit long in the tooth). As I'm not that up to date on the latest and greatest in technology, I started with Assassins excellent guide (well worth the $25 for full access to everything IMO).

In the free hardware guide, he makes the statement:
Quote:
These LGA1155 motherboards are also backwards compatible meaning that you could use a Sandy Bridge CPU with an Ivy Bridge era Motherboard — the main drawback to this approach is you would be limited to the Sandy Bridge’s chipset and wouldn’t get to use all the new features offered by Ivy Bridge.

So then I read this comparison:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2405317,00.asp

And I only really found this:
Quote:
3. Ivy Bridge uses some newer technologies. In order to achieve the reduction in Ivy Bridge die size, Intel developed a new kind of three-dimensional "Tri-Gate" transistor. But there are some additional advancements in Ivy Bridge, as well, including support for PCI Express (PCIe) 3.0 and DDR3L (low-voltage) memory, buffed-up security features, and better integrated graphics (see below).

4. Ivy Bridge is faster—but just a little. Performance generally improves more between "ticks" and "tocks" than between "tocks" and "ticks," and you can see this in the relationship between Sandy Bridge and Ivy Bridge. In our testing, for example, an Intel Core i7-3770K Ivy Bridge processor earned in our CineBench R11.5 multicore rendering test a score of 1.65, compared with a Core i7-2700K (the fastest Sandy Bridge chip) in the same system earning 1.58. The chips' scores in PCMark 7 (3,679 versus 3,867) and times in Adobe Photoshop CS5 (2 minutes 47 seconds versus 2:50) and Handbrake 0.9.6 (32 seconds versus 31 seconds) also bear this out. So you will see speed bumps, but they'll be small this time around. Chances are, however, that next year's "tock" will boost the speeds of new processors considerably more.

Doesn't seem like 3 will be much of an issue as the only card I'll be adding is my InfiniTV and the faster part seems largely irrelevant.

It does go on to say it uses less power, but from the guide it seems that power consumption for an HTPC won't be much different between the two.

then there is this:
Quote:
6. Ivy Bridge has better graphics... Sandy Bridge processors sported a redesigned video system (available in two flavors: Intel HD Graphics 2000 or 3000, with the latter being more powerful), but one that was limited in a few key ways. Ivy Bridge chips removed one of the chief limitations by replacing Sandy Bridge's dusty DirectX 10.1 (DX10.1) support with DX11 capabilities, and generally improving their speed and functionality. We didn't see enormous frame rate leaps between HD Graphics 3000 (in the Core i7-2700K) and 4000 (in the Core i7-3770K) in our testing with currently popular 3D titles, but we definitely saw some.

Ok, I don't have a 3D display and likely won't get one during the life of this HTPC.

So is there any real compelling advantage to getting an Ivy Bridge over a Sandy Bridge? My rig is going to be a pure HTPC, no gaming, no office functions, etc.
ncarty97 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 10:09 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
HD4000 graphics on ivy bridge can do madvr, I don't personally use it seems like a hassle to me.
jeffkro is offline  
post #3 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 10:11 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
ncarty97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Thanks. I've seen MadVR talked about a bit here, but honestly I'm not sure exactly what it does or if I'd see much of an improvment using my projector.
ncarty97 is offline  
post #4 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 10:52 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
MadVR is no hassle. If your projector can do 24p I suggest you use it.

I also suggest looking at the A8 or A10 AMD processors as the on-board GPU is better than the intel GPU.

Sammy2 is online now  
post #5 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 10:58 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
ncarty97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Its an Epson 8350, which I believe can handle 24p.

I've considered the AMD, sounds like I could save a few bucks and get at least equivalent performance.
ncarty97 is offline  
post #6 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 11:53 AM
Advanced Member
 
Tiddles88's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 583
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
You won't get equivalent CPU performance:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/A10-5800K-vs-Core-i3-3220-CPU-Review/1646

Just start with an i3 3225 and B75 board and you are set.
Tiddles88 is offline  
post #7 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 11:56 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
ncarty97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Well, that is the question isn't it? I know that the AMD CPU is less powerful, but for an HTPC, does it really matter? The end goal is best displaying of my media on my HTPC. I'm not even going to be doing any encoding on this machine.
ncarty97 is offline  
post #8 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 12:06 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,336
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 240
I still don't think the 3225 is worth the price if you're not going to use MadVR or 3D

If you're playing back typical HD rips just go with a 7 series motherboard with a g645. You can snap up a really cheap ivy bridge in about 6 months and swap it out (if you become interested in Madvr, 3D, heavy transcoding, etc)
Dark_Slayer is offline  
post #9 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 12:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,336
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 240
Quote:
Originally Posted by ncarty97 View Post

Well, that is the question isn't it? I know that the AMD CPU is less powerful, but for an HTPC, does it really matter? The end goal is best displaying of my media on my HTPC. I'm not even going to be doing any encoding on this machine.

To really get the benefit of the improved onboard video, you have to pay more for RAM (1866 or 2133 vs 1600). Comparitive pricing is a wash in my mind
Dark_Slayer is offline  
post #10 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 12:21 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
ncarty97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Thanks. That's good to know. In reality, my guess is that no matter which route I go, its going to be a vast improvement over what I have.
ncarty97 is offline  
post #11 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 12:57 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
You may want to take a look in this thread. Both processors have been tested by renethx and the AMD's come out ahead for HTPC use when using advanced video renderers such as MadVR.

Sammy2 is online now  
post #12 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 01:00 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
ncarty97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 16
Thanks! I had thought renethx had bowed out of this game.
ncarty97 is offline  
post #13 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 01:37 PM
AVS Special Member
 
Dark_Slayer's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 2,336
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 74 Post(s)
Liked: 240
I'd never hesitate to agree with renethx

That's actually where I first read about the huge benefit trinity onboard video receives from 1866 or 2133 over 1600, but I can't find the thread where he mentioned it

The MadVR tickler always has to be added, but the majority of my library is 1080p. I'll have to stop ignoring it eventually, but for now I'm keeping my head firmly buried in the sand
jeffkro likes this.
Dark_Slayer is offline  
post #14 of 20 Old 01-16-2013, 02:10 PM
AVS Special Member
 
fitbrit's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,059
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 24
I have an 8350 too and am happily using MadVR (built into JRiver Media Center). It works very well, but I am on a Clarkdale i3 with 450GTS.
fitbrit is offline  
post #15 of 20 Old 01-17-2013, 05:00 AM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
ncarty97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 16
I have a discrete MSI N520GT-MD1GD3/LP GeForce GT 520 (Fermi) 1GB 64-bit DDR3 in my current HTPC. Think that is good enough to handle MadVR?
ncarty97 is offline  
post #16 of 20 Old 01-17-2013, 08:10 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tiddles88 View Post

You won't get equivalent CPU performance:

http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/A10-5800K-vs-Core-i3-3220-CPU-Review/1646

Just start with an i3 3225 and B75 board and you are set.

Yeah, but we aren't running global warming climatic models here, we are playing back video. You kind of just have to look at which one handles video better and does DVR, NAS, and streaming without hickup. Basically almost any cpu can handle the load its mostly tied in to the graphics side for HTPC.
jeffkro is offline  
post #17 of 20 Old 01-17-2013, 08:13 AM
AVS Special Member
 
jeffkro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Slayer View Post

I'd never hesitate to agree with renethx

That's actually where I first read about the huge benefit trinity onboard video receives from 1866 or 2133 over 1600, but I can't find the thread where he mentioned it

The MadVR tickler always has to be added, but the majority of my library is 1080p. I'll have to stop ignoring it eventually, but for now I'm keeping my head firmly buried in the sand

Yup, if I never try it I don't miss it. wink.gif
jeffkro is offline  
post #18 of 20 Old 01-17-2013, 10:29 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffkro View Post

Yeah, but we aren't running global warming climatic models here, we are playing back video. You kind of just have to look at which one handles video better and does DVR, NAS, and streaming without hickup. Basically almost any cpu can handle the load its mostly tied in to the graphics side for HTPC.

Exactly. That is where the current AMD processors trump and for HTPC use that is where you want it to trump. Who cares if the CPU utilization is 6% vs 4% if you get better graphics capability. I have had to add a discrete card to my i3-550 to utilize MadVR for better video rendering.

Sammy2 is online now  
post #19 of 20 Old 01-17-2013, 10:30 AM
Newbie
 
tikiman1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Posts: 9
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
The i3 3225 is a great processor. I picked one up & undervolted it. It uses a max vcore of .900 volts. My HTPC uses the same amount of power that it did when I had my i3 2120T in it. The only time that it uses more is when my son plays his lego games on it.
tikiman1 is offline  
post #20 of 20 Old 01-17-2013, 10:35 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Sammy2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Right next to Wineville, CA
Posts: 9,673
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 30 Post(s)
Liked: 169
I am not saying that it isn't a great processor. It is a beast actually for most uses. What I am saying is that for advanced video playback using MadVR the on-board graphics is not quite up to snuff.

Sammy2 is online now  
Reply Home Theater Computers

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off