Apr 272012
First the run from user PytonOrm at sweclockers.com:
And then the run of exactly the same thing on my own rig:
The Ivy Bridge is slightly faster, but not much, but it is WAY hotter!
I don’t think I ever have to contemplate Ivy Bridge as an upgrade, rather a sidegrade or even thermal downgrade. Haswell will be the next interesting cpu, in 2013, until then I will be perfectly happy with using yesterdays news 
(IB-E could be interesting if it arrives at all)
Pingback: Return of FX : GA-990FXA-UD7 - OC'd AMD FX 8150 / 6990 Performance Comparison Review - Hardware Canucks
Pingback: Return of FX : GA-990FXA-UD7 - OC'd AMD FX 8150 / 6990 Performance Comparison Review
I know this is a little late but I was googling super-pi results and I came across this.
I notice that you are claiming to have very similar results to a similarly clocked 3770k. By similar results you are claiming that 10 seconds difference at point 11 is “close”. I have my 3770k clocked to 4.5 for stability etc and I ran 32m super-pi. Point 11 = 3 mins 29 seconds, only 7 seconds behind yourself. I think I could quite easily surpass your results while staying well within the efficiency temps of my processor. (Ivy is good for 95C before throttling) It’s still running just now, currently at point 22 and my max temp is 49 degrees on core#2.
One thing I do agree on is the choice of upgrade. The sandy bridge is far too good a chip to be chucking out just because a new bridge is out. The sandy bridge was a revelation, “upgrading” to the ivy wouldn’t see much gain… especially for the over clocker. However, it IS a better chip out of the box and with the appropriate cooling it IS the better chip for over clocking….. whether the difference is enough to justify the outlay is down to the buyer. Personally if I was sitting with a Sandy chip I’d be waiting on the next gen to come out. IMO it’ll just be an Ivy Bridge with decent solder on the spreader…. which you could do yourself if you wish 0=oD