No hexa cores for S1151?!

Joined
Apr 20, 2016
Messages
50
So yeah, I was looking into buying brand new Z170-based motherboard (1151 socket). To my great surprise/shock, however, i see there NO hexa/octa cores for the 1151 socket! Wut?! No, seriously, what's up with that?! I saw Intel has some new CPU's planned, for the end of April, but atill only quad-cores!

Can someone enlighten me please?!
 
Intel HEDT platform will get you that.
Its been obvious that 1155,1156,1150,1151 would not be expected to get any hexa cores.
Maybe someday, but at this moment thats not reality.
 
Socket 2011v3 is their high-end desktop platform. That's where the 6 and 8 core parts are. For Broadwell-E they're releasing a 10 core part, so maybe they'll release a 6 core for the mainstream platform in the next year or two.
 
Last edited:
Thanks.

It still have a perfectly good working P6X58D Premium motherboard, with the first i7 hexa core. Then I installed Windows 10, and found out, to my dismay, they no longer support the X58 chipset (if only their 'compat runner', which kept trashing my disk ever so often, would have told me that). Hence, I figured I start off with the latest and shiniest chipset. Guess I thought wrong. :) So maybe I'll drop back to the X99 platform (althought that's from 2014 already). Maybe even a 2011-v3 socket. Cuz, yeah, need my hexa core back, as I do a lot of video rendering (the kind that takes days).
 
Socket 2011v3 is their high-end desktop platform. That's where the 6 and 8 core parts are. For Broadwell-E they're releasing a 10 core part, so maybe they'll release a 6 core for the mainstream platform in the next year or two.

Odd. Didn't see your post there, earlier. But yeah, the 2011-v3 chipset is what I've been looking at too. At first I (erroneously) thought the entire 2011 socket was from the year 2011 too, but that's just the X79 chipset. X99 (2011-v3) is from 2014.
 
So yeah, I was looking into buying brand new Z170-based motherboard (1151 socket). To my great surprise/shock, however, i see there NO hexa/octa cores for the 1151 socket! Wut?! No, seriously, what's up with that?! I saw Intel has some new CPU's planned, for the end of April, but atill only quad-cores!

Can someone enlighten me please?!

Intel has not needed 6 or 8 cores on the mainstream platform because AMDs 8 core processor is no better at 8 thereads than intels 4 core / 8 threaded processors.
 
^^ Why, Intel may not need hexa cores, but I do. :) Video-rendering really benefits greatly from extra cores (scales linearly, basically). I may even buy the octa core (although it only runs at 3.0 Ghz).
 
^^ Why, Intel may not need hexa cores, but I do. :) Video-rendering really benefits greatly from extra cores (scales linearly, basically). I may even buy the octa core (although it only runs at 3.0 Ghz).


The 5960x will do 3.5 to 4.0GHz easily. Some will even get up to 4.5-4.6, but voltage and heat starts getting little unreasonable past 4.0.
 
So yeah, I was looking into buying brand new Z170-based motherboard (1151 socket). To my great surprise/shock, however, i see there NO hexa/octa cores for the 1151 socket! Wut?! No, seriously, what's up with that?! I saw Intel has some new CPU's planned, for the end of April, but atill only quad-cores!

Can someone enlighten me please?!

X platforms get the 6 and 8 core CPUs

Z platforms are the mainstream that get the quad cores

Not that difficult to wrap your head around
 
  • Like
Reactions: pxc
like this
X platforms get the 6 and 8 core CPUs

10 cores will be in Broadwell-e released later this year.

Z platforms are the mainstream that get the quad cores

I believe in 2018 the second generation 10nm mainstream processor will have 6 cores.
 
Thanks.

It still have a perfectly good working P6X58D Premium motherboard, with the first i7 hexa core. Then I installed Windows 10, and found out, to my dismay, they no longer support the X58 chipset (if only their 'compat runner', which kept trashing my disk ever so often, would have told me that). Hence, I figured I start off with the latest and shiniest chipset. Guess I thought wrong. :) So maybe I'll drop back to the X99 platform (althought that's from 2014 already). Maybe even a 2011-v3 socket. Cuz, yeah, need my hexa core back, as I do a lot of video rendering (the kind that takes days).

Something sounds odd there, I still am running an old P6T7 with a X5680 @ 4.5 on Win 10 Insider Build 14316.

And a second rig with a P6T Deluxe V2 running an X5650 for a HTPC with a regular Win 10 build, both X64
 
Last edited:
It still have a perfectly good working P6X58D Premium motherboard, with the first i7 hexa core. Then I installed Windows 10, and found out, to my dismay, they no longer support the X58 chipset (if only their 'compat runner', which kept trashing my disk ever so often, would have told me that). Hence, I figured I start off with the latest and shiniest chipset. Guess I thought wrong. :) So maybe I'll drop back to the X99 platform (althought that's from 2014 already). Maybe even a 2011-v3 socket. Cuz, yeah, need my hexa core back, as I do a lot of video rendering (the kind that takes days).

Yep, something is very wrong there. Got 2 completely different X58 systems running Windows 10 x64 here fine.
 
I believe in 2018 the second generation 10nm mainstream processor will have 6 cores.

Nope. If Intel don't have a 6-core notebook CPU, then you won't have a 6-core 115X. The 6+ core CPUs are all on 2011-X. Even now, you can grab a 6 core chip for about the same price as a top-tier quad.
 
Nope. If Intel don't have a 6-core notebook CPU, then you won't have a 6-core 115X. The 6+ core CPUs are all on 2011-X. Even now, you can grab a 6 core chip for about the same price as a top-tier quad.

Maybe there will be a 6 core notebook processor on the second generation 10nm process.
 
X platforms get the 6 and 8 core CPUs

Z platforms are the mainstream that get the quad cores

Not that difficult to wrap your head around

Possibly. But I'd like to think I'm like most people: I I dive into chipsets and CPU's when I need a new machine; then I forget about it for another 5 years, until I want a new system again, after which I start to familiarize myself with the lastest and greatest out there anew. So, pardon me if I didnt't immediately realize their latest Z170 chipset doesn't support hexa cores.
 
Oh, Windows 10 is running on my X58 system too, but the chipset is really at End of Life:

Intel Chipset Upgrade woes (X58)

Especially the generic SATA drivers are causing issues on my SATA600 drives.

Do you have the drives hooked up to the SATA 300 ports (Intel), or do you have them hooked up to SATA 600 (third party)?

Because I could see the third-party controllers having bad support on Windows 10, but Intel SATA is usually rock-solid.
 
Do you have the drives hooked up to the SATA 300 ports (Intel), or do you have them hooked up to SATA 600 (third party)?

Because I could see the third-party controllers having bad support on Windows 10, but Intel SATA is usually rock-solid.

On the P6X58D Premium, Sata 600 is delivered thru the Marvell 9123 Controller.
 
On the P6X58D Premium, Sata 600 is delivered thru the Marvell 9123 Controller.

So stop using the Marvell and see if your experience improves.

A long time back several websites showed there was no noticeable performance difference between Intel SATA 300 slots and 3rd-party SATA 600.

In fact see here where Intel 3gbps versus Intel 6gbps, 3gbps is enough to keep even an 840 Pro fed in real-world use cases.

Real-World Benchmarks: Five Applications - Is A SATA 3Gb/s Platform Still Worth Upgrading With An SSD?

Real-World Tests - Upgrade Advice: Does Your Fast SSD Really Need SATA 6Gb/s?

While the 3rd-party 6gbps controllers could barely saturate the SATA 6 bus with large transfers, the small 4k transfers that make up most of your Windows experience are better handled by the Intel SATA 3 controller.
 
Last edited:
So stop using the Marvell and see if your experience improves.

A long time back several websites showed there was no noticeable performance difference between Intel SATA 300 slots and 3rd-party SATA 600.

In fact see here where Intel 3gbps versus Intel 6gbps, 3gbps is enough to keep even an 840 Pro fed in real-world use cases.

Real-World Benchmarks: Five Applications - Is A SATA 3Gb/s Platform Still Worth Upgrading With An SSD?

Real-World Tests - Upgrade Advice: Does Your Fast SSD Really Need SATA 6Gb/s?

While the 3rd-party 6gbps controllers could barely saturate the SATA 6 bus with large transfers, the small 4k transfers that make up most of your Windows experience are better handled by the Intel SATA 3 controller.


Thanks for all the test links.

The more I read up on the Marvell 9123 Controller, the crappier it starts to look. :) What a piece of fei-oo!
 
Well, I might as well chime in about Win10 and x58 as well.

I have one x58 system running Win10 at my house and I put together 2 x58 systems for a family member that are running Windows 10.

Not a single problem whatsoever.

IF you want to use the 3rd party SATA controllers, you will need to find newer versions than what are on the MB makers' pages.
 
The 5960x will do 3.5 to 4.0GHz easily. Some will even get up to 4.5-4.6, but voltage and heat starts getting little unreasonable past 4.0.

I just successfully overclocked my 5820k to 4.4 on 1.24v and never hit above 67 degrees under Aida64 stress tests, and that's on air. First time overclocking anything too. I just finished the rig in my sig on Wednesday. 5960x was way out of my price range.
 
Intel isn't really pushing the design to its limits anymore on mainstream chipsets. I don't know exactly why, I've heard it explained as everything from a lack of competition from AMD, the focus on mobile, to the slowing down of Moore's Law. Maybe it's all three. But you now have to get an "enthusiast" chipset that's almost like a souped-up server to get a six-core processor now. I fear it may be a sign of things to come.

I really hope that Zen gives Intel enough of a run for its money that we finally get hex-core processors on affordable mainstream chipsets. Because I think a lot of us could use an excuse to, you know, upgrade our Ivy Bridge and Haswell processors after three years. I know some people are still on Sandy Bridge and Gulftown and doing okay as long as they have the i7.
 
I just successfully overclocked my 5820k to 4.4 on 1.24v and never hit above 67 degrees under Aida64 stress tests, and that's on air. First time overclocking anything too. I just finished the rig in my sig on Wednesday. 5960x was way out of my price range.

A 5820k has two cores less than a 5960x, so it's a little easier to overclock.
 
Intel isn't really pushing the design to its limits anymore on mainstream chipsets. I don't know exactly why, I've heard it explained as everything from a lack of competition from AMD, the focus on mobile, to the slowing down of Moore's Law. Maybe it's all three. But you now have to get an "enthusiast" chipset that's almost like a souped-up server to get a six-core processor now. I fear it may be a sign of things to come.

I really hope that Zen gives Intel enough of a run for its money that we finally get hex-core processors on affordable mainstream chipsets. Because I think a lot of us could use an excuse to, you know, upgrade our Ivy Bridge and Haswell processors after three years. I know some people are still on Sandy Bridge and Gulftown and doing okay as long as they have the i7.

It's not that they aren't pushing the limits, they just aren't pushing the limits in the direction that performance enthusiasts want. They are pushing the limits in mobile, which is where a lot of money is at the moment. Enthusiast parts have always been scaled down server parts, if you didn't know that before well here's your wakeup call. For that matter, mainstream desktop parts are primarily mobile parts that didn't make the cut for mobile. For Intel CPUs, the biggest moneymakers are server CPUs, followed by mobile.
 
It's not that they aren't pushing the limits, they just aren't pushing the limits in the direction that performance enthusiasts want. They are pushing the limits in mobile, which is where a lot of money is at the moment. Enthusiast parts have always been scaled down server parts, if you didn't know that before well here's your wakeup call. For that matter, mainstream desktop parts are primarily mobile parts that didn't make the cut for mobile. For Intel CPUs, the biggest moneymakers are server CPUs, followed by mobile.

"Enthusiast parts have always been scaled down server parts"

Sure! Every enterprise server needs a $1000 GTX Titan X, how else would the IT Admins play their favorite games?

"For that matter, mainstream desktop parts are primarily mobile parts that didn't make the cut for mobile"

Yep! Those ATX motherboards were deemed too big and too power hungry for mobile use....Shame on Asus, Gigabyte et al. for even designing such things. They must be losing money big time.

 
I just successfully overclocked my 5820k to 4.4 on 1.24v and never hit above 67 degrees under Aida64 stress tests, and that's on air. First time overclocking anything too. I just finished the rig in my sig on Wednesday. 5960x was way out of my price range.
If possible, try AIDA FPU only or OCCT small. At the very least, 5°C more under those tests are assured.
 
It's not that they aren't pushing the limits, they just aren't pushing the limits in the direction that performance enthusiasts want. They are pushing the limits in mobile, which is where a lot of money is at the moment.

Well, certainly. It's the only explanation for all the die space being spent on an iGPU and the falling TDP numbers.

"Enthusiast parts have always been scaled down server parts"

Sure! Every enterprise server needs a $1000 GTX Titan X, how else would the IT Admins play their favorite games?

I think he specifically meant Intel CPUs, because you can't use a workstation GPU for gaming or vice-versa. Granted, it would be an exaggeration to say that it's "always" been this way... but it's definitely been this way since a little before Sandy Bridge. The server space was not always Intel's bread and butter. Certainly not before the Pentium IV.

"For that matter, mainstream desktop parts are primarily mobile parts that didn't make the cut for mobile"

Yep! Those ATX motherboards were deemed too big and too power hungry for mobile use....Shame on Asus, Gigabyte et al. for even designing such things. They must be losing money big time.

ATX motherboards aren't really Intel's parts though. They're designed from the ground up to be the core of a desktop system, different scenario altogether. Intel churns out several similar CPU dies which can be packaged in a number of ways... with cores or features disabled, in an LGA or BGA package with whatever number of pins they like, etc. ASUS and Gigabyte have to design and engineer a much more specific product for each market segment they target due to the nature of what they're providing. It's not even comparable.

I know you were probably joking here, but it's hard to tell on the Internet.
 
"Enthusiast parts have always been scaled down server parts"

Sure! Every enterprise server needs a $1000 GTX Titan X, how else would the IT Admins play their favorite games?

"For that matter, mainstream desktop parts are primarily mobile parts that didn't make the cut for mobile"

Yep! Those ATX motherboards were deemed too big and too power hungry for mobile use....Shame on Asus, Gigabyte et al. for even designing such things. They must be losing money big time.

Either you are joking, or you have absolutely no idea how expensive true workstation and server parts can be.

The Titan X isn't a good example, as the Maxwell dies were built as 100% gaming chips with no regard for compute (aka workstation) capabilities. The previous generation Titans were prosumer cards, between general consumer and workstation. They are that way because they have workstation capabilities unlocked but work with consumer drivers. nVidia has a completely different set of drivers for their workstation cards, and those cards can go up to $5000 a pop, with the exact same die as the prosumer cards. Previous incarnations of the prosumer card include the GTX 580 and 480. Point being, the workstation market and server market is a lot more expensive than you think they are with much larger margins.
 
Either you are joking, or you have absolutely no idea how expensive true workstation and server parts can be.

The Titan X isn't a good example, as the Maxwell dies were built as 100% gaming chips with no regard for compute (aka workstation) capabilities. The previous generation Titans were prosumer cards, between general consumer and workstation. They are that way because they have workstation capabilities unlocked but work with consumer drivers. nVidia has a completely different set of drivers for their workstation cards, and those cards can go up to $5000 a pop, with the exact same die as the prosumer cards. Previous incarnations of the prosumer card include the GTX 580 and 480. Point being, the workstation market and server market is a lot more expensive than you think they are with much larger margins.

"Enthusiast parts have always been scaled down server parts"

Most servers don't even need a GUI. You're confusing typical workstation and server hardware requirements.
 
"Enthusiast parts have always been scaled down server parts"

Most servers don't even need a GUI. You're confusing typical workstation and server hardware requirements.

When I said that, I was referring specifically to Intel, where Xeons do double duty as server and workstation, but generally are referred to as server CPUs. If you want to keep arguing semantics, be my guest.
 
Back
Top