Dual i7-2600K Motherboard

Discussion in 'Motherboards' started by LittleTinyScooby, Mar 5, 2011.

  1. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Could something like this exist?

    If not, why not. I think it would be amazing to have a machine with two i7-2600K processors humming along nicely. And with my apps, I would easily saturate all 8 cores.

    How do MB manufacturers decide when to offer a motherboard that can accomodate two processors? Just curious. thanks
     
  2. Neb

    Neb 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,320
    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2000
    Nope, it will have to be a dual Xeon system due to the QPI links IIRC. Nothing you can do about that aside from shelling out the money for the eventual xeon systems.
     
  3. avatardelta

    avatardelta [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    4,722
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2009
    Just wait/look for the Xeon iterations of 1155.
     
  4. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Dual-socket motherboards are usually reserved for the top-end socket, 1366 currently and 2011 in the future. I doubt you will ever see dual 1155 motherboards, there aren't any dual 1156 motherboards as far as I know.

    To put it simply, non-server CPU's do not have the functionality to communicate with each other. Opterons and Xeons designed for multi-CPU support have a specific feature which allows them to communicate with each other on a board, which is omitted in consumer CPU's and lower end server CPU's.
     
  5. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Thanks. I guess that explains it.

    It sounds like I should be looking for a Xeon system instead of an i7-2600K system then. It's odd though because I thought I had remembered a while back there were high end workstations designed with 2 processors in them and not just servers. Perhaps I confused much older dual core systems for multi-processor systems or something but I thought I once took apart a high end workstation that had 2 processors and looked at them in amazement. This would have been 10 years ago or so though.

    It's too bad because the 2600K would be so nice if you could have 2 in the same rig. Oh well. Time to look at the Xeons I guess. They are pricy though. :(

    How come they don't realize there is a market for things like two 2600K systems for hardcore users? Could some third party manufacturer come along and design something that could allow two 2600K's to be on the same motherboard? Like ASUS, they are always pushing tech in crazy ways. You'd think there would be some ingenious hack for this to work or something, even a virtual linking or something, anything. If there was a dual 2600K motherboard on the market, I would snatch it up in a heartbeat, so would others I would imagine.

    It could be like the days when 3dfx released the first Voodoo card and SLI was born, cept, it would be the first dual 2600K (lga-1155) motherboard instead.

    I keep looking at these Xeon prices and they just seem, well, not very cost effective for home users. :(

    Seems wrong, I mean, the industry lets us put as many GPU's as we want in a system for reasonable prices (think some motherboards have 4 ePCI x16 slots with each card having a dual GPU that's 8 on 1 motherboard), but if we want to pair together a couple CPU's in the same system, we are charged up the whazooo for Xeons. :(
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2011
  6. paperwastage

    paperwastage [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,131
    Joined:
    Jul 12, 2009
    there is... you just have to pay for the upgrade to xeon... no point in putting or investing hardware on consumer items when people who want 2x xeons will pay for the xeon

    If you can figure a way for your stuff to be parallelized (like Map/Reduce or HPC), then get 2 Sandy bridge systems
     
  7. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Simple reason why there won't be any dual i7 2600k systems:
    People who truly want dual systems will pay the price premium for xeon systems. Those who want dual-cpu's are usually running top-end systems anyways. If you really want multiple cores on a budget, you should have gone the quad-cpu opteron route. Even then, that's not cheap.

    Consumer-cpu's simply do not have the hardware integrated in them to communicate with each other. You make the argument with GPU's, but that is not valid for all cases. Only the top-end GPU's have the capabilities for quad SLI/crossfire. Middle road ones only have dual sli/crossfire. Low end ones do not have sli/crossfire capabilities.

    Edit: oh, just to add. Even the i7 980x does not support dual-cpu configurations. So don't expect a lowly (relatively) i7 2600k to.
     
    Last edited: Mar 5, 2011
  8. jojo69

    jojo69 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,396
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    EVGA SR3

    /time warp
     
  9. SolidBladez

    SolidBladez [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    6,274
    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2008
    Personally I think the SR-4 is a better alternative.

    [​IMG]

    lawls
     
  10. jojo69

    jojo69 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,396
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    oh gawd

    that's great!

    unplug the dryer first...lol
     
  11. Stupid_Newbie

    Stupid_Newbie Gawd

    Messages:
    659
    Joined:
    Dec 4, 2005
    I remember looking at opteron systems for a gaming rig. They used to perform well. It wasnt dual, but once OCed it was a good performing, and an option over intel. Now ill go 1155
     
  12. 00011

    00011 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    290
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011

    Damn!!!

    What PSU would you need to run that with four OC'd cpu's, 48GB of ram, and say four 6950's, etc?
     
  13. jojo69

    jojo69 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,396
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    Oh, the Corsair AX4800 handles it just fine
     
  14. m_isom

    m_isom Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    365
    Joined:
    Oct 27, 2006
    Quad board is shopped, look on the right. Two SLI tags, and the cut off is in the BIOS battery. On the left, you see two buzzer speakers the top buzzer has a prominent board corner and the capacitors are cut vertically from the PCI express slots below.

    Would be a heck of a box to have 6 core 12 threads each socket and max out the RAM
     
  15. tangoseal

    tangoseal [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    7,602
    Joined:
    Dec 18, 2010
    24 cores but a game that uses one will be as fast as 1 core.

    AMDs are WICKED (CAPS) fast in database, SQL, etc... but games ughhh. Im talking server silicon here.

    I am however going to follow in Vega's past steps and build a Xeon Ivybridge dually when they come out.
     
  16. Zepher

    Zepher [H]ipster Replacement

    Messages:
    16,893
    Joined:
    Sep 29, 2001
    Back in the day I had a couple of dual CPU setups running consumer CPU's.
    Pair of Slot 1 Intel Celeron 266Mhz @ 400Mhz on an Asus board and a pair of Slot 1 PII 450's on an Asus board.

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]
     
  17. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011

    I remember those. I think that is what I was thinking of, and that was a consumer CPU as you mentioned. So, how come they no longer make dual cpu motherboards for consumer CPU's, but they did back then?
     
  18. [T5K]thrasher

    [T5K]thrasher 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,359
    Joined:
    Mar 15, 2001
    Haha I was just thinking about this topic the other day, had an Abit PB6 back in the day. Hooray for consumer grade dual CPU mobo's.
     
  19. silent-circuit

    silent-circuit [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,133
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Multi-CPU tech has come a long, long way in the intervening what, 10 years? Changed considerably. Also, what the heck are you wanting to do that a OCed 2600k won't handle just fine, that you aren't willing to pay Xeon premiums for?
     
  20. JohnleMVP

    JohnleMVP [H]ardness Supreme

    Messages:
    5,251
    Joined:
    May 20, 2001
    Because that was the only way a consumer could get more than one core back then. Now we have 4-6 cores in a single socket. LGA 2011 should bring 8 cores and I'm sure AMD will have something too.
     
  21. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Mostly, 3D animation rendering, and being in Second Life while multitasking with other apps.

    Both will take whatever you throw at them and eat it for breakfast.

    Renderings take up to 48 hours straight of maximum cpu loads, but when not rendering, Second Life will eat up 16 cores easily as SL is programmed horribly but also contains dynamically changing content, and most of SL relies on CPU and not the GPU unfortunately. Some day, when it is programmed correctly (i.e. scrapped and started over), then SL will use the GPU properly instead of the CPU. Also, keep in mind, when I'm in SL, it's usually at 5040x1050 or 5040 x2000+pixel resolutions or similar.

    If I rendered professionally I would probably just get the Xeons or setup a renderfarm, since I only do it for fun, and since SL is just a hobby, I don't want to pay premium for the Xeons, and instead would prefer a simple dual 2600K solution. Plus, it just seems like an option that should be available to us for tweaking with. The 2600K seems like an amazing cpu that would be nice to have doubled, but not only that cpu, many others would benefit from doubling as well. So they did it 10 years ago and then stopped. Wonder why they stopped? I guess enough people didn't purchase them for various reasons. Bummer.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  22. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    If Intel and AMD supported multi-CPU configurations with consumer grade processors, then what would be the point in server grade CPU's? Simple business sense.

    The reason why it won't happen today is because multi-CPU technology is vastly different. CPU's designed for multiple CPU boards have a unique feature which allows them to "talk" to other CPU's on the board, and thus able to balance and process things much more efficiently. Consumer grade CPU's don't have that ability. Also, motherboards that have multiple-CPU's have a completely different chipset from regular consumer-grade motherboards. The different chipset is to facilitate communication of the CPU's. So not only does the CPU have to support it, the chipset has to support it. Creating a new chipset for 1155 when the existing one for 1366 and the future 2011 one will fill the job? I don't think so.

    As for the thing 10 years ago, technology was vastly different then. Back then, they didn't have higher end CPU's, so the only thing they could do is offer multiple-CPU configurations. This is now, there are higher-end CPU's than the i7 2600k.

    If you're not willing to pay a price premium, then you're screwed. People who really want multiple-CPU's are willing to pay the price premium for the server grade CPU's, and the motherboard that will support them. That's the only way to get things nowadays. If you really needed multiple cores without paying more, then as I said, you should have gone the Opteron route, or socket 775 multiple Xeon route.
     
  23. Epona

    Epona n00b

    Messages:
    50
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    If ya want dual processors I'd recommend an SR-2/Xeon build but I assume that eventually where will be Xeon 1155 processors and then You'd be able to find something, though that day could be very far away.
     
  24. 00011

    00011 Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    290
    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2011
    Does it have to use server CPU's or can it use consumer CPU's?
     
  25. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    There will always be a use for $1000+ multi-CPU systems for the server market.

    The real question is what is the point of the consumer multi-CPU system, and I guess the point of consumer multi-CPU systems would be to fulfill the same market segment of people who purchase multiGPU systems and multi-display systems, the hardware enthusiasts, who used to be catered to 10 years ago with multi-CPU systems. Perhaps a re-immergence of the consumer dual cpu motherboard is in order.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  26. silent-circuit

    silent-circuit [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,133
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    Has to use server CPUs because consumer CPUs lack QPI. It's already been explained above. There is /no/ exception to this in the last few generations.

    They stopped because the technology changed making it no longer possible to make a dual socket board for any chip. Also, Intel realized they could make more money selling Xeon chips to professionals and Pentium / Core / etc to everyone else.
     
  27. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Couldn't somebody hack around this limitation?


    Technology changes all the time, I would think someone could come up with a way for this to work once again. What is the technical reason it won't work?
     
  28. silent-circuit

    silent-circuit [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    16,133
    Joined:
    Sep 18, 2005
    There is an interface (QPI) missing entirely from Intel's chips outside the Xeon server line. Even some of the Xeon branded chips don't support it. i7 / SB chips will not work in a multi-chip configuration without QPI support, and since it is a hardware limitation and relies on an extremely low latency high speed link between the two or more chips in a system, there is no hacking around it.
     
  29. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    I see what you mean now as far as QPI being the requirement. It's too bad QPI wasn't included in the 2600K design. That would have been nice.

    Oh well. Guess I'll have to be happy with the 2600K for now. Bummer though, because I would really like to have 2 of these in the same system.

    So it seems, I've already outgrown the CPU I just ordered. :(

    My next upgrade may have to include Xeon tech, wish it wasn't so expensive though. Sure would be nice to be able to have a dual Xeon W3690 system. We can only dream.

    Earlier someone had mentioned that Dual Xeon's were targeted for the server market mainly, but that doesn't seem true. Many professional workstations also use Xeon's in dual configs, like these ones from Titanus.

    http://www.titanuscomputers.com/category-s/67.htm

    Holy Moly!

    For the hell of it I priced out one of these Titanus systems with a dual Xeon 3680 and 48 gigs of RAM, price came to almost $8,000. They are marking up the pair of 3680's by $1000 and who knows how much markup on every other component in the rig. :)
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  30. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Server/workstation are mostly interchangeable, they both target pretty much the same sector (high performance, high load, high reliability).

    You really should actually read the posts, instead of picking out specific parts that suit your needs. I have stated at least 3 times throughout this thread that consumer-grade CPU's LACK THE ABILITY TO SUPPORT A MULTI-CPU SYSTEM. I have even stated a clear reason why in my last post. I have also told you even the highest-end consumer grade CPU does not support multi-CPU systems, so don't expect lower ones to. You can't add a hardware ability that isn't there, same as you can't run CUDA on AMD GPU's.

    As I also already explained to you, you can't use graphics cards to compare. Low end graphics cards (like GT220) do not support SLI. Mid-range graphics cards (like GTX 560 and 460) only support dual-SLI. Only the top-end cards support tri-SLI and above. The only reason this exists is because costs are much lower to implement it, and much more people want it. There's much more people playing games than there are people converting videos. Besides, videos don't require things to be rendered within a specific time frame (for most people), whereas graphics rendering does to maintain frame rates on games. So once again, you're paying a lot more for multiple graphics card abilities than you would pay for single graphics cards abilities only. Also, you need a higher end motherboard that will support multiple graphics cards. So you're paying more there also.
     
  31. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    I get that, but I still think there is an enthusiast sector that wants dual CPU systems at a much more reasonable cost, just as there are enthusiasts who want the MD230 display to be much lower than $569 (a rip off, should be $349).

    For instance, right now, I would love to build a dual 2600K system. If the QPI was there, I would do it.

    However, I am not willing to spend $1000 per cpu for a dual system. There should be a halfway point in there somewhere, and it would be pointless to build an older dual Xeon system. I'd want the speed of the W3690 \ X5670 doubled if I was to bother, but they are crazy overpriced for most enthusiasts.

    And, there are games out now that would benefit from dual cpu systems, Second Life in 5760x1600 is one of them, and there are many others as well. Eyefinity alone (6+ panel) has caused a reason for dual CPU systems to exist in the enthusiast market. Hopefully they come back to the consumer enthusiast market. We already have dual and tri GPU systems, but for some of these games, the CPU is still the bottleneck (especially for people who like to play Eyefinity games in super high resolutions while multitasking, like I do). I see this as a trend that AMD is focusing on.

    Read an interesting review of the SR2:

    http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/motherboards/2010/08/17/evga-classified-sr-2-review/1

    "Way back in 2003, long before the concept of a multi-core CPU had even entered the mind of AMD and Intel, Asus did what was hitherto considered impossible and made a motherboard that could overclock a pair of Xeon CPUs. That board, the legendary PC-DL, was not only groundbreaking due to the massive amount of performance it could unleash when overclocked, but also because it had been designed with enthusiasts in mind."

    Would be awesome if they could do the same thing with something like a 2600K, with enthusiasts in mind.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  32. Uberbob102000

    Uberbob102000 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,243
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    It's not insanely expensive like you keep pointing out for dual socket, dual CPU systems. (The follow figures are CPUs/Mobo)

    I think you could do a dual quad core Opteron system for less than $500 using a dual socket C32 board.
    If your attached to Intel's higher performance then you could do a dual quad core LGA1366 system for about $675.
     
  33. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Indeed, I have a thing against AMD CPU's. Go figure, I love their GPU's though. I had a pair of Athons way back in the day that left a bad taste in my mouth from AMD, been with Intel for CPU's ever since. I did like the old AMD 386DX-40 way back when. That was my first AMD CPU. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Am386

    The LGA1366 you mention, which processor? The higher end Xeon's are a grand each. (for any that compare to the speed of the 2600K). I'm probably missing something I suppose.

    This is awesome, and funny at the same time: http://www.guru3d.com/article/evga-classified-sr2-review/
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  34. jojo69

    jojo69 [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    10,396
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2009
    I remember people saying there would never be another skulltrail.

    Now SR2 folding rigs are fairly common.

    I feel fairly confident that EVGA will serve up the MOBO for dual processor SB

    As previously stated...you WILL have to pay the Xeon toll
     
  35. Uberbob102000

    Uberbob102000 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,243
    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Well that's just the thing, there probably will NOT be Xeons for LGA1155 because it's the consumer oriented socket, not the enthusiast/workstation or high end server socket.
     
  36. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    I don't see games creating a large demand for dual-CPU systems anytime soon, as you claimed. Most are not able to take advantage of more than two cores. Eyefinity as it is is a very niche market, and eyefinity6+ even more so.

    You keep saying enthusiast this, enthusiast that. Are you really an enthusiast? What do you consider to be an enthusiast? If you really needed that much processing power, why not pay for the i7 990x? Oh yeah, I forgot... you're a cheap enthusiast. Maybe you should've waited for ivy bridge before jumping on sandy bridge. You pay for additional performance. Period. Now maybe you should stop crying/whining, I doubt you will ever see consumer-grade dual-CPU systems, not at least until games that can take advantage of multiple cores become widespread, and even then, not until they become more CPU bound than GPU bound. So basically, a game like Crysis (which I believe can use multiple cores) would need to become restricted by a processor like the i7 990x on a quad-SLI GTX 580 system (in current terms) for multi-CPU consumer systems to even be considered by Intel/AMD, and even then, those games would need to make up at least 50% of the games actually being played. Which, really, I don't see happening anytime soon. Games for the most part are still going to be much more GPU bound than they are CPU bound in the next several years.

    Not sure why an AMD processor from several years ago has any factor in what is happening now. 6+ years in computer terms is like a thousand+ years difference.

    Edit: Keep dreaming for a dual-CPU SB system. None has appeared for 1156 yet, so it is very unlikely for one to appear for 1155. If Intel won't support it on the processor, it won't be supported by any motherboard manufacturer. Any that does make one will just be shooting themselves in the foot, because there won't be any processor that will support it. If you want a cheaper system, try socket 775, or go with lower performing 1366 Xeons. Either way, two of them will outperform your 2600k, right?
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  37. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    Why would I buy the i7 990X for $1000, when I can get the comparible i7 970 for $585?

    It's because I like to stay away from price gouging.

    The i7 990X is a ridiculously overpriced CPU.
     
  38. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Because the 990x has an unlocked multiplier and will overclock better than the 970. Well, actually, I would say go with the 980x.

    Price gouging is the primary reason I stay away from Intel.
     
  39. LittleTinyScooby

    LittleTinyScooby Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    130
    Joined:
    Mar 4, 2011
    I just don't think the extra $400 is worth that small of an overclocking perf gain. The 980X is also way overpriced.

    The 2600K is more reasonably priced, and if it had QPI and could go dual, it would be the JESUS chip.

    And calling me a cheap enthusiast makes no sense and not to mention is uncalled for. For some people, the whole point of overclocking is to gain that extra little bit of performance out of CPU's that cost less than the more expensive ones. In that respect, every person who overclocks is a cheap enthusiast, so it's not a bad thing to want to get the best bang for the buck, but you make it sound like it is. So yeah, I'm a cheap enthusiast because I don't like to pay for overpriced CPU's like the 980x and 990x.
     
    Last edited: Mar 6, 2011
  40. Tsumi

    Tsumi [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    13,030
    Joined:
    Mar 18, 2010
    Then wait for ivy bridge/2011 sandy bridge. But no matter what, you will have to pay extra for the xeons. That's the whole point of the top-end sockets that 1366 is and 2011 will be. It doesn't make good business sense to make something high-end available for mid-range.

    And yes, I do agree that the 6-core i7's are way overpriced, and that the i7 2600k is more reasonably priced. And yes, I understand best bang for the buck, which is why I go AMD.

    But the whole point is, you're not willing to pay extra for the features the Xeons offer. And you keep trying to justify things for a cheap consumer dual CPU system, when in fact, there is no such thing. Okay, so the cheap enthusiast remark may have been a bit over the top, but it's not too far from the truth. You are simply not willing to pay that extra bit to get a dual-CPU system.