LGA Socket 775 to be Troublesome??

K

Kirkov

n00b
Joined
Mar 17, 2004
Messages
55
The new CPU sockets about to hit us all is not really a socket at all but actually a plug since it is all pins and it is proving troublesome. Rumours suggest poor reliability and that the socket manufacturer is limiting the warranty to a single CPU insertion by an official OEM. This reporter has serious reservations about this but does share the concern about reliability. One bent socket pin and the CPU won't work! Here is a virgin socket!!!
Click to expand...

Source: http://www.bit-tech.net/feature/38/2

R0016208.jpg


If it's true it ain't very interesting ahemmmmmmmm
 
that just looks weak.
Could be they're working against tweakers, or certainly not catering towards those that swap CPUs regularly.
 
Well crap. I mean, generally I don't remove my proc very often, but it'd still be nice to know that it won't break on you when you need it.
 
why don't they just use some titanium pins?
those are strong...
and small amounts shouldn't cost too much right?
 
don't really like this move by intel.... they better have some good reasons for it.
 
I know, been hearing this alot. I was really excited about not having pins on the new p4 chips. thought they would be even more sturdy and less likely to break pins :(

why can't they have the flat LGA pins on bottom of p4 chip and flat connector on mother board to mate to gether. or maybe tiny stubby pins instead :(
 
Originally posted by mewannafastpc
why don't they just use some titanium pins?
those are strong...
and small amounts shouldn't cost too much right?
Click to expand...

i would assume it has to do with electrical properties, copper/gold (amoung others) alloy they use now has some of the best electrical conductivity of any cheap, easy to produce metals. I can't imagine a Ti alloy handeling electrical current as well as what the current stuff does.
 
Just wondering how is this any different than a bent pin on a CPU?
Click to expand...

Well, "normal "pinned" CPU" can be swap without problems without having to worry about bending their pins (unless you're totaly brain damaged) . The LGA Socket on the motherboards seems to have very fragile pins as you can see
 
Originally posted by EarthwormJim
Just wondering how is this any different than a bent pin on a CPU?
Click to expand...

Maybe Intel is trying to shift the replacement burden of bent pins from themselves to the motherboard manufacturers. I suspect that bent and broken pins would increase dramatically if they were used on a 775 "pin" CPU.
 
Originally posted by Duckzilla
Maybe Intel is trying to shift the replacement burden of bent pins from themselves to the motherboard manufacturers. I suspect that bent and broken pins would increase dramatically if they were used on a 775 "pin" CPU.
Click to expand...
Look at socket 7 vs socket 370 vs socket 478.
The more pins are more tightly packed, shorter and seem to be made of stronger materials.
On a Pentium MMX or Celeron/PIII, the pins can be bent, wiggled a bit, on the P4's I have, those are tough little bastards. I can't see why 775 would be weaker unless they went with signifigantly smaller pins. Seems the biggest reason for the change was electrical, well, according to Intel...
I don't see why the LGA has to have diagonal slanted contact points rather than anything else... the design on the mobo just looks inherently weak.
 
Originally posted by mewannafastpc
why don't they just use some titanium pins?
those are strong...
and small amounts shouldn't cost too much right?
Click to expand...
They would be expensive and difficult to fabricate. The selection of available metal fabrication tools is greatly diminished when you move to titanium. FreiDOg covered the rest ;)
 
One thing is for sure, it'll be easier and cheaper for Intel to make their CPUs if they don't have to deal with all those little pins.
 
Originally posted by Duckzilla
One thing is for sure, it'll be easier and cheaper for Intel to make their CPUs if they don't have to deal with all those little pins.
Click to expand...

Yep, like someone else said. Put the burden of 775 fragile pins on the mobo makers instead of themselves.

They should have kept the socket design. This is going to make swapping CPU's potentially deadly to mobos.

They need the bent angle to provide spring/tension on each pin. To absorb the pressure and to ensure contact. However, after a few different CPU's I could definitely see these things weakening.

Also, are all of those capacitors what Intel has been trying to hide? Every other picture I've seen has the middle of the socket photoshopped over so you cant see it.

Whats the big deal?
 
Originally posted by chrisf6969
Yep, like someone else said. Put the burden of 775 fragile pins on the mobo makers instead of themselves.

They should have kept the socket design. This is going to make swapping CPU's potentially deadly to mobos.

They need the bent angle to provide spring/tension on each pin. To absorb the pressure and to ensure contact. However, after a few different CPU's I could definitely see these things weakening.

Also, are all of those capacitors what Intel has been trying to hide? Every other picture I've seen has the middle of the socket photoshopped over so you cant see it.

Whats the big deal?
Click to expand...

So we can't see how damn little each pressure contact is compared to the relatively giant surfaced-mount capacitors? (if that indeed is what they are.) Christ, they are small.
 
When is 775 (and AMD 939) launching anyway? The only reason i dont upgrade is a figure the improvements WILL be worth it this time (PCI-E, DDR2, new socket, etc).
 
DDR2 will kick ass in a few years from now. Just like the original DDR - PC1600 (DDR200) wasnt that great compared to SDRAM at first. (only had CAS 2.5 & 3 at first etc.)

But now that we're up to DDR400 (cas2) officially and DDR500+ (unofficially) it kicks ass.


DDR2 at first wont give any big improvements. (b/c of its increased latency) Though I think it will be very overclockable and in the long run kick some serious ass.
 
I think I can safely say a Socket T processor is NOT in my future. I have a feeling this one is going to be up there with the Pentium III 1.13 Ghz and i820 MCH.
 
here's what the INQ says:
There's another Achilles' heel for Intel too, and that's that you can probably only plop Prescotts into Socket Ts three or four times before the whole thing goes awry.
Click to expand...
 
Originally posted by Duckzilla
One thing is for sure, it'll be easier and cheaper for Intel to make their CPUs if they don't have to deal with all those little pins.
Click to expand...

Exactly. Less production cost which equals higher profit margine. Don't expect them to pass the savings onto us.
 
Why didn't Intel use a similiar socket like the Athlon64 745/940? The ZIF socket AMD uses works perfectly every single time. There must be a reason Intel went for a pinless CPU. But what?? Heat issues forced them to use a pinless socket form factor? At higher frequencies are the close proximity of pins causing EMI? I don't understand, Intel is wacked lately.
 
Originally posted by §kynet
Why didn't Intel use a similiar socket like the Athlon64 745/940? The ZIF socket AMD uses works perfectly every single time. There must be a reason Intel went for a pinless CPU. But what?? Heat issues forced them to use a pinless socket form factor? At higher frequencies are the close proximity of pins causing EMI? I don't understand, Intel is wacked lately.
Click to expand...
The LGA socket has much more contact area for a direct interface between the motherboard and CPU circuits, allowing for higher current delivery abilities. With Prescott and Tejas CPUs drawing much more current than any other desktop CPU, Intel was compelled to go with an LGA-type socket.
 
Originally posted by xonik
The LGA socket has much more contact area for a direct interface between the motherboard and CPU circuits, allowing for higher current delivery abilities. With Prescott and Tejas CPUs drawing much more current than any other desktop CPU, Intel was compelled to go with an LGA-type socket.
Click to expand...
I can see that by the sheer number if pins, why change from pins to LGA?
Packaging costs on the CPU would go down, mobo socket costs probably won't change that much after the initial redesign, but it just doesn't look to be as sturdy.

I'm seeing many RMA'ed boards in the future... does the warranty cover upgrading of the CPU killing the socket?

I've upgraded both of my desktop processors 3 times, well over twice the original frequency (700 to 1000 to 1400, 700 to 1400 to 2.1GHz) and I've pulled each system down on more than one occasion for cleaning and such. Will the LGA socket survive that and if it is as weak as it sounds is Asus going to warranty the board due to the weak socket losing a pin?
 
They're going to make a zif (pinned) socket for the LGA socket. SO if they LGA socket goes bad you lift the handle... and replace the LGA socket.

THen next they are going to go to Slot7 processors that work like the 370/slot1 adapters so if the LGA socket goes bad you replace the slot adapter.

J/K :) this industry is so backwards assed sometimes

coming up with new solutions that break old fixes... so then they retry an old fix and break a new solution and back & forth.
 
An LGA type 775-pin socket, yes. The current projection for Tejas is expected to be Q1 2005, though I suspect that it will be pushed back further, maybe even scrapped if the going is tough for this NetBurst architecture.
 
Originally posted by EarthwormJim
Just wondering how is this any different than a bent pin on a CPU?
Click to expand...

Easy - much easier to replace a cpu than a motherboard. CPUs are replaced more frequently than motherboards, generally.
 
:eek: .

Seriously.. :eek: !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I do NOT like that picture. If I'm an end-user and I'm looking at my own motherboard looking like that, I am NOT a happy person! :mad:

I guess I'll get to feel what disarming a ticking bomb feels like, what with the sweat dripping down my face as I carefully put the CPU in..
 
seriously, knowing that that can happen, I'll be a bit more careful installing my CPUs on that platform, making sure it is going in the right way, if you force it in the wrong direction, of course that can happen, it'll happen on S478, and S940 (whether AMD-fanboys want to believe it or not, *recalls conversation with one earlier this week).


Frankly, people are quite skeptical cause it's a new way of doing something, thats human-kind, i guess.
 
Originally posted by Duckzilla
One thing is for sure, it'll be easier and cheaper for Intel to make their CPUs if they don't have to deal with all those little pins.
Click to expand...

Yes, but motherboard prices will go up cuz socket T costs more. They've estimated the socket alone will add 5-7 bucks to the cost of motherboards, so you wont be saving much if any.
 
This is a sucessful effort to put the blame of bent/broken pins on the motherboard manufacturers. While it may have some advantages in the process, it is obvious that Intel does not want the burden anymore.
 
Originally posted by tdg
Yes, but motherboard prices will go up cuz socket T costs more. They've estimated the socket alone will add 5-7 bucks to the cost of motherboards, so you wont be saving much if any.
Click to expand...

I didn't mean to imply that the end-user would save any, only Intel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top