LGA2011 info X79

Most excellent. Now with BF3 and LGA2011 both marked for "Q4 2011" let's hope it goes LGA2011 first, then BF3. :)
 
AthlonXP said:
yum quad channel DDR3...
Click to expand...

Gotta wonder how much that will matter, given that SB isn't exactly starved for memory bandwidth (judged by the difference between 1333 and 2133 performance).

No more QPI either.
 
Hmmm....

I was about to buy a new i7, but after reading this I might have to wait.
 
PolygonGTC said:
Hmmm....

I was about to buy a new i7, but after reading this I might have to wait.
Click to expand...
That's flawed logic. When this ships ... the next one is right around the corner, so you might have to wait a bit.

When you compare x79 to p67, there's not much difference other than a new CPU socket and quad DDR channels (which isn't going to make a difference in performance outside of benchmarks). It doesn't even have native USB 3.0.
 
bigdogchris said:
That's flawed logic. When this ships ... the next one is right around the corner, so you might have to wait a bit.

When you compare x79 to p67, there's not much difference other than a new CPU socket and quad DDR channels (which isn't going to make a difference in performance outside of benchmarks). It doesn't even have native USB 3.0.
Click to expand...

I think you can count on the smarter motherboard makers to add USB 3.0 with a separate chipset.
 
I'm thinking ivy bridge may be the smarter choice at the time. But I didn't become a computer enthusiast by making smart buying decisions. LGA2011 here I come.
 
No integrated USB 3.0 doesn't sound good for the future of USB 3.0 and those hoping to see USB 3.0 as standard in laptops. In desktops I'm sure everyone will have a 3rd part chip to handle USB 3.0.
 
bigdogchris said:
That's flawed logic. When this ships ... the next one is right around the corner, so you might have to wait a bit.

When you compare x79 to p67, there's not much difference other than a new CPU socket and quad DDR channels (which isn't going to make a difference in performance outside of benchmarks). It doesn't even have native USB 3.0.
Click to expand...

Those are just icing on the cake. I'm contemplating waiting for a faster processor with 8 cores. If I upgrade now, I won't when 2011 comes out. I have an i7 right now, so it's not like my computer is slow.

Also, as was said, any mobo worth it's salt will have a separate chip onboard for USB 3.
 
Last edited:
Yeah its pretty stupid that Intel isn't offering natively support for USB3, WTF Intel? You guys should be moving forward if your planning a new socket and chipset, but overall, I can't wait. Hope the CPU isn't too expensive, I'll be happy if one doesn't cost $1K for a mainstream one.
 
bigdogchris said:
That's flawed logic. When this ships ... the next one is right around the corner, so you might have to wait a bit.

When you compare x79 to p67, there's not much difference other than a new CPU socket and quad DDR channels (which isn't going to make a difference in performance outside of benchmarks). It doesn't even have native USB 3.0.
Click to expand...

you have no clue how Pci-e works. Then there is other applications other than games btw. So your statement is flawed
 
My guess is Light Peak will be like USB 3. Not on the chipset, but possibly on the boards.
 
Eh most board support Usb 3.0. And a lot of companies make controllers for it
 
The one thing I want is for them to actually make these more workstation-minded (if that's a word) for the average consumer

The i52500K was introduced, and it's powerful. Introducing another CPU which is essentially the same but just another version of this CPU and there is probably no reason to go the other route.

My wishlist for Intel is that I would like to build a dual CPU 2011 8-core 16-thread system with room to grow in the future (12 cores, 16 cores etc), 8 ram slots for 64GB+ and all of that on an ATX or SSI-CEB form-factor motherboard. The Tyan S7025 should be normal for consumers, and not that much more expensive than the "mainstream" p67/H67 boards. Minimize the PCI-e slots if needed (I need just 4~5, depending on what else the board has), and ditch the PCI slots entirely.

Not E-ATX since that makes it too large; ATX or SSI-CEB can work fine and dandy.


The Mac Pro can, it's time to give us on the PC side the options to build such a machine as well. Make the differences between the LGA1155 and the LGA 2011 more pronounced.
 
Last edited:
Avi said:
The one thing I want is for them to actually make these more workstation-minded (if that's a word) for the average consumer

The i52500K was introduced, and it's powerful. Introducing another CPU which is essentially the same but just another version of this CPU and there is probably no reason to go the other route.

My wishlist for Intel is that I would like to build a dual CPU 2011 8-core 16-thread system with room to grow in the future (12 cores, 16 cores etc), 8 ram slots for 64GB+ and all of that on an ATX or SSI-CEB form-factor motherboard. The Tyan S7025 should be normal for consumers, and not that much more expensive than the "mainstream" p67/H67 boards. Minimize the PCI-e slots if needed (I need just 4~5, depending on what else the board has), and ditch the PCI slots entirely.

Not E-ATX since that makes it too large; ATX or SSI-CEB can work fine and dandy.


The Mac Pro can, it's time to give us on the PC side the options to build such a machine as well.
Click to expand...

Sounds like your describing server hardware. That is what the mac pro uses, and is already available.
 
That's my point. IMO, Xeon's shouldn't really exist. A P67 system nowadays is fast enough, that to just add more bells and whistles to an X79 just makes it a souped up P67, not an entirely different breed of CPU like it should be.

Extra lanes? Whohoo. More Satas? Whoop-dee-doo. The total amount of ram remains the same, the CPU frequency are negligible, I see no reason why you woul go for an enthusiast over the current mainstream.

Unless, the X79 is much more beastly than the P67, which IMO can be achieved by literally doubling the total ram capacity, the possibility of dropping in a second chip for more processing power, etc. We've had dual CPUs in the Pentium 3 days, why can't we have them back now?

For me, that would be a key selling point. Not extra PCI-e lanes or 4 more sata ports (which I can get with an add-in card anyway), but an extra CPU socket and more total RAM without needing an E-ATX board or fully buffered DIMMs.



IMHO.
 
It will be some time before all that fits on an atx. And so far all we have is specs about the chipset. We don't really know anything about the cpu's themselves. I don't see dual cpu's coming back to the mainstream market anytime soon. That is why there is an enthusiast/server market. Most people don't need anything like that.

Also, Xeon's will always exist, because big business will spend big money. So why wouldn't they?
 
Avi said:
That's my point. IMO, Xeon's shouldn't really exist. A P67 system nowadays is fast enough, that to just add more bells and whistles to an X79 just makes it a souped up P67, not an entirely different breed of CPU like it should be.

Extra lanes? Whohoo. More Satas? Whoop-dee-doo. The total amount of ram remains the same, the CPU frequency are negligible, I see no reason why you woul go for an enthusiast over the current mainstream.

Unless, the X79 is much more beastly than the P67, which IMO can be achieved by literally doubling the total ram capacity, the possibility of dropping in a second chip for more processing power, etc. We've had dual CPUs in the Pentium 3 days, why can't we have them back now?

For me, that would be a key selling point. Not extra PCI-e lanes or 4 more sata ports (which I can get with an add-in card anyway), but an extra CPU socket and more total RAM without needing an E-ATX board or fully buffered DIMMs.



IMHO.
Click to expand...

The chipset's function has greatly diminished this day. They are not much more than a PCIe bridge with an integrated SATA and USB controller. Everything else is in the CPU or in external chips. The chipset has no longer anything to do with RAM. And fully buffered DIMMs died already with the introduction of the Nehalem CPUs.
Intel builds these CPUs mainly for the server market and offers featurewise stripped down and renamed uniprocessor versions for the few "enthusiasts" that need an 8 core CPU at home. This is then bundled with a stripped down and renamed server chipset. Intel does not lose anything by doing this, they developed the processors for the server market and if they can sell a few additional CPUs with everything deactived what makes them server CPUs for 90% of the original price they will gladly do it.
If you want a workstation system, you have to buy workstation CPUs. They are not that much more expensive than the comparable consumer CPUs. By the way, the Mac Pro uses Xeon CPUs.
 
Last edited:
Avi said:
That's my point. IMO, Xeon's shouldn't really exist. A P67 system nowadays is fast enough, that to just add more bells and whistles to an X79 just makes it a souped up P67, not an entirely different breed of CPU like it should be.

Extra lanes? Whohoo. More Satas? Whoop-dee-doo. The total amount of ram remains the same, the CPU frequency are negligible, I see no reason why you woul go for an enthusiast over the current mainstream.

Unless, the X79 is much more beastly than the P67, which IMO can be achieved by literally doubling the total ram capacity, the possibility of dropping in a second chip for more processing power, etc. We've had dual CPUs in the Pentium 3 days, why can't we have them back now?

For me, that would be a key selling point. Not extra PCI-e lanes or 4 more sata ports (which I can get with an add-in card anyway), but an extra CPU socket and more total RAM without needing an E-ATX board or fully buffered DIMMs.



IMHO.
Click to expand...

Server chips exist so that Intel can sell you 24/7/365 uptime and reliability. ECC/Registered RAM goes hand in hand with that. As do the features on a typical server-class motherboard, which are generally along the lines of "remote-monitoring/access/change/security"-type deals. The margin on server chips is HUGE and that's why Xeons do exist. Most server features are wasted on the general public.

Your suggestions are eerily reminiscent of Intel's "Skulltrail" platform, which utilized a 2-CPU socket, FB-DIMM EATX motherboard and support for Xeon 2P CPUs. It was ludicrously expensive for its time, didn't perform that much better than a similarly configured Core 2 Quad system in most general tasks, and ended up being an abject failure. The closest thing I can think of that exists today is the EVGA SR-2, which, due to its cost, also isn't exactly flying off the shelves.

You suggest eliminating the need for EATX and registered/buffered DIMMs, but if you're going to load up on multiple CPU sockets (with the attendant HUGE CPU coolers that we have today) and 128 GB worth of memory populating 8 DIMM slots, you pretty much have to have EATX and better memory. People that have these outsized requirements are going to buy true workstation/server class hardware.

LGA2011 just sounds like a classic upsell - you'll probably get like 5-8% aggregate performance boost over a similar P67 platform, but at like 20-30% of the cost. For most people, that's surely not worth it. But here on [H], it just might be. We'll just have to wait and see.
 
What happened to PCI Express 3.0 ???

Why aren't people talking about that? That was the real motivation to wait for X79 in the first place. All info (up to now) was pointing to "PCI-E 3.0 being debuted with LGA2011", and now that's gone.

Generally speaking, my "full system upgrades" only happen when there is a jump in physical connections like PCI-E 1.0 to 2.0 (otherwise I just stretch a system's lifespan by upgrading it as far as I can with newer CPUs and GPUs, adding more and more RAM and extra HDDs, and now SSDs). PCI-E 3.0 would be a worthy upgrade path because all new high end video cards would use the new spec. Only problem is that it's not happening....
 
E^vol said:
What happened to PCI Express 3.0 ???

Why aren't people talking about that? That was the real motivation to wait for X79 in the first place. All info (up to now) was pointing to "PCI-E 3.0 being debuted with LGA2011", and now that's gone.

Generally speaking, my "full system upgrades" only happen when there is a jump in physical connections like PCI-E 1.0 to 2.0 (otherwise I just stretch a system's lifespan by upgrading it as far as I can with newer CPUs and GPUs, adding more and more RAM and extra HDDs, and now SSDs). PCI-E 3.0 would be a worthy upgrade path because all new high end video cards would use the new spec. Only problem is that it's not happening....
Click to expand...

I think PCIe 3.0 was part of the leaked Ivy Bridge slides that showed up a few days ago. But you're right, it's mysteriously missing from LGA 2011.

Intel's going to dole out better tech as slowly as it possibly can.

"Please sir, can I have some more?"
"MORE?!"
 
Right now, the only thing holding me back from Sandy Bridge is PCI lanes. I need to be able to run a RAID controller card & Graphics card without splitting bandwidth on one or the other, so SB is out of the question. If X79 will do it, then great, but I would really like an extreme CPU on the next build as well.
 
The QPI links will be disabled for uniprocessor CPUs Intel is going to sell in the enthusiast segmet.
 
Forceman said:
Do you see QPI mentioned anywhere? Because all I saw was a DMI link to the southbridge, supplemented with the x4 PCIe. But I guess it doesn't really matter, since all the PCIe lanes are off the CPU anyway.
Click to expand...

QPI never mattered for single CPU setups. Its for SMP systems. Its a direct link between the chips. The Xeons are going to have 2 QPI links. Just because stuff isn't mentioned in very early leaks doesn't mean that it isn't going to happen. Those slides are far from the full feature list of the chipset.
 
r00t61 said:
Server chips exist so that Intel can sell you 24/7/365 uptime and reliability. ECC/Registered RAM goes hand in hand with that. As do the features on a typical server-class motherboard, which are generally along the lines of "remote-monitoring/access/change/security"-type deals. The margin on server chips is HUGE and that's why Xeons do exist. Most server features are wasted on the general public.

Your suggestions are eerily reminiscent of Intel's "Skulltrail" platform, which utilized a 2-CPU socket, FB-DIMM EATX motherboard and support for Xeon 2P CPUs. It was ludicrously expensive for its time, didn't perform that much better than a similarly configured Core 2 Quad system in most general tasks, and ended up being an abject failure. The closest thing I can think of that exists today is the EVGA SR-2, which, due to its cost, also isn't exactly flying off the shelves.

You suggest eliminating the need for EATX and registered/buffered DIMMs, but if you're going to load up on multiple CPU sockets (with the attendant HUGE CPU coolers that we have today) and 128 GB worth of memory populating 8 DIMM slots, you pretty much have to have EATX and better memory. People that have these outsized requirements are going to buy true workstation/server class hardware.

LGA2011 just sounds like a classic upsell - you'll probably get like 5-8% aggregate performance boost over a similar P67 platform, but at like 20-30% of the cost. For most people, that's surely not worth it. But here on [H], it just might be. We'll just have to wait and see.
Click to expand...



Quite correct.

I decided to look up how things are on the server side of things for the first time in quite a while, and I have stumbled on the Tyan S7002. Specifically, this model. It fits the FT02B I was planning on using for my next build, and I can even mount dual corsair H50s just for kicks (and keeping fan noise low). 32GB unbuffered ram tops, but I can definitely live with that.

One thing I haven't quite figured out is the processor themselves: I can't seem to find info on the Xeons themselves, as to which offers the best bang for the buck. But this mobo would be a godsend for my workflow, and it's not that much more expensive than top of the line "consumer" stuff.

I wonder what LGA2011 will bring for this form factor. /wishful thoughts
 
Last edited:
German Muscle said:
QPI never mattered for single CPU setups. Its for SMP systems. Its a direct link between the chips. The Xeons are going to have 2 QPI links. Just because stuff isn't mentioned in very early leaks doesn't mean that it isn't going to happen. Those slides are far from the full feature list of the chipset.
Click to expand...

The relevance to enthusiast chips, and the reason I brought it up, was that the X58 used QPI to connect the processor to the IOH - which has now been dropped. Some people, earlier, were using the QPI link as a reason to skip 1155 and wait for 2011, so I was just pointing out that the SB-E chips won't have QPI either.
 
I wouldn't say that FB-DIMM died whem Nehalem was released, since Nehalem EX/Beckton systems utilize FB-DIMM to achieve quad-channel DDR support.
 
You are right, I meant FB-DIMMs are obsolete now for two-socket systems. Which is IMHO different from the Core2 generation.
 
They way I read the article is the X79 will be released before any new chipsets for 1155, almost like we won't see one till IB.

Edit: they meant no "enthusiast" level 6 series chipsets. I guess 1155 is just second fiddle.


Also wanted to add why USB 3.0 won't be released on the native intel chipset, cause a lot of USB 2.0 devices don't wor with USB3 ports. Intel would have to have both USB2 and USB 3 native support since the bacward compatibility is a bunch of BS. I don't see USB3 ever being more than an extra.
 
Last edited:
Is there an expected release date for all this? Been trying to find one, cant seem to find anything. :(
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top