• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

LGA2011 Info?

T

TwistedAegis

[H]F Junkie
Joined
Oct 7, 2009
Messages
8,958
Apparently my GoogleFu is sadly lacking in this, because I can't find any information on the net about this. Not too surprising, I know, but seeing all the people throwing out info about LGA2011 on these forums and others I was wondering if you all had any decent sources out there to get more info.

I'm trying to decide whether to spring for a 2600k or wait. I understand 2011 info wil be sketchy and broad, but I was just looking to get a general impression of what will differentiate the two in terms of power and price.
 
No reason to wait.... 2600K is an awesome proc. I WILL be upgrading to Ivy Bridge when it comes out however.
 
Brahmzy said:
No reason to wait.... 2600K is an awesome proc. I WILL be upgrading to Ivy Bridge when it comes out however.
Click to expand...

:p My finances don't give me that option and I'm fairly happy with my current rig for what games are out there right now. I'd be willing to wait 6 months or so for something that will be substantially better for the next gen of games, mainly BF3, and pay a premium on it, up to a point (no $1k EE editions for me).
 
Well a smattering of what I've read in relation to single cpu setups of socket 2011 in various places is: (socket 1155 info in parentheses)

pci-e 3.0 (2.0)
more pci-e lanes
quad channel ram (dual channel)
processors with more cores, up to 6 or maybe 8 depending on where you read
larger cache sizes on the processors

Will SB socket 2011 have better performance than SB socket 1155?
Yes
Will SB socket 2011 have better performance than ivy bridge socket 1155 when it's released?
Almost certainly yes. Keep in mind that socket 2011 builds will be more expensive and so I am not saying dollar for dollar better. Just that the average 2011 build will perform better than the average 1155 build.
How much better performance?
no way to know

I think the best thing to do is figure out what your budget is and go from there. Build a hypothetical rig right now based on socket 1155 and see how much it all costs. If you've met or exceeded your budget then I'd go for a 1155 build. Socket 2011 builds will cost more due to more expensive processors, more expensive motherboards, and quad channel ram requires a higher minimum cost than dual channel. And this is without considering what people have already said which is that socket 2011 caters to the multi-gpu crowd with all it's pci-e lanes so that adds to cost as well.

Just my 2 cents
 
Even then the added cost is hard to justify for a stricly gamer. Games are still not taking advantage of multicore (2+) and there is more than enough bandwidth across the "limited" PCI-e lanes for a couple GPUs

Now if you do more than just game, like a lot of transcoding or folding, rendering ect. then the 2011 is worth looking at.

Those of us on 1366 its kind of a step sideways IMO to go to 1155, at least right now. my 920 is still pushing 4.6ghz 24/7 w/o issue and I have enough cores to keep me happy.

It will have to be a BIG jump in perf to get me to move.
 
Thanks for all the info. I actually have a full build (minus CPU+mobo) sitting in boxes that I have picked up through hot & warm deals the past month or so. Of course, the dual channel RAM won't work, but it wasn't that expensive to begin with.

In terms of cost, I'm thinking I would be willing to spend up to the $500-$600 range for a LGA2011 CPU, but not the $1k or so of the EE processors. I do plan to SLI 6970s in my setup, although really would that saturate the PCIe lanes even with x8x8? I don't think so.

As for hard to justify as a gamer, I'm hoping this build will last me 2-3 years, so I would hope that at some point games begin to take advantage of more cores. It seems that BC2 and hopefully BF3 as well will do a decent job at it.

Right now I'm on a Q6600 @ 3.2, so either 1155 or 2011 will be a huge jump for me.
 
You could just spring for a 2500K for now. From what I have read Ivy Bridge can be placed in P67 mobos and that will be a octocore. Save that hundred and put it towards Ivy when the 2500K is not up to par. I would assume the Ivy bridge cores are just as stronger if not stronger then the current sandy ones, plus having twice as many will make it a beast. Honestly it is making me want to drop my plans for any upgrade to bulldozer atm.
 
xBanzai89 said:
You could just spring for a 2500K for now. From what I have read Ivy Bridge can be placed in P67 mobos and that will be a octocore. Save that hundred and put it towards Ivy when the 2500K is not up to par. I would assume the Ivy bridge cores are just as stronger if not stronger then the current sandy ones, plus having twice as many will make it a beast. Honestly it is making me want to drop my plans for any upgrade to bulldozer atm.
Click to expand...
The chipset might support it but thats not to say motherboard manufacturers will release BIOS updates in order to be compatible. I wouldn't depend on this when making the decision on which platform to choose. If it does turn out to be plug and play, then thats a plus to an already extremely potent system.

As for the OP, I don't think you could go wrong either way. If you are only keeping the setup for 2-3 years, either 1155 or 2011 will more than likely last you that long (if current trends remain - no oversaturation of PCI-E or shitty ports). If it doesn't you could always upgrade again if necessary but then the cost could potentially be larger in the end.

Do you just have the upgrade itch or is your Q6600 not doing what you want? If its fine for now, I would wait to see what Bulldozer and 2011 have to offer.
 
I have the upgrade itch, and I'm not able to max out the latest games. I also play at 2560x1600 so obviously I need more performance than what 1080p would demand.
 
i'm interested to see what ivy bridge has to offer. My guess is fast quad cores. I'm betting over 4ghz stock. That would be perfect for gaming. I'm sure I won't be able to resist 2011 though.
 
I would bet ivy-bridge will bring 6 or 8 cores at > 3.5 GHz and still be less than 95W.
 
I think that there will be costs associated with the socket 2011 processors and chip sets that will far outstrip the performance for most users.

A setup with 16gb ram 2600k will cost 600-700, I would imagine that a setup with 2011 with 16gb ram will easily cost 1000, and it will probably not be an unlocked core. (So it will be very difficult to hit 4.8 ghz etc).

In cinebench the 2600k has a 13% ipc improvement over the i7-950, which in turn has less than a 1 percent improvement over an i7-870. I would be surprised that once normalized for quad cores if 2011 has anything more than 10 percent improvement in cinebench. The difference in performance in gaming for multi gpu configurations should be about 5 percent (except for tri-sli). Most of that loss can be recovered by ponying up 100 dollars more a board with nf200.

It's hard to gauge where the performance of 2011 series processors will be, but short of pulling a rabbit out of their hats... for most users I don't think the benefit will be inline with the cost.

Cost associated for a 2600k nf200 setup (150 16gb ram, 350 M/b , 330 CPU=830), I would be very suprised if 2011 processors launch at less than 500 dollars, and of course it won't be unlocked. So is that 10 percent improvement worth 150 dollars? Is that fractional percentage improvement in multigpu gaming worth that much? And of course, you may have to wait till q3 or q4.

Then there's that fact that a lot of users don't need nf200, or 16gb ram.... so your back to a 170 dollar board a 330 processor and 75 bucks for which ever weekly newegg memory deal. So for under 600 dollars you're done.

The upgrade question becomes even more precarious if you are using a 1336, where i'm still trying to rationalize spending maybe 200 net on a sandybridge upgrade. It's tempting, confusing, but if you don't need a hex core 1336 you will probably not need to go 2011 which will be hex and octo core only.
For gaming putting that extra money into another high-end video card will probably reap greater benefits even with bandwidth losses due to limited pcie lanes.
 
You mention the nf200; do you have any info that this is necessary? All I know is that the last [H] review of PCIe lanes showed no difference between running x16 or x8, and if I recall correctly even x4 barely showed any change. Even with SLIed 580s, would you see any real-world difference running x8x8 vs x16x16? (Perhaps in multi-display setups?)
 
TwistedAegis said:
You mention the nf200; do you have any info that this is necessary? All I know is that the last [H] review of PCIe lanes showed no difference between running x16 or x8, and if I recall correctly even x4 barely showed any change. Even with SLIed 580s, would you see any real-world difference running x8x8 vs x16x16? (Perhaps in multi-display setups?)
Click to expand...

In any case, 2011 should, like 1366, have additional PCIe lanes off the processor, making the NF200 unneeded anyway.
 
TwistedAegis said:
You mention the nf200; do you have any info that this is necessary? All I know is that the last [H] review of PCIe lanes showed no difference between running x16 or x8, and if I recall correctly even x4 barely showed any change. Even with SLIed 580s, would you see any real-world difference running x8x8 vs x16x16? (Perhaps in multi-display setups?)
Click to expand...

The hardocp review concentrates on an x58 platform, where the nf200 provides negligible benefit.... put that on p55/p67 and there will be measurable differences, in some benchmarks.
The point is that even with deficiencies that will show themselves on some games/benchmarks, and in some configurations (high resolutions or nvidia surround) that for nearly everybody they are better off putting that money towards either a nf200 board and/or another highend video card for some multi gpu action. Because most of us, do not have unlimited funds.

But yeah there are situations where having more lanes is great.... and you need the hex core for gaming, but most of us don't have 3 30" monitors and 4 gtx580s.... :) and if you need a hex core then you need a hex core. Just buy sandybridge and be happy.
 
Hmm I don't understand how the platform would make a difference when they are measuring x16, x8 and x4. Does each lane have different bandwith per platform? My understanding is by no means thorough, but PCIe x16 should offer the same bandwith on x58, p55 or p67, correct?
 
TwistedAegis said:
Hmm I don't understand how the platform would make a difference when they are measuring x16, x8 and x4. Does each lane have different bandwith per platform? My understanding is by no means thorough, but PCIe x16 should offer the same bandwith on x58, p55 or p67, correct?
Click to expand...
Each platform has different numbers of available PCIe lanes. The higher-end boards tend to have more than the cheaper alternatives.

Also, each revision of the PCIe standard going forward has additional bandwidth (PCIe 1.0 - 2.5GT/s; PCIe 2.0 - 2.5-5GT/s; PCIe 3.0 - 8GT/s). All expansion slots are the same throughout the revisions of PCIe (x16 slots, 1x slots, etc) just not the maximum available throughput. The P55s are using PCIe 1.0 versus the P67 which uses PCIe 2.1.
 
Ok I'm sorry to keep beating on a dead horse here.

The [H] review showed no difference running x16 or x8 on a x58 which is PCIe 2.0. So I would imagine this should hold true for ANY board using PCIe 2.0, whether it be x58 or P67?
 
TwistedAegis said:
Ok I'm sorry to keep beating on a dead horse here.

The [H] review showed no difference running x16 or x8 on a x58 which is PCIe 2.0. So I would imagine this should hold true for ANY board using PCIe 2.0, whether it be x58 or P67?
Click to expand...

No one knows for sure yet. It might be reasonable to think that; however, LGA2011 is a different creature. It might make a difference where the X58 didn't.
 
GreenGoose said:
No one knows for sure yet. It might be reasonable to think that; however, LGA2011 is a different creature. It might make a difference where the X58 didn't.
Click to expand...

I agree. I was more trying to make sense of avddreamr's claim that a NF200 on a P67 would net performance gains you wouldn't see on a x58, even when using the same PCIe architecture and same # of lanes.
 
TwistedAegis said:
Ok I'm sorry to keep beating on a dead horse here.

The [H] review showed no difference running x16 or x8 on a x58 which is PCIe 2.0. So I would imagine this should hold true for ANY board using PCIe 2.0, whether it be x58 or P67?
Click to expand...

The P67 doesn't need the NF200 to run x8x8 (even though some boards include the NF200), since there are 16 full speed lanes available off the CPU, so yes, X58 x8x8 should be the same as P67 x8x8.

However, the inclusion of the NF200 adds latency to the problem - so x8x8 on an NF200 might be limited where the x8x8 on an X58 (no NF200) is not. As to how significant that is, well...I don't know that I've seen it benched anywhere.
 
avddreamr said:
It's hard to gauge where the performance of 2011 series processors will be.
Click to expand...
Not really,

Given that it's the same core design I would expect 2011 sandy bridge to have about the same IPC as 1155 sandy bridge. Stock clocks may be higher but likely only marginally so. There will be options with more cores (LGA1155 is 2-4 cores, afaict LGA2011 will be 4-8 cores)

The real question is whether intel will be nice enough to release a LGA2011 processor that is both affordable and overclockable.

tangoseal said:
Why not buy a 2600K and couple with the Z67 or X67 or who the hell knows 67 chipset replacement that will offer X58 like features?
Click to expand...
Such a chipset is simply not possible.

Afaict the only feature of x58+ICH10 has that P67 doesn't is it provides lots of PCIe lanes and connects them to the processor with a fast QPI interconnect. This is simply not possible with a LGA1155 CPU. The closest you can come is to connect the 16 lanes of PCIe that are available to a PCIe bridge chip like the NF200.

With Intel chips the days of being able to combine a mainstream CPU with a high end platform (or a high end CPU with a mainstream platform) disappeared when they moved from the old fashioned FSB to integrated memory controllers with QPI at the high end and on-chip PCIe at the low end.
 
Last edited:
Rossi~ said:
If it's Ivy Bridge then it's 22nm. Current Sandy bridge is the 32nm tock.
Click to expand...


LGA 2011 is NOT ivy bridge. LGA 2011 is NOT the refresh to current sandy bridge.

ivy bridge will be the 22nm refresh of socket 1155 processors.

LGA 2011 is targeted to server/enthusiast market. It is a different platform that will be released seperately from 22nm ivy bridge socket 1155 parts.
 
drescherjm said:
I would bet ivy-bridge will bring 6 or 8 cores at > 3.5 GHz and still be less than 95W.
Click to expand...


I am extremely doubtful that ivy bridge will have 8 cores. SB is only shipping with up to quad core right now and that seems like quite the jump.

Plus the notion that January 2012 will see an octocore chip built on 22nm on a mainstream platform (1155) kind of seems like it would take much of the gusto out of socket 2011 octocores on 32nm tech coming out Q3/Q4 this year. Socket 2011 would still obviously have the greatly expanded number of pci-e lanes, but that still just doesn't sound right. I don't imagine seeing 8-core processors on mainstream parts until haswell, but that's just me. Maybe ivy bridge could eventually get 8 core processors, I just don't see that happening at launch.
 
Good point. Intel will most likely not compete with itself if it does not have to. Meaning if bulldozer does not overtake the SB 2600K in desktop applications I do not see an 8 core lga1155.
 
Yeah i'm doubting the mainstream ivy bridge will have more than 4 cores. Possibly 6. It's my thinking that the die shrink will mainly be to speed up the chips.
 
modulus said:
LGA 2011 is NOT ivy bridge. LGA 2011 is NOT the refresh to current sandy bridge.

ivy bridge will be the 22nm refresh of socket 1155 processors.

LGA 2011 is targeted to server/enthusiast market. It is a different platform that will be released seperately from 22nm ivy bridge socket 1155 parts.
Click to expand...

Thanks for clearing that up, that's exactly why i said "If" :)
 
IDK, I think I will just stick with my X58 for my main computer for some time to come. X58 is proven, and proud. I did an i5 2500K build right when sandy bridge came out, and guess what, there were issues.
 
modulus said:
Well a smattering of what I've read in relation to single cpu setups of socket 2011 in various places is: (socket 1155 info in parentheses)

pci-e 3.0 (2.0)
more pci-e lanes
quad channel ram (dual channel)
processors with more cores, up to 6 or maybe 8 depending on where you read
larger cache sizes on the processors
Click to expand...

Also, from what I read, LGA 2011 platforms will have native support for JEDEC DDR3-1600 RAM (unfortunately, no such DIMMs exist at present; all of the currently available so-called "DDR3-1600" DIMMs are really overclockable DDR3-1333 DIMMs with XMP profiles for 1600 speed). However, the auto-selection of the DDR3-1600 speed is supported only with one DIMM per channel (four DIMMs total for a quad-channel CPU). If two DIMMs per channel (eight DIMMs total) are installed on such platforms, the memory speed will default to DDR3-1333 speed. If three DIMMs per channel (12 DIMMs total) are installed, the memory speed will default to only a fail-safe DDR3-800 speed.
 
nf200 is 'alright' but no substitute for the real deal. More pci on die is always better!
In my 1156 rig I got the following:
MOBO: Maximus 3 Extreme
CPU: i7-870
GPU: 6950 2GB (stock clocks and nothing 'unlocked' as I am happy with stock for the time being).
RAM: blah blah
PCIe x 8 Hardware Raid controller (PERC 6/i)
PCIe x 4 Hardware Intel PRO 1000 PT dual port NIC

As you can imagine the above rig scales the video card down to x8. Thankfully, I 'apparently' only lose 1fps (so-it -seems). I have not run thorough tests, just the latest Furmark before and after installed components (obviously GPU-Z displays card running at x8 only after PCIe cards are installed). This is when hardware RAID is moving files over one of the RJ45 ports to another computer (~150MB/s) and the other accessing the internet by running ISP SpeedTest, and running Furmark full screen (799Mhz being used of 800Mhz GPU core).
Not too shabby. However, I still much prefer my 1366 rig over the 1156 with nf200 anyday!

*I must note; I did not try running USB 3.0 and Sata 6gbps at the same time. I will try the USB 3.0 tomorrow and update this post accordingly with more test results. However, I do not have any Sata 6gbps HDDs or SSDs as all my Storage drives are only Sata 3gbps, therefore this will not be tested.
 
Last edited:
drescherjm said:
I would bet ivy-bridge will bring 6 or 8 cores at > 3.5 GHz and still be less than 95W.
Click to expand...
I'm dubious about this as well. Back when LGA 1156 came out, intel said that they wouldn't release any 6 core chips on it because real world applications (as opposed to mostly synthetic benchmarks) would bottleneck on only 2 channels of memory. While we have faster DDR3 now, and will see another uptick by next year sandybridge is also somewhat faster as well so that's a wash.

I don't see intel being able launch mainstream chips at the 6/8 core level without a new socket: either triple channel DDR3 (lga 1365), or dual channel DDR4 (lga 1154). I lean towards the former because while DDR4 is expected to launch early next year initial prices are likely to be high and availability low.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top