E5645 gives you excellent performance / watt / dollar. Motherboard costs also includes features like registered ECC memory, dual Intel NICs, remote management, excellent reliability. You do lose overclocking though, unless you get SR.2, which is probably the motherboard cost you're talking about - it costs a LOT more than many dual-1366 motherboards and requires specific cases because it has a completely retarded form factor, cause EVGA was too good for E-ATX or SSI EEB.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
-
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.
Sandy Bridge-E Model Numbers, Clock Speeds Surface
- Thread starter Tisca
- Start date
E5645 gives you excellent performance / watt / dollar. Motherboard costs also includes features like registered ECC memory, dual Intel NICs, remote management, excellent reliability. You do lose overclocking though, unless you get SR.2, which is probably the motherboard cost you're talking about - it costs a LOT more than many dual-1366 motherboards and requires specific cases because it has a completely retarded form factor, cause EVGA was too good for E-ATX or SSI EEB.
D
Deleted whining member 223597
Guest
Who said I buy this or that people who buy this buy this for gaming?
For people in this thread, earlier, suggesting that the socket 1155 cant handle 3 590s or 6990s. Well your dead on right.
The cards are only limited by their respective manufacturer to only be able to physically run 2 cards. So your argument is null and void before your attempt to make a point had any ground to stand on.
Bulldozer will offer 32 lanes as well and if you cant afford E then BD will be for you.
I for one do not forsee anything at this point atleast for one more year that can hold back the 2600K @ 4.8ghz.
The cards are only limited by their respective manufacturer to only be able to physically run 2 cards. So your argument is null and void before your attempt to make a point had any ground to stand on.
Bulldozer will offer 32 lanes as well and if you cant afford E then BD will be for you.
I for one do not forsee anything at this point atleast for one more year that can hold back the 2600K @ 4.8ghz.
German Muscle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 7,290
I find it funny that all of the 1155 are mad that this is coming out and trying to tell everyone how pointless the 2011 platform is for anything except servers and workstations.
It's as pointless as 1366 was. FYI, I'm currently speaking from an LGA 775 E8200, so get your facts straight.
Motherboards manufacturers are also retarded; they're complaining that quad channel makes it hard to route motherboard traces, yet Supermicro has been stuffing 8 DIMMs in ATX mobos for a while (H8SGL-F), on the same side.
That board only goes up to 1333mhz. While 1600mhz as the x79 officially supports isn't much higher, it is higher, plus these mobo companies most likely want enthusiasts to be able to use the OCed RAM, 2000+mhz and such.
That has no impact on motherboard traces. They're too cheap to add another layer in their highest end products >.> It's not about how thick the traces are, they're complaining that there's too many and it's a problem, when it clearly isn't. Their problem is probably because they have the RAM oriented in the wrong direction; almost all real server and workstation motherboards have it parallel to the bottom, while all desktop is perpendicular; it makes it harder to fit a large socket, VRMs and memory in a short lateral space.
GreenGoose
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2004
- Messages
- 1,721
I agree with this. Some people get so upset and jealous of those that always buy high end. They spend all there time talking about how unnecessary it is rather than talking about the new technology in itself. Maybe some of you people are just not [H]ard enough for this forum.
What's funny is that before 1155 came out, everyone was talking about how it was pointless and everyone should wait for 2011. Now that 2011 is coming out, different story.
I think it is pointless ... that 1356 should be the low end and 2011 the high end...
shouldn't continue to have dual channel on low end...
DeathPrincess
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 18,205
the lowest end 3820 seems like the only pointless option. No overclocking. Same number of threads as a 2600k and only a few more lanes/memory channels. I don't really see which market segment it's aimed at, people who want a higher end CPU that acts like a lower end CPU?
They should have left at least one of the "lower" models non crippled. I suppose they don't have any competition below the lower end models...
They should have left at least one of the "lower" models non crippled. I suppose they don't have any competition below the lower end models...
that isn't confirmed yet
DeathPrincess
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 18,205
It just seems likely however... Not sure why... Though it doesn't really make sense. High end part...with low end limitations...
Bus clocking!!!
DeathPrincess
Fully [H]
- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 18,205
If only that were true! Feels so much more hardcorer!
I bet its true.
It would make sense...as of yet I have not payed for a new unlocked chip...
(picked up an old fx for pocket change and such) never payed for a k or anything...
I am a bus clocker...
I wouldn't even think about SB-E or IB until DDR4 boards come out (2012) supporting those boards, that will be the real upgrade platform for the rich or benchmark addicted.
If I had money to waste just get a G1 killer board and a 970 / 980 with sum DDR3 2200. But that system now will be like high end maybe a year tops. Pretty much a waste for the price imo, unless you've had that system for awhile maybe you've gotten some fun use from it for the price paid.
If I had money to waste just get a G1 killer board and a 970 / 980 with sum DDR3 2200. But that system now will be like high end maybe a year tops. Pretty much a waste for the price imo, unless you've had that system for awhile maybe you've gotten some fun use from it for the price paid.
German Muscle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 7,290
Your opinion isnt fact. LOL BTW im on a LGA 775 Q6700. You want a cookie?
I do agree the DIMMs should be on one side and not 2.
Well see how pointless socket 2011 is when all the naysayers dont have a rig as fast.
+10
Nor is yours lol...
um... mixed feelings on ram placement... as far as lowest possible latency splitting it makes sense... and reduces pcb cost for traces and layers..
That said... my G34 quad channel is all on one side...
German Muscle
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2005
- Messages
- 7,290
i never stated my opinion was fact. The sales of socket 1366 boards and CPUs show it wasnt pointless.
And also makes it impossible to use a fan on a heatsink on either side of it with tall memory heatspreaders, which is common in enthusiast systems; at least with them on one side you can use a fan on the other side. If they were parallel to the top/bottom of the motherboard, you could use whatever setup you wanted, except a fan towards the top.
PCB cost, meh... how come G34 mobos are not too bad when you take out the server features out, as well as take Supermicro's support out (which carries a premium on all of their boards)? It's just one more channel, should cost marginally more than 1366.
Michaelius
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2003
- Messages
- 4,684
That's good we need to get rid of that stupid marketing fad which pushes huge ram heatsinks to the clueless masses.
firas
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 2,458
so they mixed the memory bandwidth benchmark with the real world benchmarks (Cinebench,POV-Ray,ProShow where the increase was 12%-15%) to come up with that 47 number!
Yeah, as adding more memory bandwidth magically makes stuff faster. We know that even triple channel DDR3 2133 is a massive bottleneck. Right? Right?! Right??!
needmorecarnitine
Supreme [H]ardness
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2004
- Messages
- 4,609
Last I heard, DDR4 is expected in 2014. Where did you see that SB-E or Ivy Bridge would use DDR4?
SB-E won't use ddr4... and I doubt IB will
lol... G34 is quad channel because its an mcm package... 2 dual channel dies... its highly bandwidth sensitive because of this...
then again 2011 seems to be bandwidth sensitive also... up the core count ...it only makes sense... I hate tall ram coolers... I am glad they are coming back down to more reasonable levels...
DDR4 is still years off from now. I'd only be slightly surprised if Broadwell (14nm shrink of Haswell) supports DDR4. DDR4 is something coming more in the Skylake release schedule, at least in sufficient volume.
The problem with DDR4 is topology: it uses a point to point connection to the memory controller, unlike the multiple DIMMs that can be connected per memory channel now. A DDR4 motherboard is not just a tweak of a DDR3 board like DDR2->DDR3 was. It is a big shift on the desktop.
1 DDR4 DIMM == 1 memory channel. And the speed is slowly increasing through development. Some speed targets aren't expected to be met until 2013. Also, the DDR4 memory spec isn't even finalized yet. So it's very unlikely that either AMD or Intel has integrated DDR4 memory controllers yet. When the spec is finalized, expect CPU products using it to follow 3-4 years later.
The problem with DDR4 is topology: it uses a point to point connection to the memory controller, unlike the multiple DIMMs that can be connected per memory channel now. A DDR4 motherboard is not just a tweak of a DDR3 board like DDR2->DDR3 was. It is a big shift on the desktop.
1 DDR4 DIMM == 1 memory channel. And the speed is slowly increasing through development. Some speed targets aren't expected to be met until 2013. Also, the DDR4 memory spec isn't even finalized yet. So it's very unlikely that either AMD or Intel has integrated DDR4 memory controllers yet. When the spec is finalized, expect CPU products using it to follow 3-4 years later.
Package doesn't matter, still same number of traces whether it's LGA 1944 or LGA 2011. LGA 2011 ain't bandwidth sensitive for desktop use, neither is LGA 1366, neither is LGA 1155.
thats not what she said...
um... if your buying 2011...your not a regular desktop user...
The reason G34 is more sensitive than 2011 folding wise... is because of package... on 2011 your depriving all cores equally...vs just half of them... so you get load imbalance on g34...
and I bet benchmarks will show that 2011 is sensitive for gaming... you put that many cores down... it needs more bandwidth...
- Joined
- Jun 9, 2003
- Messages
- 7,099
I was waiting for Socket 2011 for Enthusiast parts to upgrade and if these are the only 3 options, I'm going to be really, really frustrated .
Where is my 6-core full HT, Full feature set, Full cache (15mb) , Unlocked, NON extreme edition with lower base clocks? Did they really hate the success of the Core i7 920 and 930 so much that they had to cripple everything save their Extreme edition? Very, very disappointed.
Where is my 6-core full HT, Full feature set, Full cache (15mb) , Unlocked, NON extreme edition with lower base clocks? Did they really hate the success of the Core i7 920 and 930 so much that they had to cripple everything save their Extreme edition? Very, very disappointed.
I don't know if it is so much that people get mad, but perhaps some do. But you would not concede that at least it is definitely overkill at this time? "Yeah, yeah *blank* should be enough anyone will ever need," not saying that lol. I'm just saying with the current state of games and software support, particularly in the multi-thread area, there is plenty of hardware that is plenty more than sufficient. Sure for stuff like video encoding, more is always better, but unfortunately for games, they certainly aren't keeping up with processors or memory bandwidth.
Are you really going to say that we need 12 threads and quad channel memory to get the most out of 99% of software out there? Particularly games?
Now I am not mad that new hardware is coming out, that is just how it is. And it has always been that way. But top of the line or 2nd down, soon enough something will be knocking you down a notch. It's just how the hardware game works.
But I will have to agree that the diehard 1366 fanatics are the ones who are delusional, still insisting that it is a superior platform for gaming compared to 1155, all things considered. Those are the ones that give me a good laugh. "But, but, it's *high end* and 1155 is "mainstream," mine has to be better!! Not fair!!"
And yes, maybe they aren't "hard" enough, but come on, we are all adults here, aren't we? Can't we discuss the relative cost/performance ratio and benefit, and not always rag on that stuff which isn't absolutely top of the line bleeding edge? Or is that not [H]ard enough?
But suffice to say, I am looking forward to socket 2011. I can't say I will adopt right away, as I am more than satisfied with my 2600K at 4.8, and pushing only one monitor, I really don't have need for multiple video cards. But if the lowest price UNLOCKED SB-E chip can manage to be no more than $500, then I will definitely be interested. Can't wait to see.
firas
2[H]4U
- Joined
- Oct 29, 2006
- Messages
- 2,458
same here
i7-3960X __ 6 cores, 12 threads with HTT 3.30 GHz, Turbo Boost to 3.90, 15 MB L3 cache
i7-3930K __ 6 cores, 12 threads with HTT 3.20 GHz, Turbo Boost to 3.80, 12 MB L3 cache
i7-3820 ___ 4 cores, 8 threads with HTT 3.60 GHz, Turbo Boost to 3.90, 10 MB L3 cache
the third has 4 cores and locked BClk multiplier
the second may cost $700 alone + new LGA2011 board + 4 memory dimms =
2600K+Z68 board+8GB DDR3@1600 could cost less than $600
Desktop doesn't mean just email and facebook, it covers gaming too. Games aren't memory bandwidth. There's lots of people with 1366 that don't do anything other than gaming, while 1366 was intended as a workstation/server socket, just like 2011 is. It's available to gamers just to earn some bucks from people with too much money.
No it doesn't. It's been shown 6-core Gulftown gets no improvement from higher than 1333. In fact, dual channel on Gulftown still doesn't impact performance.
This is still true: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-speed-tests,1807-15.html
Yes it may be old, but single channel DDR2 667 is just 5-7% slower than dual channel 1066 in WinRAR, and anything else is up to 3% slower. 3% speed improvement by addiing four times the memory bandwidth (1066 / 667 = 2; 2 channels as well). Now Nehalem/Gulftown is 1066 default (1333 on 1156 and Xeons), but it's DDR3, which doubles bandwidth once again, it has an IMC which dramatically reduces latencies and it has a third channel on 1366.
Memory bandwidth only makes an impact in ERP; G34 gets a solid boost just because of the memory, LGA 1567 gets even more as the quad channels are fed to all the cores, instead of half. Database too to a lesser extend, but databases like large caches and lots of capacity more than banddwidth.
EDIT: AnandTech made a new memory performance test. 1600 MHz is the sweet spot, 1333 is a just little slower and barely noticeable, and this is on video transcoding with x264 and compressing with 7-Zip - you're better off spending that money on a faster CPU, as these workloads scale MUCH MUCH better with higher processor clocks.
Last edited:
same here
i7-3960X __ 6 cores, 12 threads with HTT 3.30 GHz, Turbo Boost to 3.90, 15 MB L3 cache
i7-3930K __ 6 cores, 12 threads with HTT 3.20 GHz, Turbo Boost to 3.80, 12 MB L3 cache
i7-3820 ___ 4 cores, 8 threads with HTT 3.60 GHz, Turbo Boost to 3.90, 10 MB L3 cache
the third has 4 cores and locked BClk multiplier
the second may cost $700 alone + new LGA2011 board + 4 memory dimms =
2600K+Z68 board+8GB DDR3@1600 could cost less than $600
+1
I was waiting for SB-E to upgrade, but it's starting to look like a 2600K/Z68 combo will be in my future. That ~$700 price tag for the 3930K is a lot to consider.
That said, I still can't wait to see a real review of the final product.