SandyBridge for the 1366 socket?

W

WBurchnall

2[H]4U
Joined
Oct 10, 2009
Messages
2,622
Will we be seeing any upgrades over the icore 920/950/980x anytime soon with regards to the new Sandy Bridge chips?

Its nice to see the mainstream chips are performing so well to the point that there's little to no reason to buy the 1366 socket, but...as a 1366 socket owner, I can't help but feel a tiny bit let down. It feels like I picked the dead/wrong upgrade path. Will there be any 'new' builds made off 1366 now that SandyBridge is available for the 1156? I think not. So does this mean we'll get less love from intel as were now the 'even smaller' enthusiast base? I'm hoping not but thinking so.

Has anyone heard any plans for a SandyBridge high-end chip?
 
sandybirdge is the lowend to midrange stuff

1366 is dead. socket 2011 will replace it later this year.
 
I think you'll be waiting about as long as I did for an X2 on Socket 754. Not going to happen.
 
WBurchnall said:
Will we be seeing any upgrades over the icore 920/950/980x anytime soon with regards to the new Sandy Bridge chips?

Its nice to see the mainstream chips are performing so well to the point that there's little to no reason to buy the 1366 socket, but...as a 1366 socket owner, I can't help but feel a tiny bit let down. It feels like I picked the dead/wrong upgrade path. Will there be any 'new' builds made off 1366 now that SandyBridge is available for the 1156? I think not. So does this mean we'll get less love from intel as were now the 'even smaller' enthusiast base? I'm hoping not but thinking so.

Has anyone heard any plans for a SandyBridge high-end chip?
Click to expand...

fyi sandy bridge is 1155 not 1156...
 
Sandy Bridge-E will use socket LGA 2011. No SB for LGA 1366.

Next month (2/27) Intel will release another top end LGA 1366 CPU for $1000: the i7 990x 3.47GHz, 6 cores, 12 threads.
 
Yeah I'm fairly frustrated that Intel decided not to continue using the 1366 socket. I don't have a lot of money to sink into my PC, but last February I put together a Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R and i7 920. It seems now i too chose the wrong upgrade path. Oh well at least I suppose coupled with a HD 5850 I will get some good life out of until 4 or 5 more years down the road when I upgrade again. It's not like games are advancing very fast anyhow. This was the biggest concern I had w/Intel back in the day is that they made their sockets obsolete pretty quickly, unlike AMD.
 
Sell your X58 and i7 920 and buy a P67/2600K instead.

The limited selection of CPUs will happen again with LGA 2011. It should be compatible with 8 core chips through Haswell though.

Megalomaniac said:
you must be new to intel.... they have been doing this for decades.
Click to expand...
Wat? AMD and Intel both went through several socket changes in just the last 10 years. AMD had Socket A (in various flavors from 266MHz FSB *only* to 400MHz FSB), Socket 754, Socket 939, Socket AM2, Socket AM3 and Socket AM3+, each breaking socket compatibility, and some with interim releases that may or may not support newer chips due to platform changes. In the same time frame, Intel did socket 423, 478, LGA 775, LGA 1156, LGA 1366 and now LGA 1155, with LGA 2011 coming later this year.
 
Last edited:
WBurchnall said:
Will we be seeing any upgrades over the icore 920/950/980x anytime soon with regards to the new Sandy Bridge chips?

Its nice to see the mainstream chips are performing so well to the point that there's little to no reason to buy the 1366 socket, but...as a 1366 socket owner, I can't help but feel a tiny bit let down. It feels like I picked the dead/wrong upgrade path. Will there be any 'new' builds made off 1366 now that SandyBridge is available for the 1156? I think not. So does this mean we'll get less love from intel as were now the 'even smaller' enthusiast base? I'm hoping not but thinking so.

Has anyone heard any plans for a SandyBridge high-end chip?
Click to expand...

LGA 1366 was the king of the hill (and still is with Gulftown) since late 2008. If you recently went with a 1366 system and are regretting it now that Sandy Bridge is out then that's your own fault for not researching the situation.
 
aphexcoil said:
Does anyone find it ironic that 2011 pin socket will come out in ... 2011?
Click to expand...
They are trying to match EA Sports titles. Every year will be a "new" one with hardly any differences.

On a more serious note, why does everyone expect Intel and AMD to stay with the same socket for what seems like forever? Changes happen. Things progress. Sure, they might be trying to milk all the money they can from consumers but you can't expect everything to be compatible with technology that is older. I'd love to see an upgrade for my 61" rear projection "HD"TV from the 480p/1080i config to a full 720p/1080p but that won't happen.
 
I wouldn't say that any one who bought a 1366 picked the "wrong upgrade path". Both 1156 and 1366 are dead and your i7 is still just as fast as amds next gen offering. So your only other option was not build a new computer.

besides with how cheap SB is you can sell off an x58 build and invest ~$100 to make the jump to SB. Then in 9 months sell it off again and build a 2011.
 
Nobody should buy a high CPU and motherboard with the expectation of being able to drop in a next gen CPU on the same motherboard. This series is a lot different and 1366 had its day.

1356 and 2011 will "obsolete" 1155 and 1366 (for real this time, its still quite fast today) in Q4.
 
I'm wondering if LGA 1356 is a done deal. For all we know, it may not materialize, and there may only be an LGA 2011 - at least I haven't seen anything new in a long while that talks about 1356. For all we know LGA 2011 may be both the dual proc WS + Server socket as well as the high end single proc. Workstation + High End gaming solution, like LGA 1366 was. I don't see what the point of further fragmenting the market is.

Realistically, the top desktop socket (whichever one it turns out to be) will have more PCIe lanes and probably a few > 4 core CPUs for the next year, which was (and still is) also the case for 1366. It's not meant to be the 'sweet spot' socket, it's meant to be the high end socket for people who need either 6 cores on the desktop or more PCIe lanes or both (technically they also support triple channel, and a lot more memory).

Regarding the advice to buy a current P67/H67 chipset, keep in mind that we already know about Z68 and Ivy Bridge coming later this year, and while they keep the socket, they are different chipsets which means different motherboards. You could possibly keep your old CPU, but I'm guessing there will be new CPUs that only work with the new chipsets. I haven't bought a new AMD motherboard in a while, but the one thing they have done is maintain better continuity than intel. If you look at intel's history, they don't keep a chipset / variant current for very long, and actually, LGA1366 / X58 has been one of the longer lived intel chipsets in recent history.
 
Last edited:
Whats all the complaining about 1366 ..my god these things fly..and will be just below the latest thing out..what are we talking about a few seconds in some heavy application...I like running the latest stuff but there comes a point where you say is the upgrade going to be stellar and ill notice a big difference in the way the computer runs...
No upgrade other than the one to i7/920 has really made me say ,lord this thing flys compared to my last rig...as you can probubly tell im inpressed with my i7 rig..also i came from an amd 955 and have been with amd since 1996......just sayin...
 
ravx25 said:
Yeah I'm fairly frustrated that Intel decided not to continue using the 1366 socket. I don't have a lot of money to sink into my PC, but last February I put together a Gigabyte GA-X58-UD3R and i7 920. It seems now i too chose the wrong upgrade path.
Click to expand...
While you are right that other than the insanely expensive hex core chips there have been no significant upgrades to that platform it's not like any of the other choices were any better.

LGA1156 had slower chips than LGA1366.
LGA1155 didn't exist last febuary
Afaict AM3 still hasn't got anything that can compete on individual core performance with an i7 9xx and probablly never will have.
 
Filter said:
sandybirdge is the lowend to midrange stuff

1366 is dead. socket 2011 will replace it later this year.
Click to expand...

Just quoting you so I dont have to type all that.

If you are right then god are we in for a treat come socket 2011. Im also excited about the dozer and that is totally putting aside all the negative attitudes Intel fanny boys have against the other Silicon Giant.

Honestly I am going to buy a dozer just to own one but Im very excited about what 2011 will bring to the table on this new upcoming socket.
 
wesleys_dad said:
Whats all the complaining about 1366 ..my god these things fly..and will be just below the latest thing out..what are we talking about a few seconds in some heavy application...I like running the latest stuff but there comes a point where you say is the upgrade going to be stellar and ill notice a big difference in the way the computer runs...
No upgrade other than the one to i7/920 has really made me say ,lord this thing flys compared to my last rig...as you can probubly tell im inpressed with my i7 rig..also i came from an amd 955 and have been with amd since 1996......just sayin...
Click to expand...

Couldnt agree more dude. All these people upgrading and building whole new systems when a new CPU comes out..its insane. You cant tell me that all you guys are hardcore video editors...Games arent improving that much, ports becoming more and more common (aka the game being made on 360 then ported to PC).

It seems to me people are upgrading for benchmark wars..."dude its awesome i sold my i7 for a SB i7 and got a way better benchmark score!!!". Its lame. Do i understand the addiction of upgrading tech? yeah. But the only thing that has come out that i can honestly say improves a PC enough worth to buy it is a SSD, cause that does substantially improves boot/load times.
Proof of all this? My PC runs everything i throw at it, and look at its specs. I play all the new video games on the highest settings on 1680x1050 res. Dont be fooled by these companies that have you in a updating cycle spending hundreds-to-thousands of $ a year for no real gain in day to day computing power/speed.
 
i just jumped into the i7 (both a 1156 and 1366) just at the beginning of this year. It is awesome and takes everything I throw at it.

btw i upgraded from a 478 socket p4.....it was the most insane upgrade i have ever had...

(everything in my sig is from the last 8 months! i had a mega upgrade itch in 2010!!)
 
NathanP2007 said:
Couldnt agree more dude. All these people upgrading and building whole new systems when a new CPU comes out..its insane. You cant tell me that all you guys are hardcore video editors...Games arent improving that much, ports becoming more and more common (aka the game being made on 360 then ported to PC).

It seems to me people are upgrading for benchmark wars..."dude its awesome i sold my i7 for a SB i7 and got a way better benchmark score!!!". Its lame. Do i understand the addiction of upgrading tech? yeah. But the only thing that has come out that i can honestly say improves a PC enough worth to buy it is a SSD, cause that does substantially improves boot/load times.
Proof of all this? My PC runs everything i throw at it, and look at its specs. I play all the new video games on the highest settings on 1680x1050 res. Dont be fooled by these companies that have you in a updating cycle spending hundreds-to-thousands of $ a year for no real gain in day to day computing power/speed.
Click to expand...

I upgraded from a 4 ghz Qx9650 to a SB that can do 5 ghz with some voltage, and I couldn't be happier. Even at 4 ghz, stuff is noticably faster; It's basically like a 4.7 ghz QX (without the hyperthreading) if you estimate by Spi 1m times. Though TBH, I only upgraded because I burnt the 4 pin connector on my PSU by trying to push the QX hard on a board that only has a 4 pin socket; not made for quads at high current. (I was planning to only upgrade at S2011). But that old board was also holding my video card OC back (considerably) too, as now I can OC it more, with my UD5, than I could on the 975x board. (P5wdh). Could be the 2.1 PCIE vs the 1.1 of the 975....
 
NathanP2007 said:
Couldnt agree more dude. All these people upgrading and building whole new systems when a new CPU comes out..its insane. You cant tell me that all you guys are hardcore video editors...Games arent improving that much, ports becoming more and more common (aka the game being made on 360 then ported to PC).

It seems to me people are upgrading for benchmark wars..."dude its awesome i sold my i7 for a SB i7 and got a way better benchmark score!!!". Its lame. Do i understand the addiction of upgrading tech? yeah. But the only thing that has come out that i can honestly say improves a PC enough worth to buy it is a SSD, cause that does substantially improves boot/load times.

Proof of all this? My PC runs everything i throw at it, and look at its specs. I play all the new video games on the highest settings on 1680x1050 res. Dont be fooled by these companies that have you in a updating cycle spending hundreds-to-thousands of $ a year for no real gain in day to day computing power/speed.
Click to expand...

I could have NOT said it better myself :) a FAST SSD will be much much more noticeable than two processors which are almost as fast as each other ...
 
While you may have a point, if you are into low power systems that run 24/7, you might gain by going from a 1366 to 1155 .... unless of course you need >16GB RAM, in which case you have little choice till 2011 :)

For some, the most important metric is performance per watt

NathanP2007 said:
Couldnt agree more dude. All these people upgrading and building whole new systems when a new CPU comes out..its insane. You cant tell me that all you guys are hardcore video editors...Games arent improving that much, ports becoming more and more common (aka the game being made on 360 then ported to PC).

It seems to me people are upgrading for benchmark wars..."dude its awesome i sold my i7 for a SB i7 and got a way better benchmark score!!!". Its lame. Do i understand the addiction of upgrading tech? yeah. But the only thing that has come out that i can honestly say improves a PC enough worth to buy it is a SSD, cause that does substantially improves boot/load times.
Proof of all this? My PC runs everything i throw at it, and look at its specs. I play all the new video games on the highest settings on 1680x1050 res. Dont be fooled by these companies that have you in a updating cycle spending hundreds-to-thousands of $ a year for no real gain in day to day computing power/speed.
Click to expand...
 
Falkentyne said:
I upgraded from a 4 ghz Qx9650 to a SB that can do 5 ghz with some voltage, and I couldn't be happier. Even at 4 ghz, stuff is noticably faster; It's basically like a 4.7 ghz QX (without the hyperthreading) if you estimate by Spi 1m times. Though TBH, I only upgraded because I burnt the 4 pin connector on my PSU by trying to push the QX hard on a board that only has a 4 pin socket; not made for quads at high current. (I was planning to only upgrade at S2011). But that old board was also holding my video card OC back (considerably) too, as now I can OC it more, with my UD5, than I could on the 975x board. (P5wdh). Could be the 2.1 PCIE vs the 1.1 of the 975....
Click to expand...

Which is all fine and good but you proved my point for me. Everything you listed is great, except what do you do that justifies needing that extreme of processor power? Like i said, real world application, everything you listed are scientific/technological improvements, yeah you can OC more efficiently and to a high GHz and you can hyperthread more or better or w/e...but how does this apply to anything but intensive video software editing and benchmarks?

All im saying is theres a difference between getting a new CPU because you will see a marked improvement in real world day to day application, same applies for any upgrade (GPU, RAM, Hard Drive etc).
And getting a new CPU and seeing improvements only in things like benchmarks, OC'ing ability, etc
And what i mean by day to day application are things like: Boot time, FPS in gaming increase, multi-tasking abilities increased (maybe you open a TON of programs or watch a movie on one screen and do other stuff on another) and so on...
 
ddutta said:
While you may have a point, if you are into low power systems that run 24/7, you might gain by going from a 1366 to 1155 .... unless of course you need >16GB RAM, in which case you have little choice till 2011 :)

For some, the most important metric is performance per watt
Click to expand...

I have no experience in that realm, but im sure that is true. Though i have no idea to what extent the difference is and how much money would be saved...but i am all for a green PC and someone wanting one for any reason.
I would guess that it would take a long while to make up the cost of a new mobo cause of the need for the new socket + the cost of the CPU to the money you save from the low power system. Assuming you don't sell off all the old hardware.
 
NathanP2007 said:
Which is all fine and good but you proved my point for me. Everything you listed is great, except what do you do that justifies needing that extreme of processor power? Like i said, real world application, everything you listed are scientific/technological improvements, yeah you can OC more efficiently and to a high GHz and you can hyperthread more or better or w/e...but how does this apply to anything but intensive video software editing and benchmarks?

All im saying is theres a difference between getting a new CPU because you will see a marked improvement in real world day to day application, same applies for any upgrade (GPU, RAM, Hard Drive etc).
And getting a new CPU and seeing improvements only in things like benchmarks, OC'ing ability, etc
And what i mean by day to day application are things like: Boot time, FPS in gaming increase, multi-tasking abilities increased (maybe you open a TON of programs or watch a movie on one screen and do other stuff on another) and so on...
Click to expand...

Gaming.
#1: my COD BO performance has gone WAY up. No more FPS drops into the 50's. I may now finally be able to use my 120hz monitor (which requires 120 fps to be smooth) rather than my CRT.

2: My videocard overclocks a LOT better now. The PCIE 1.1 on the p5wdh was definitely holding it back. Definitely explains why my previous 4890 was such a bad clocker too. And I was wondering why the two 6970's wouldn't do more than 920 mhz, and wouldn't do 950 mhz even with 1.25v. Change boards=card is clearly getting more juice=more stable, higher OC.

3) Loading times. Even in windows XP, my game/map loading times in games have definitely plummeted. I get into black ops almost twice as fast as before....same HD/OS installation. Some of this is definitely due to the newer chipset.
Hell, even loading areas in Morrowind is faster...

The only negative (besides the POST/booting and occasional bluescreen while loading problems which everyone knows about) is that my mouse poling rate is suffering from the infamous X58/P55 problem; 125/500/1000 hz is fine in W7, but isn't consistent in XP like it was on the P5wdh. Sort of annoying, but not THAT noticable (though you can tell it isn't quite as smooth as before). VERY noticable at 125hz.
If I set mouseerate to 1 cpu core, it shows 62 hz instead of 125, which the directx mouse poll tester does show 125 but jumping up and down slightly.

500hz/1000 doesn't show any issues in games though.

This upgrade was worth every penny.

(tl;dr version:
My actual original intention, after realizing (after burning the 4 pin socket) that I wouldn't be able to wait for socket 2011, was to replace the P5wdh board with a c2q board meant for overclocking quads, since I burnt the 4 pin PSU to a crisp trying to OC the QX9650 to 4.2 ghz (which was game stable) at 1.45v. Plug (both 12v pin holes) was burnt, PSU connector was crisped and unusuable. So I used the 8 pin connector (and actually scorched one of the 12v holes slightly with that, even at 4 ghz and 1.375v (Prime did that, not games), but that taught me (no more vcore), did 3690 at 1.25v, while I Furiously tried to win a EP45-ud3p from ebay). But with my max bid being $200 for a new unopened board/box, some extremely desperate person outbid me in the last 30 seconds. I was so mad--and so desperate to get a replacement board so i didnt cause magic smoke to destroy everything, that i just ordered the entire upgrade from newegg and ate the $930 cost).
 
Last edited:
During this recession, I think people have forgotten how to have fun. I know when I sat on my Q6600 for 3+ years, and my HD 4850 for 2+ years, something died inside me. Building my i7 rig has been a blast because it's a hobby I enjoy. I'm hoping to eventually get to 5 GHz because it will be fun. I don't care if it's unnoticeable over 4.5 GHz. I don't care if my Q6600 was good enough. Enough with the practicality already.

Also, I'm getting tired of this either/or proposition with SSDs and SB. I intend to have both when C400/Intel G3 hit and I'll have a blast playing with that too.


NathanP2007 said:
Couldnt agree more dude. All these people upgrading and building whole new systems when a new CPU comes out..its insane. You cant tell me that all you guys are hardcore video editors...Games arent improving that much, ports becoming more and more common (aka the game being made on 360 then ported to PC).

It seems to me people are upgrading for benchmark wars..."dude its awesome i sold my i7 for a SB i7 and got a way better benchmark score!!!". Its lame. Do i understand the addiction of upgrading tech? yeah. But the only thing that has come out that i can honestly say improves a PC enough worth to buy it is a SSD, cause that does substantially improves boot/load times.
Proof of all this? My PC runs everything i throw at it, and look at its specs. I play all the new video games on the highest settings on 1680x1050 res. Dont be fooled by these companies that have you in a updating cycle spending hundreds-to-thousands of $ a year for no real gain in day to day computing power/speed.
Click to expand...
 
Socket 2011 is rumored to only be a server board and a small chance it will be an enthusiasts board. There's speculation that socket 1356 will be the performance board and will support 6+ core chips.
 
aldamon said:
During this recession, I think people have forgotten how to have fun. I know when I sat on my Q6600 for 3+ years, and my HD 4850 for 2+ years, something died inside me. Building my i7 rig has been a blast because it's a hobby I enjoy. I'm hoping to eventually get to 5 GHz because it will be fun. I don't care if it's unnoticeable over 4.5 GHz. I don't care if my Q6600 was good enough. Enough with the practicality already.

Also, I'm getting tired of this either/or proposition with SSDs and SB. I intend to have both when C400/Intel G3 hit and I'll have a blast playing with that too.
Click to expand...

Lol, a bit conflicting...talking about expensive purchases that are frivolous but also mentions the fact that this country is in a recession, which obviously means people dont have money and one of many reasons there is a recession is our economy is based on a weak infrastructure of frivolous consumerism of things we don't need when we already have things that satisfy our needs, and based on debt so the people that purchase these frivolous things and put them on credit cards.

I am not saying NOT to buy these things. I read what you say and of course, this is our hobby, its what we derive fun from. But i am saying its a very expensive hobby, that in the past 1-2 years, has become purely for pleasure, that we are getting no real world benefits from our new builds. I personally had a completely adiqute PC and then paid $170 for the Q9550 and saw no real world improvement, i then took the E5200 and built a HTPC using that as its CPU. So i am not saying that its wrong and theres only one way and that is using what you got until it breaks.

Im fine with people spending however they wanna spend , whether its being a penny pincher and getting every drop of life out of their P4 before they upgrade, or someone else spending all their extra cash on insane PC building projects..its America so go for it. What i have issue with is this frenzy of consumerism and needing the next new thing that these companies facilitate with their yearly product upgrades and socket changes and so on, then they got you all in their pocket, every time they release something you need it even though you don't need it. So what i have issue with isnt YOU buying w/e you buy...i have issue with everyone on forums telling people to upgrade and get the newest thing to thread creators that if they are asking, probably arent as informed as you. So they dont realize what they got is great and satisfies all their PC needs already.
 
NathanP2007 said:
Lol, a bit conflicting...talking about expensive purchases that are frivolous but also mentions the fact that this country is in a recession, which obviously means people dont have money and one of many reasons there is a recession is our economy is based on a weak infrastructure of frivolous consumerism of things we don't need when we already have things that satisfy our needs, and based on debt so the people that purchase these frivolous things and put them on credit cards.
Click to expand...

The point I'm trying to make is not everyone in this country is doing poorly and I don't consider my purchase frivolous at all for various reasons. Many of which have been shared in this thread and in the SB benchmarks and operational tests.

But i am saying its a very expensive hobby, that in the past 1-2 years, has become purely for pleasure, that we are getting no real world benefits from our new builds. I personally had a completely adiqute PC and then paid $170 for the Q9550 and saw no real world improvement, i then took the E5200 and built a HTPC using that as its CPU. So i am not saying that its wrong and theres only one way and that is using what you got until it breaks.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry but you can't be serious about things changing over the last 1 - 2 years. I don't know how many (actually I do) Athlons, Athlon XPs and Athlon 64s I went through over the years and saw very little real-world increases. We're talking a few hundred MHz at a time per upgrade. Then I repeated the pattern with C2D and C2Q when I was into distributed computing. I also tried water cooling for 3 years. I bought way too many fans and thermal paste. I bought every stick of high-performance, low-latency RAM around. If I were alone this forum wouldn't exist.

So what i have issue with isnt YOU buying w/e you buy...i have issue with everyone on forums telling people to upgrade and get the newest thing to thread creators that if they are asking, probably arent as informed as you. So they dont realize what they got is great and satisfies all their PC needs already.
Click to expand...

That's nothing new. It's been that way for 11 years here. Enthusiasts are opinionated folk.
 
NathanP2007 said:
Couldnt agree more dude. All these people upgrading and building whole new systems when a new CPU comes out..its insane. You cant tell me that all you guys are hardcore video editors...Games arent improving that much, ports becoming more and more common (aka the game being made on 360 then ported to PC).

It seems to me people are upgrading for benchmark wars..."dude its awesome i sold my i7 for a SB i7 and got a way better benchmark score!!!". Its lame. Do i understand the addiction of upgrading tech? yeah. But the only thing that has come out that i can honestly say improves a PC enough worth to buy it is a SSD, cause that does substantially improves boot/load times.
Proof of all this? My PC runs everything i throw at it, and look at its specs. I play all the new video games on the highest settings on 1680x1050 res. Dont be fooled by these companies that have you in a updating cycle spending hundreds-to-thousands of $ a year for no real gain in day to day computing power/speed.
Click to expand...

+1. I wait 5-6 years to upgrade my rigs. I always have an Intel and an AMD box. I don't really know why I do this but, after all, this is the [H] so I don't really need a reason.

Anyway, the next one to get upgraded (July?) is my Intel box. It's the original socket 775 mentioned in my sig. Like this, every upgrade is awesome. Not marginal.:cool:
 
Last edited:
aldamon said:
The point I'm trying to make is not everyone in this country is doing poorly and I don't consider my purchase frivolous at all for various reasons. Many of which have been shared in this thread and in the SB benchmarks and operational tests.



I'm sorry but you can't be serious about things changing over the last 1 - 2 years. I don't know how many (actually I do) Athlons, Athlon XPs and Athlon 64s I went through over the years and saw very little real-world increases. We're talking a few hundred MHz at a time per upgrade. Then I repeated the pattern with C2D and C2Q when I was into distributed computing. I also tried water cooling for 3 years. I bought way too many fans and thermal paste. I bought every stick of high-performance, low-latency RAM around. If I were alone this forum wouldn't exist.



That's nothing new. It's been that way for 11 years here. Enthusiasts are opinionated folk.
Click to expand...

My only real reply is that what i meant by not changing the past 1-2 years isnt about how the CPU's arent changing, your right they are getting better and better and by much larger leaps and bounds than the cpu's you mentioned. What i am saying is, applications and games and programs are not advancing much anymore. With gaming in particular, considering where consoles are at, and how they supposedly are going to have a 5-10 year life before a new generation comes along, game developers are keeping graphics and processing on the console level...rarely are games created FOR PC now, and let alone for HighEnd PC's.
My point being, it seems programs, applications, and video games are almost all made for dual core, thankfully making for quad is kind of starting, with games like BFBC2, but i dont think its catching on to a point where the majority of developers are creating games that utilize quad core like BFBC2 does, if anything the opposite seems to be the majority, developers saying they are porting their games from 360 to PC and love doing that cause its cheap.
Im not saying dont upgrade cause the CPU's arent a improvement over what you currently got, or that they arent amazing etc. I am saying question upgrading because games and multimedia and applications and programs arent utilizing 2010-2011 tech...that the few that do utilize quad core, are more on the C2Q level, unfortunately not the SB i7 Quadcore level.
 
Its silly to be concerned about a minor performance gain from from i7 9x 1366 to the 1155 Sandy Bridge if you only sport 4 gig of ram and or mechanical hard drives? More ram and a SSD if you dont have one will have a far greater impact on overall performance than a single generation CPU upgrade. Plus your SSD if implemented correctly will last a few systems and be worthy of any new motherboard/CPU combo you buy down the road so it is not wasted money.

That said... I have a i7 2600k in my HTPC setup and LOVE it.. runs much cooler than my main i7 [email protected] and the HD3000 IGD chipset is all I need for media playback.

2600k /w scythe ninja mini passive with only two case Noiseblocker M12-S2 at 7V = 19C idle SILENT
i7 920 /w Megahalems/Indigo Xtreme/ 2x Noiseblocker MF12-P and 5 other M12-S2 12V = 31C idle
 
JJ91284 said:
Socket 2011 is rumored to only be a server board and a small chance it will be an enthusiasts board. There's speculation that socket 1356 will be the performance board and will support 6+ core chips.
Click to expand...

Indeed.
Something tells me 2011 is a multi-cpu motherboard for servers/enthusiast supporting quad channel RAM. The 1356 (Socket B2) looks as though it will be the 1366 replacement supporting single cpus and triple channel still.
 
Rossi~ said:
Indeed.
Something tells me 2011 is a multi-cpu motherboard for servers/enthusiast supporting quad channel RAM. The 1356 (Socket B2) looks as though it will be the 1366 replacement supporting single cpus and triple channel still.
Click to expand...

Socket B2 is coming for Dual socket as well. It is triple channel and although still PCI-E V3 I'm not sure but it might have less lanes (32 Total vs 48 of LGA2011 maybe).

LGA2011 will be available in single CPU form, Supermicro are planning the X9SRI and you can bet Asus will have something too. Unbuffered dimms are supported so other than price I dont see any eason why LGA2011 wont be the enthusiast platform of choice.
 
JJ91284 said:
Socket 2011 is rumored to only be a server board and a small chance it will be an enthusiasts board. There's speculation that socket 1356 will be the performance board and will support 6+ core chips.
Click to expand...
Two weeks ago, (blurred) pictures of a MSI desktop LGA 2011 board were shown. ;)

Anyways, JC at xtremesystems (of the guys who posts leaked pictures of hardware and CPU-Z shots, including the 8 core SB a few months ago) says LGA 2011 is on the desktop and there is no LGA 1356 for the desktop.
 
It could be that 2011 Is desktop + server and 1356 could be server only then? Who knows lol, still damn early to tell exactly what's going on. 2011 desktop would be lovely jubbly, quad channel mmmmm, though would mean i have to find a single stick extra *waves angry fist*.

There's quite a few of these threads about over the past few months
http://www.overclock.net/intel-general/869457-sandy-bridge-socket-confusion.html


Also found the MSI LGA2011 board pictures here -- http://www.tcmagazine.com/tcm/news/...1-x68-motherboard-pictured-pretty-far-release
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top