Agreed, my Q9550 has no trouble playing any games right now. I'm waiting until the release of the LGA 2011 to upgrade since no games have warranted a needed upgrade yet.
![[H]ard|Forum](/styles/hardforum/xenforo/logo_dark.png){kind=logo}
Sanity check - i7 1336 isn't going anywhere, right?
- Thread starter lopoetve
- Start date
Agreed, my Q9550 has no trouble playing any games right now. I'm waiting until the release of the LGA 2011 to upgrade since no games have warranted a needed upgrade yet.
Activate: AMD
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2004
- Messages
- 1,994
just go with the 1366 i7's. All these people are talking about sandy bridge like its going to make everything else look like a joke, but be realistic. Its nothing like the jump from C2D/Q to nehalem. That was actually a "revolutionary" move (though AMD did the IMC thing way earlier). This is just a tweak for power, IGP performance and a small CPU performance bump. No need to make yourself sit through the maturation process just for a 5% performance increase. Not to mention, prices on the i7-950 and X58 boards aren't nearly as ridiculous as they used to be, sandy bridge will have jacked up mobo prices again just because its the new hotness
I think the reason people are suggesting waiting is because 1366 is more than 2 years old at this point, and the new stuff is only a month away. If he hasn't upgraded in 2.5 years, I think he can wait a month.
And if he needs an immediate boost, he should swap in a quad 775 CPU.
And if he needs an immediate boost, he should swap in a quad 775 CPU.
Sheesh, some of you keep missing it... I'm not buying sb1155 in january.
For me: Availability = GA date + 6 months.
You're still missing it. That'd be waiting 7 months to upgrade. I don't buy just launched hardware. Not anymore.
How did it run at stock speeds? I haven't overclocked a processor in ~ages~.
I can see video cards being crap and mobos being premature, that's always been my experience... but I don't really think CPUs have this issue (IMHO). Yes, maturation will increase overclock headroom and sometimes allow lower volts/heat with later steps, but that in no way makes the CPU unstable.
I7, even as a mature product, is most likely going to put out more heat and be less overclockable than a 2500k or 2600k SB, even if it is NOT mature.
IF you want to keep with a mature motherboard/chipset, fine, that's fair. However I think it's faulty to say that i7 is better than SB simply because it is a better fab process.
Just my 2 cents, but I read through this thread and found your stance (mature CPU is "more stable" than a new architecture. A some-to-all fallacy.) somewhat counter intuitive and misleading.
/rant
I7, even as a mature product, is most likely going to put out more heat and be less overclockable than a 2500k or 2600k SB, even if it is NOT mature.
IF you want to keep with a mature motherboard/chipset, fine, that's fair. However I think it's faulty to say that i7 is better than SB simply because it is a better fab process.
Just my 2 cents, but I read through this thread and found your stance (mature CPU is "more stable" than a new architecture. A some-to-all fallacy.) somewhat counter intuitive and misleading.
/rant
Activate: AMD
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2004
- Messages
- 1,994
what? the point is not that the CPU is immature, its a whole new platform. New CPUs, new mobos, new chipsets. I dont think anyone thinks that the CPU itself would be to blame, though that has been an issue in the past (first phenom and others). Platforms have teething issues, thats a fact. I'm fully in agreement with the OP, I'd never buy a brand new CPU/mobo/chipset combo until it had been proven in the market for a couple months at least. give it some time for the rev 1.1's and whatever else to come out.
nobody said i7 was a better fab process, but just that it was a mature platform
Unfortunately though, I can't just run a CPU. You have to have a motherboard with it, and while I agree that CPU's generally don't need many fixes (there are microcode patches, but they're rarer), the motherboards are often a different matter
Mobo/CPU go together, can't have one without the other. As a platform (cpu, motherboard, northbridge, southbridge (as applicable)), I7 is more mature than SB. Now. if I could run sandy bridge in an existing, stable motherboard platform (say, any of the good 1156 boards), it'd be a totally different story, but it's a new socket, so we have to deal with a totally new platform as a whole again. Same with SB 2011 - it's a lot more than just swapping to a new CPU.
Again, I'm not so worried about overclocking (not [H], I know, but I've run for 2 years on a stock E8400), but the need for 4 true hardware threads, and stability in the entire platform. This system HAS to run. It cannot wait on a BIOS patch.
Exactly my point. If I had a secondary system that could do this set of tasks, fair enough - I'd be willing to gamble on SB then. But I don't.
This isn't going from Conroe to Westfield. This is Pentium 4 to Conroe again - you've got to wait for things to mature out.
Are you not talking about processor platform here:
I already stated that if he wanted to base his decision on the chipset, that's perfectly fine. However, the platform is not "new" and the chipset is built upon preexisting generations. This is not AMD releasing Phenom or Intel releasing Conroe. Both the processor and chipset platform are already essentially v1.1.
My point is that there's no reason to assume this platform is going to be buggy when it's not a new platform. Even if it was I went Conroe 2 months after it came out and then Nehalem 2 months after it came out. I got either V1.0 or 1.1 on my motherboards and have never had a problem, even when overclocking. Even if I did have issues I'd swap out the processor with an RMA a month after a new stepping came out. If you chose a mature Netburst over a day old Conroe that'd be a very poor decision IMHO.
Again, this is my personal opinion. I'm not attacking anyone. I'm just noting a theme I saw in this thread and remarking.
TLDR: Don't assume a "mature" platform is necessarily better than a "new" platform. SB is an refresh, not a redo. Don't buy an old platform just to be safe; RMA if you've got issues.
I updated my e8400 with a q9550 and was quite happy with the results. If money is tight or you are waiting for the chipset/mainboards to settle down, I'd give your current 775 board a bit more life. Multipliers, you want to bump up the cores. A few notes from my rig.
333Mhz 1333 QDR 8.5x 667Mhz =2830Mhz <-- stock
400Mhz 1600 QDR 8.5x 800Mhz =3400Mhz <-- stock fan! (very easy OC with cheap DDR2-800 RAM)
416.6Mhz 1666 QDR 8.5x 833Mhz =3541Mhz
450Mhz 1800 QDR 8.5x 900Mhz =3825Mhz
466.6Mhz 1866 QDR 8.5x 933Mhz =3966Mhz <-- with an h50, with cheap DDR2-1100 RAM
475Mhz 1900 QDR* 8.5x 950Mhz =4040Mhz
333Mhz 1333 QDR 8.5x 667Mhz =2830Mhz <-- stock
400Mhz 1600 QDR 8.5x 800Mhz =3400Mhz <-- stock fan! (very easy OC with cheap DDR2-800 RAM)
416.6Mhz 1666 QDR 8.5x 833Mhz =3541Mhz
450Mhz 1800 QDR 8.5x 900Mhz =3825Mhz
466.6Mhz 1866 QDR 8.5x 933Mhz =3966Mhz <-- with an h50, with cheap DDR2-1100 RAM
475Mhz 1900 QDR* 8.5x 950Mhz =4040Mhz
Last edited:
Activate: AMD
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2004
- Messages
- 1,994
Um, no? I'm talking about the value proposition of a processor overall. At no point do I mention that the processor itself may be the weak link. I'm talking about the pricing down the road and the fact that people are talking about SB like its the next coming of the goddamn transitor. What are the true benefits of sandy bridge? do they justify the 6 month wait for the mobo designs to shake out? Would you spend 100$+ now on a C2Q just for the extras that SB brings you? So what, the SB core i7's stack up pretty well against the current ones, but he needs 4 cores NOW. Thus, for him the costs of going to SB would have to include the price of a C2Q. is SB really worth $100 versus a current 1366?
Right, you're proving my point. Its not new, its not revolutionary, and it brings no killer apps whatsoever to the table. Why wait 6 months for something that gives you a marginal performance improvement? I mean, half the hype is that SB graphics don't totally suck! is that even relevant for 99% of us on [H]? I'd wait for Conroe, I would not wait for SB for something I could really use right now
If the guy needs his PC for work, RMA'ing is not the way you want to handle this. you're really going to begrudge the guy the desire to have rock-solid components for his work machine? People can't always afford to wait 6 weeks while the manufacturer jerks them around to handle an RMA. theres a reason "enterprise" parts are so expensive compared to consumer items.
Every platform is buggy at release. I work in enterprise computing - there ~is~ no software, hardware, or any other package that is perfect at release. Does not exist. Will not exist.
I don't have time for an RMA. This system has to be stable right now, and has to stay stable. Over performance. I just also have to be able to run 4 threads as well right now.
That was the question. I was never considering Sandy Bridge. I will not buy a new platform when it comes out right away - not anymore.
This is a combination of work and personal system. I use it constantly. Yes, I want it to be faster, but I need it to be reliable more than anything. There's a reason I'm on an E8400 right now at 100% stock speeds - I built the system to be stable and reliable, and other than the video card oops (6870ftl), it's been 100% totally rock solid for 2.5 years. And played games fine too. Yes, the situation is a little weird - it's how my weekend work goes. Tis what it tis.
Furystrike
[H]ard|Gawd
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2004
- Messages
- 1,535
You did, however, start the thread with the question, "Is Sandy Bridge going to make 1366 obsolete," so don't be surprised when people talk about the Merits of SB over 1366
I agree with both sides of the debate here. SB will be superior, but its always dodgy jumping into something that is both "superior" and very possibly "buggy". Give it 6 months and it will be a no brainer.
I was faced with the same connundrum buying my 2010 Mustang GT. The 2011 is much faster but i was afraid of Fords ability to implement such a revolutionary engine and get it right the first time, so i bought the 2010 and loaded it up with every option available including the Track pack and nav.
Fast forward 6 months (yes the 5.0 hit the lots around June). The message boards are FULL of guys whos clutches have gone out and many have this odd "ticking" sound from their engine that is horrible. There are also many more who DON'T have the problems and have the joy of being over 9% faster in the quarter mile and thus and matching the performance of an M3 on a race track. Where as all i an say is that mine can be a Camaro....IF he has an automatic transmission and i might beat a 335I or G37 on a road course
Am i happy with my decision? When i see the threads about the clutches that are just GONE and hear the Youtube videos with the awful ticking sounds....YES. When i see their drag time slips...NO.
My point is, its always a crap shoot, but i like to err on the side of quality over performance.
As far as waiting till SB is out for the lower prices to hit...i AGREE 100% I saved over 6k on my mustang doin the same thing.
I have been the victim of early adopter on platforms before..dont get me started on Slot A/Slot 1 early problems or even socket A/Socket 1.
It may be stable but who is to say that HIS PARTICULAR Mobo for SB wont have some stupid PCI bug affecting games or some lame SB problem affecting his DMI settings or even some issue with Ram timings?
Come guys..these are ALL problems we have ALL experienced on early mother boards.....he does have a point.
However, for the guys with the new Stangs who dont have any problems..they are happy and LOVE TO RUB IT IN. Its a gamble EITHER WAY if you want to know the truth about it.
I was faced with the same connundrum buying my 2010 Mustang GT. The 2011 is much faster but i was afraid of Fords ability to implement such a revolutionary engine and get it right the first time, so i bought the 2010 and loaded it up with every option available including the Track pack and nav.
Fast forward 6 months (yes the 5.0 hit the lots around June). The message boards are FULL of guys whos clutches have gone out and many have this odd "ticking" sound from their engine that is horrible. There are also many more who DON'T have the problems and have the joy of being over 9% faster in the quarter mile and thus and matching the performance of an M3 on a race track. Where as all i an say is that mine can be a Camaro....IF he has an automatic transmission and i might beat a 335I or G37 on a road course
Am i happy with my decision? When i see the threads about the clutches that are just GONE and hear the Youtube videos with the awful ticking sounds....YES. When i see their drag time slips...NO.
My point is, its always a crap shoot, but i like to err on the side of quality over performance.
As far as waiting till SB is out for the lower prices to hit...i AGREE 100% I saved over 6k on my mustang doin the same thing.
I have been the victim of early adopter on platforms before..dont get me started on Slot A/Slot 1 early problems or even socket A/Socket 1.
It may be stable but who is to say that HIS PARTICULAR Mobo for SB wont have some stupid PCI bug affecting games or some lame SB problem affecting his DMI settings or even some issue with Ram timings?
Come guys..these are ALL problems we have ALL experienced on early mother boards.....he does have a point.
However, for the guys with the new Stangs who dont have any problems..they are happy and LOVE TO RUB IT IN. Its a gamble EITHER WAY if you want to know the truth about it.
Well, I was mostly asking if 1366 was being obsolesced by SB in Q1 2011 - the answer to that, as it turns out, is no - the update for that is coming in Q3/Q4 2011, which is far enough out to not be a concern.
If both were being updated at the same time, then I'd have been guaranteed to get a C2Q and tried to survive for 6 months, instead of having an actual decision to make about trying to survive on a C2Q for a year, and then debating 1155/2011, or just jumping to 1366 and waiting 2 more years for my next upgrade.
I said I didn't want to get into an argument and I meant it. There's no reason to get upset. You referenced certain improvements to the processor, not a chipset, and I saw that as an argument against the processor. Sorry if that's not what you meant, but that's how I read it. No hard feelings.
He at no point in this thread said this was enterprise, only that it needed to be stable and he needed to to run basically all the time. I could say this sentiment applies to most on [H] with stress testing. Folders don't want their systems to crash either. Typically when people note that they want the enthusiast processor, not the server processor, and that they want to use Eyefinity on the newest gen ATI graphics card one draws a different conclusion.
OP: Most (or all) i7s right now use HT as well. If you are multithreading then you might get a decent gain from that. Should be more than stable at default freq. and volts.
Agreed. /thread
HT is very stable on my I860@ 3.533Ghz (whats that a 21% OC?). HT remains stable in Turbo modes up to 4.160GHZ as well. (and believe me...it turbos nearly constantly..pretty much LIVES between 3.8-4ghz. Its more like it "throttles back" to 3.533 under load then it is like it "speeds up" when not under load. For all the glory of the 1366/tri channel set up. The 1156 has amazing turbo modes/power saving/latency value at still a much better price.
STOCK VOLTAGE with Ram@1600 no less.
STOCK VOLTAGE with Ram@1600 no less.