What's the word on Z68 chipsets?

Discussion in 'Intel Processors' started by DaRuSsIaMaN, Jan 6, 2011.

  1. DaRuSsIaMaN

    DaRuSsIaMaN [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,199
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    I was going to get SB and start building a new PC. But the stupid way intel implemented integrated graphics for the desktop has put me off. I guess I will continue to wait until something more reasonable comes along. I want a system that is at least capable of using the IGP. The better IGP, HD3000, only comes with the 2600K/2500K, but in order to use it, I would need a H67-based motherboard. But then the OC ability of the chips would be completely wasted. How dumb.

    From what I understand, the Z68 chipset will eliminate this stupidity and allow much more flexibility? Is this correct? Anyone know of an ETA more precise than "later in 2011"?

    What I want out of my next computer build is to be able to combine a half-decent IGP with a new generation cpu. I want the IGP to drive a dual monitor display, each at 1920x1200. Obviously not for gaming. Later, I might want to get a real video card if I feel the need.

    Thanks
     
  2. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    Q2 2011 is the earliest possible date AFAIK. Intel can't announce it too soon else they risk losing sales from people on the fence who will wait rather than take the plunge and buy now.
     
  3. Arkalius

    Arkalius Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    272
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Why would it be wasted?

    The estmated dates for LGA2011 based chips is Q3 2011 so you'll be waiting a little while.
     
  4. DaRuSsIaMaN

    DaRuSsIaMaN [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,199
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    ?

    Well, it would be wasted because H67 mobos can't do any overclocking, from what I understand. So I'd be putting an unlocked cpu meant for OCing into a board in which it will be eternally stuck at stock speed. I'm not exactly sure what the point is that you're making regarding lga2011.

    ***

    Thanks for the info, btw.
     
  5. Paladin21

    Paladin21 Gawd

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    Because the two choices right now for chipsets are the H series, which uses the IGP but doesn't support any overclocking, and the P series, which does overclock but doesn't do graphics.

    The decisions Intel has made regarding CPU's and chipsets for launch are very, very odd.
     
  6. Rauelius

    Rauelius 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    2,240
    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2008
    Also getting rid of OC'ing on non-k chips is just plain stupid.
     
  7. polive

    polive [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,283
    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2005
    Wait, the P67 doesn't do IGP, but the H67 does? And the opposite as far as overclocking? Why are they doing this?
     
  8. jeremyshaw

    jeremyshaw [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    12,112
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2009
    so you buy more? :p I don't really know, lol.
     
  9. munkle

    munkle [H]ardForum Junkie

    Messages:
    11,196
    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2005
    Maybe their plan is to sell you those unlock codes and software to unlock special features that should have been there in the first place? :confused: I would like to get sandy bridge but it's lame if I want a good igp I lose certain features, or to gain those features I lose the igp.
     
  10. Paladin21

    Paladin21 Gawd

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    You also have the better GPU tied to the more expensive CPUs, which are less likely to use them, and the K series chips gain overclocking but lose VT-d and some other tech. I understand that different chips and chipsets have different tradeoffs, but it feels more like they threw darts at a board than a serious attempt to segment the market in a logical fashion.
     
  11. Arkalius

    Arkalius Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    272
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Well... if you want to overclock you probably aren't using integrated graphics.
     
  12. Paladin21

    Paladin21 Gawd

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    That's the fun part, the good GPU (3000) only comes on the K series (overclocking) chips...which can't overclock on the only boards available to use the GPU.
     
  13. pxc

    pxc [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    33,064
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2000
    I'm waiting for nvidia SB chipsets.

    kidding
     
  14. Arkalius

    Arkalius Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    272
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    Right... so if you're an overclocker you go for that chip. But if you're not an overclocker, but want the best integrated graphics, you go for that chip. I guess Intel's reasoning is that few people are actually both. The chip fulfills two market segment roles... just not at the same time.
     
  15. Dark Shroud

    Dark Shroud Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    229
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2010
  16. 77Pat

    77Pat n00b

    Messages:
    51
    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2010
    I mostly agree, but I would think most people would want to be able to use Quick Sync.
     
  17. MrCrispy

    MrCrispy 2[H]4U

    Messages:
    3,944
    Joined:
    May 14, 2007
    But this only lets you use QuickSync if the IGP is supported in the chipset (H67 or Z68). Its a pretty niche market - people who want a dedicated graphics card for games but want to use QuickSync for transcoding. There is NO reason Intel couldn't enable it on the P67, its just an in memory buffer copy and the whole thing runs on the same cpu. Its just artificial limits to force people to upgrade sooner.
     
  18. Monkey God

    Monkey God Mangina Full of Sand

    Messages:
    6,723
    Joined:
    May 7, 2007
    Pretty much how I read it as well.
     
  19. DaRuSsIaMaN

    DaRuSsIaMaN [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,199
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Wait, what? I don't think I saw this in the reviews I've read. What's VT-d? And what other tech do the K chips lose?
     
  20. Arkalius

    Arkalius Limp Gawd

    Messages:
    272
    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2005
    VT-d is directed I/O for Virtualization. It allows virtualized environments to access I/O resources directly. It's a valueable option for people who use virtual machines extensively.
     
  21. pxc

    pxc [H]ard as it Gets

    Messages:
    33,064
    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2000
    http://ark.intel.com/Compare.aspx?ids=52209,52210

    K chips lose VT-d and TXT. If you don't use VMs with limited native hardware drivers, it's no big deal. TXT can be used for enhanced security, but generally isn't used at all by consumers. http://software.intel.com/en-us/blo...el-virtualization-technology-for-directed-io/ http://www.intel.com/technology/malwarereduction/index.htm

    (added better link, VT-d info is getting out of date)

    edit: these are the kind of nice results you can get in Xen with VT-d http://confessionsofalinuxpenguin.blogspot.com/2010/11/pushing-graphics-card-into-vm-part-3.html (notice the GPU and drive scores)
     
    Last edited: Jan 7, 2011
  22. Paladin21

    Paladin21 Gawd

    Messages:
    529
    Joined:
    Jun 22, 2004
    In the past, TXT was coupled to vPro, which some of my management stuff here at work uses. I haven't seen any mention of it one way or the other in any of the reviews. Has anyone seen a mention of this? If I can't VNC into the new boxes, that's going to be an issue.
     
  23. DaRuSsIaMaN

    DaRuSsIaMaN [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,199
    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2007
    Hmm interesting.... I didn't really understand any of that blog about VT-d... LOL. Guess that means I don't need to worry about it. :p
    Needless to say, I don't do anything with VMs.
     
  24. anthrex

    anthrex [H]ard|Gawd

    Messages:
    1,871
    Joined:
    Jul 7, 2004
    Damn you intel for making my purchase more difficult. I really would have liked quick sync