Why are the i7 boards expensive?

J

Jospeh

[H]ard|Gawd
Joined
Jul 29, 2008
Messages
1,885
Is there something special that drives up the cost of i7 boards?
 
The X58 chipset is fairly expensive. Also the X58 boards have more phases than most X48 or P45 chipset based boards do. And really they aren't as bad as you think. There are boards that cost around $200. Not every X58 chipset based board is $350+.
 
Dan_D said:
The X58 chipset is fairly expensive. Also the X58 boards have more phases than most X48 or P45 chipset based boards do. And really they aren't as bad as you think. There are boards that cost around $200. Not every X58 chipset based board is $350+.
Click to expand...

^^^, plus the "bang for the buck" core 2 boards were mostly 965, P35, P45 chipsets where as X38, X48 have traditionally cost more

The Core i7 equivalent seems sadly to be relegated to Core i5
 
why do you say sadly? Theres a hell of a lot more differences between P55 and X58 than P45 and X48.

More expensive chipset is one part, but the one chip solution is cheaper than 2, 4 memory traces are cheaper than 6. X58 boards uses more layers than P55 boards will. Etc. I wont go into the reasons behind those differences, there are a sufficient number of other threads to cover that.
 
chinesepiratefood said:
What I meant was I wish it would all be 1 socket
Click to expand...

I think they went over why it wouldn't work in another thread.

LGA 1366 came from server boards/processors... something about not being cost effective (or just completely impossible) to have consumer level boards/chipsets with the same socket.

It sucks, but meh... unless I5 comes out before I start ordering parts and is cheaper/same performance as I7 then I won't really even consider it... :eek:

Plus that 6-core proc is on 1366 isn't it?
 
Blazestorm said:
I think they went over why it wouldn't work in another thread.

LGA 1366 came from server boards/processors... something about not being cost effective (or just completely impossible) to have consumer level boards/chipsets with the same socket.

It sucks, but meh... unless I5 comes out before I start ordering parts and is cheaper/same performance as I7 then I won't really even consider it... :eek:

Plus that 6-core proc is on 1366 isn't it?
Click to expand...

Yup...1336 is HIGH-end...1156 is mainstream...and a 6 core CPU is not mainstream.
 
The LGA 1366 paltform is really for workstation / server use.
- Greater memory bandwidth (triple channel DDR)
- better I/O bandwith with 2 x QPI . (one for Core i7). The x58 support 36 direct PCI-E 2.0 Lanes, good enough for native 2 x 16x PCIe graphics. Also most x58 board support SLi and crossfire proplerly.....In previous generations, crossfire and SLi costed about as much as the current x58 boards.
 
evilmedic said:
The LGA 1366 paltform is really for workstation / server use.
- Greater memory bandwidth (triple channel DDR)
- better I/O bandwith with 2 x QPI . (one for Core i7). The x58 support 36 direct PCI-E 2.0 Lanes, good enough for native 2 x 16x PCIe graphics. Also most x58 board support SLi and crossfire proplerly.....In previous generations, crossfire and SLi costed about as much as the current x58 boards.
Click to expand...

Core i7 is meant for the high end market segment. Not necessarily for workstations and servers. Though that is where the technology is going to be most useful at this point.
 
I know what the op means though. The mobo is what stopped me from i7. When I can get a really good p45 board for $100 that will give me a 50% overclock on a quad, it's hard to justify the expense. All of the good toys cost too much. :(
 
xxEIEIOxx said:
I know what the op means though. The mobo is what stopped me from i7. When I can get a really good p45 board for $100 that will give me a 50% overclock on a quad, it's hard to justify the expense. All of the good toys cost too much. :(
Click to expand...


Yeah, those bastards at Intel charging $200 for their flagship CPU architecture.
 
Core i7 is new and offers the fastest desktop performance that money can buy. Intel knows it and charge for it. And you know what?... I do not have problems with that.

This should not be confused with Intel fine in Europe for antitrust violation where Intel abused its competitive power. This is a serious offense and I hope that US will do the same.
 
RadXge said:
This should not be confused with Intel fine in Europe for antitrust violation where Intel abused its competitive power. This is a serious offense and I hope that US will do the same.
Click to expand...

You are correct, so I am not sure why you are threadcrapping with this remark. If you want to discuss this, there are other threads to do it in. Keep this one on topic.
 
I think X58 boards are priced exactly as they should be, $180-220 for the cheapest ones is a great price for an Intel mobo that can do CF and SLI while supporting the latest i7 processors, etc. X48 boards were just as costly, if not more so, and they only supported CF. 680i boards were a total crapshoot. Both were just as expensive. Yeah they're all more expensive than a P45 or a 780GX, and i7 is more expensive than a Q8400 or Q6600, why shouldn't it be? It's not a huge premium, $200-ish give or take for a comparable C2Q rig vs i7, but it's there... Up to you whether it's worth it, just take performance and your upgrade habits into account.
 
Jospeh said:
I fail to see why SLI/CF are at all necessary.
Click to expand...

It's not, and no one has said it is. That's why eventually there'll be an i5 and a P55 which will be priced at more mainstream levels. Are you saying they shouldn't charge a premium for a board that fully supports SLI/CF though? (amongst other things)
 
Jospeh said:
I fail to see why SLI/CF are at all necessary.
Click to expand...

Well then that's FAIL on your part.

I'm sorry, but frankly I get sick of this comment. Those of you who are making these types of statements aren't running the 24"-30" monitors using resolutions of 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 and trying to run the latest games at those resolutions without dropping the quality settings in the game. Frankly, even using the fastest single cards (dual GPU or single) you still don't generally get adequate performance in some games. This is especially true when you add AA and AF into the mix. It isn't a cost effective solution and like a high end car, you can argue the point of diminishing returns compared to another vehice in your price range and that's fine. Those of us who buy them don't necessarily need 30" monitors and 3-Way SLI, but we buy them anyway. Sometimes because we can justify a need for them or sometimes just because we want to.

Like fast cars, large TVs, badass stereo's or whatever, you've got to pay to play. Whether or not that's worth it to you is something for you to decide for yourself, but these types of technologies aren't "pointless" just because you don't understand or even desire them.
 
And here I thought he exercised a lot of restraint... Well, except for the size 7 bolded 'FAIL'. :p Bitching that there's high-end parts marketed to the enthusiast is like bitching that Audi, BMW, and Porsche exist. If it's not for you and it seems superfluous then just ignore it, how hard is that?
 
Dan_D said:
Well then that's FAIL on your part.

I'm sorry, but frankly I get sick of this comment. Those of you who are making these types of statements aren't running the 24"-30" monitors using resolutions of 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 and trying to run the latest games at those resolutions without dropping the quality settings in the game. Frankly, even using the fastest single cards (dual GPU or single) you still don't generally get adequate performance in some games. This is especially true when you add AA and AF into the mix. It isn't a cost effective solution and like a high end car, you can argue the point of diminishing returns compared to another vehice in your price range and that's fine. Those of us who buy them don't necessarily need 30" monitors and 3-Way SLI, but we buy them anyway. Sometimes because we can justify a need for them or sometimes just because we want to.

Like fast cars, large TVs, badass stereo's or whatever, you've got to pay to play. Whether or not that's worth it to you is something for you to decide for yourself, but these types of technologies aren't "pointless" just because you don't understand or even desire them.
Click to expand...

You missed out on an opportunity to use this, Dan.

1225401770r0ZtFsfumt_9_3.jpg
 
Dan_D said:
I'm sorry, but frankly I get sick of this comment. Those of you who are making these types of statements aren't running the 24"-30" monitors using resolutions of 1920x1200 or 2560x1600 and trying to run the latest games at those resolutions without dropping the quality settings in the game.
Click to expand...
...who said anything about gaming? Wait. Nobody did.
 
Monkeypillow said:
You missed out on an opportunity to use this, Dan.

Image snip...........
Click to expand...

Your right, I did miss an opportunity to use that graphic. (I love that one. Always makes me laugh when I see it.)

Jospeh said:
...who said anything about gaming? Wait. Nobody did.
Click to expand...

When you bring SLI or Crossfire up in a conversation gaming sort of goes with it. If you aren't playing games with your system then Crossfire and SLI are useless. (Outside of professional 3D modeling/animation use anyway.)
 
Jospeh said:
...who said anything about gaming? Wait. Nobody did.
Click to expand...

Umm, nobody mentioned any intended purpose... 'Till you brought up SLI/CF, which is obviously geared for gaming, if you don't game then why even bring it up? Or are you lamenting the fact that high-end mobos for the i7 are possibly costlier than they might otherwise be if SLI/CF wasn't in the picture? You might have a point then, but workstation mobos aren't any cheaper. Or maybe you're just being vague and argumentative for the hell of it. :rolleyes:
 
Having SLI/CF with a high-end chipset goes hand-in-hand... I still don't understand what you're getting at...
 
I'm getting at that it would be nice to have some cheaper boards and that will probably require them to drop crossfire/sli support.
 
Jospeh said:
I'm suggesting including those drive up the costs of the boards.
Click to expand...

Jospeh said:
I'm getting at that it would be nice to have some cheaper boards and that will probably require them to drop crossfire/sli support.
Click to expand...

I don't really think it increases the cost of the boards that much if any. The X58 chipset has enough PCI-Express lanes for at least two PCI-Express x16 slots. This configuration isn't just useful for Crossfire or SLI. Boards not supporting Crossfire or SLI tend to be cheaper, but not because of the lack of Crossfire or SLI support but rather because those boards tend to have less integrated hardware. Cheaper integrated audio, one LAN port instead of two, no added RAID controllers, no eSATA, IEEE1394a, etc. or any variation of the above.
 
Jospeh said:
I'm getting at that it would be nice to have some cheaper boards and that will probably require them to drop crossfire/sli support.
Click to expand...

Not necessarily, it just won't be optimal for SLI/CF at high res (might run it at x8 & x8 for instance). The P45 could do CF, the P55 will probably be able to do it as well... It's just not out yet. Cutting edge tech usually demands a premium and is tied to other cutting edge tech, that's what i7 is. It's not like C2Q or Phenom IIs are instantly obsolete, i5 will be out eventually if you crave more CPU power at a more mainstream price. i7 is simply not for you. Most X58 boards are still premium mobos with lots of extra frills, and premium P55 mobos will probably be nearly as expensive too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top