PDA

View Full Version : Intel furure proofing....LOL



SolMiester
30-08-2010, 11:32 AM
Yet another socket for Sandy Bridge...so much for 1366 lasting more than 1 architecture!!, Im sure Intel must have a number of deals with board manufacturers!
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/3

wratterus
30-08-2010, 11:33 AM
Ha, knew saving $$ and going with 1156 was the right idea. :D

SolMiester
30-08-2010, 11:41 AM
Just realised why USB3 speeds are sh*t on Intel boards....

The other major (and welcome) change is the move to PCIe 2.0 lanes running at 5GT/s. Currently, Intel chipsets support PCIe 2.0 but they only run at 2.5GT/s, which limits them to a maximum of 250MB/s per direction per lane. This is a problem with high bandwidth USB 3.0 and 6Gbps SATA interfaces connected over PCIe x1 slots. With the move to 5GT/s, Intel is at feature parity with AMD’s chipsets and more importantly the bandwidth limits are a lot higher. A single PCIe x1 slot on a P67 motherboard can support up to 500MB/s of bandwidth in each direction (1GB/s bidirectional bandwidth).

wratterus
30-08-2010, 11:46 AM
Interesting...

Just noticed your avatar - Cygnus x1. Very cool. Still my favourite case mod of all time. :p

SolMiester
30-08-2010, 11:54 AM
Interesting...

Just noticed your avatar - Cygnus x1. Very cool. Still my favourite case mod of all time. :p

Oh totally the best custom box I have ever ever seen......the work the guy put in was fantastic, not to mention the work-log!

qazwsxokmijn
30-08-2010, 12:40 PM
Performance wise wouldn't i7 9xx still be the king? Cause that's all that's important for me.

SolMiester
30-08-2010, 12:47 PM
Performance wise wouldn't i7 9xx still be the king? Cause that's all that's important for me.

Probably not, what have you got Nehalem or Gulftown?...SB is 32nm process, and looks to have a higher turbo of 3.8ghz, not sure what they are at present, 3.46ghz aren't they...at any rate, we have different L3 cache and apparently faster clock for clock due to architecture changes..

In fact, archiving performance of 4 cores looks to be level with current 6 core!!!
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/10

jareemon
30-08-2010, 12:53 PM
Can any cpu with a socket number go into any mobo with the same socket number?

SolMiester
30-08-2010, 01:00 PM
Can any cpu with a socket number go into any mobo with the same socket number?

Not with 478 or 775 sockets....not sure on AM2 and AM3, but i think with current sockets yes!

qazwsxokmijn
30-08-2010, 01:24 PM
Probably not, what have you got Nehalem or Gulftown?...SB is 32nm process, and looks to have a higher turbo of 3.8ghz, not sure what they are at present, 3.46ghz aren't they...at any rate, we have different L3 cache and apparently faster clock for clock due to architecture changes..

In fact, archiving performance of 4 cores looks to be level with current 6 core!!!
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/10
I have Nehalem, i7 920 to be exact. I can crank it up to 4GHz easy, probably 4.5 if I needed it with my (soon to be completed) watercooling setup.

Agent_24
30-08-2010, 02:21 PM
And I'll stick with AMD.

SolMiester
30-08-2010, 02:37 PM
And I'll stick with AMD.

Really?...I used to be a big AMD fan, however they just sat back on the Athlon 64 and did nothing for too long and have only had power to watt bang for buck ever since which is a shame really....

Intel have been handing it to them since Conroe...and while Bulldozer go some way against the new 7xxx Xeons, Sandy bridge is yet another leap ahead....I wish they were better as it would help on pricing, however......

Snorkbox
30-08-2010, 02:38 PM
Can any cpu with a socket number go into any mobo with the same socket number?

It depends.

The BIOS may have to be upgraded to insert a faster CPU than what is currently in the motherboard for example. If there is no later BIOS then you may be out of luck.

pctek
30-08-2010, 02:41 PM
Ha, knew saving $$ and going with 1156 was the right idea. :D

The first was LGA-1366 for the original Nehalem based Core i7. In 2009 we got LGA-1156 for Lynnfield, later updated with support for the dual-core Clarkdale CPUs launched in 2010. Next year, Sandy Bridge will launch with LGA-1155.

The CPU and socket are not compatible with existing motherboards or CPUs. Thatís right, if you want to buy Sandy Bridge youíll need a new motherboard.


It's always the way, and Intel have always done that too - AMD at least for a while were pretty good with backwards compatibilty.

I'm not bothered, I'll upgrade when I need to and with CPUs, it's pretty much always MB, CPU and RAM as a bundle.

Agent_24
30-08-2010, 02:50 PM
Really?...I used to be a big AMD fan, however they just sat back on the Athlon 64 and did nothing for too long and have only had power to watt bang for buck ever since which is a shame really....
If I had a lot of money to burn I would probably have bought an Intel this time.

But quite interesting reading a benchmark on Toms Hardware.

The Phenom II 965 vs the i7-something (top of the line at the time)
The Phenom II was about $400 and the i7 almost $2200

The benchmark showed the performance difference about 1-10FPS on most games.

Sure, with triple channel memory the i7 was far ahead in terms of memory write speed but why spend an extra $1800 or so to get an extra 1FPS out of Crysis on a graphics card I can't afford either?

Speedy Gonzales
30-08-2010, 02:59 PM
I may try an AMD soon, since quite a few of them have all the connections as well as firewire. Since I use a cam with firewire.

And some are cheaper than the Intel mobos.

Just have to make sure I get one where the firewire works (the last one didn't). And also make sure to take it back if it doesnt work. Since last time the shop tried to fix it, they killed it lol

SolMiester
30-08-2010, 03:05 PM
Well yeah, the flagship is always too expensive, however no one buys those except JJJJJ....
Anyway, not sure about Toms benchies...but there is more than a few frames between them bud...A lot more games these days are CPU dependent, especially RTS
http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/102?vs=142

trinsic
30-08-2010, 05:02 PM
Not all that funny. AMD just happen to be doing the exact same thing with the upcoming Bulldozer CPU's.

AM3+ CPU's will not work on AM3 motherboards. However vice versa is OK (AM3 CPU's on AM3+ motherboards).

The reasons for it are there are certain features that from a performance standard are well worth it.

Agent_24
30-08-2010, 05:20 PM
it makes sense, the new CPUs will require certain support that the old boards can't provide, but the new boards are backwards compatible.

It still allows for an upgrade of your board first and then CPU later so you don't have to spend money all in one go.