Dual Socket LGA775 Motherboards??

Hello,
I am new to this forum and looking for a little guidance/assistance. I want to build a couple of new system and am having trouble locating a motherboard with the specs I am interested in.

I am looking for dual socket LGA775 motherboards. Do they exist? If so, seem really hard to find.

Further I wanted to upgrade the type of processors I use. Currently I am using P4 3.4Ghz 650 Processors. I am really looking to start using Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600 Kentsfield 2.4GHz LGA 775 Processors.

Ultimately I want to be able to build a system with 2 x Q6600 and 4+ GB of memory. Beyond that I am flexible.

Any assistance or guidance would be appreciated.

Thanks. That’s what I was afraid of. I have found a number of LGA771 boards but even the cheapest LGA771 processors are much more expense than the LGA775’s (and with much lower speeds).

I dont have time to find it, but i read some time ago that they did have a modified x-38 based dual socket motherboard coming out for socket 775, maybe try googling dual socket x-38 motherboard.

Thanks reconviperone1. I will do some research with those key terms.

To answer Starcraftfanatics question, I was looking to virtualize a number of older low end servers. Also I am looking ahead to a switch to Vista and Server 2007. The new OS are gluttonous resource hogs. The Core 2 Quad seem to give more bang for the buck than you get when looking at Xeon 771. (Both appear to be relative in performance but the LGA771 Xeons are drastically more expensive.) Also as technology (OS and Hardware) changes the box would likely have been migrated to a media server (either through MS Server Home Edition or the Media Center in Vista).

They DO make a dual 775 motherboard, but NOT for your Quad core, it ONLY supports the Xeon Version of the Quad core, which has support for ASMP. I noticed they were wired for ASMP, and started looking around myself, and tyan makes ONE. And, it's CRAZY. It's 675 dollars. And, it uses a intel chipset, with regular ole PCIe, and NO pci-X or ANY slots with BANDWIDTH! The PCIe is X-16 for Graphics only, and there are 2 X-1, and 2 PCI. What kind of CRAP is that for a Server board, I'll tell you, IT AIN"T a server board, it's for crazy people that think they will need 8 cores in the next year or 2. IF it was something that was Viable, Supermicro, and Intel would be making it also.
NO, I'm not prejudice against Tyan, I just don't like them much. Besides, A GOOD server board, is SUN SPARC IV+!!!!!!!!!!!!! If in fact you are rolling in dough.

^^^^^FUD

A microsoft non-believer then. If Microsoft software is so sh ite than why do they control the majority of the market? Ill admit that i dont like Vista currently but it will improve. As for server 2003, ive currently got 2 servers setup with no issues (errors or system log problems). One is used as a file server, WUS and bittorrents, the only "aftermarket software " on it would be Azureous which is free. The other Runs a Domain inc. AD, DHCP, DNS, RIP, Exchange, ISS (with homepage and outlook logins, and FTP server). And the addition software is NIL. So i dont see what the big issue with it is, id think that you havent set something up correctly and didnt know how to fix it. Sure, i dont know the first thing about linux but to disregard a majority market holder seems to me like a grudge and nothing more.

I appreciate all of the input. I have just signed on with the IT dept at a medium level corporation and saw some things that made me re-think my current network and my boxes (numbers and hardware). My most recent focuses have become virtual servers, single image deployments (containing multiple HALS) and preping hardware for Vista and Server 2008 (as I was corrected earlier).

I wouldn’t hesitate to go with the Intel Xeon E5410 Quad if I could get it for the “Pricing in business quantities” at “$256.” The pricing I am seeing is about 150% more than a comparable 775 Quad core.

Regardless of the arguments, I have used multi-processor systems since the PIII socket PGA370s and have always seen increased liability and performance.

I also lean more toward the 775 Desktop chipset b/c what is a killer virtual server box today; winds up being a good media server box in 8 months; and in a year and a half its simply a respectable desktop.

It’s a shame there are not manufactures breaking the conformity and creating hardware like the 775 dual socket mobos. I am no hardware architect but I simple do not believe that a dual 775 is impossible. I feel that its just not profitable enough for manufactures being that it would compete with 771 server equipment. However I think that enthusiast and powers users would have a field day.

Dual amd with DDR2 ECC or DDR2 on the 4x4 board is a lot cheaper then FB-DIMMS with a Intel board

Check around this and similar Forums:

users are beginning to realize the potential
of multiple PCI-E RAID controllers using
all x16 PCI-E lanes, a la SLI and CROSSFIRE video.

(WHY THE HECK NOT??)

If we all start hounding companies like Highpoint, Areca
and Adaptec, maybe they'll build these sooner than later.

SSD developments alone will demand much more
raw bandwidth, as RAID controllers get faster and smarter.

The OCZ "Z-drive" is just a Highpoint RocketRAID controller
+ 4 x OCZ MLC SSDs and a plastic shell to hide the components.


x8 PCI-E 2.0 anybody?


MRFS

Intel most likely will not release support for dual Socket 775 motherboards, it would destroy their Xeon line from which they make huge amounts of money in the buisness world. And basically if you are looking for a cheap way to virtulize other computers most likely you will not get a very good outcome, Xeon are pretty powerful processors not intend for home use, but they deffinantly are used in home. You will be better off spending the money on a top of the line Intel i7 with 8-16gb ram, go with SCSI 15000RPM drives or WD Raptors (300GB each is the negitive but speedy!). This will be plent fast enough unless you somehow has 100's of people excessing the computer/server. And Microsoft Server 2008 should be alright, the anit-microsoft guy (robl256) he probably doesn't take the time to get certified and learn the system, just settles with the old mentality the "MS sucks". Windows 7 works great, ive had the RC for a few month with no major problems, besides apple not updating ITunes for it... errr!

Basically, you should be fine with a single quad-core processor for your purposes, I love how question forums turn into pissing contest about different hardware, and obsecne hardware cost SSD won't get cheap anytime soon, The hardrives are going to be a big feat for you, you need the access speed on them otherwise the processor mind as well be a Pentium 4... Linux is also a good alternative to MS, lots of free stuff if you are looking to cut cost, but cut cost = cut features.

Nathaniel Cooper
X-Wired Service Inc.