Dual Socket LGA775 Motherboards??

[jbhaire2004]

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.

 

[runswindows95]

They only make dual socket mobo's for Xeons.

 

[jbhaire2004]

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).

 

[starcraftfanatic]

that's because they were designed with circuitry to run on the dual socket J boards. What are you planning to do with 8 cores? a quadcore should serve you well enough.

 

[reconviperone1]

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.

 

[aevm]

If you really need a lot of speed I'd say wait for QX9650, overclock it to 4 GHz with a Thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme, get Vista 64, 8 GB of RAM, and a couple of WD7500AAKS in RAID. That should humiliate the average Q6600 system.

 

[jbhaire2004]

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).

 

[chookman]

The new Microsoft Server is 2008 not 2007 and its actually is ment to have built in VM software which is good news

 

[robl756]

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.

 

[robl756]

Oh, and too Chookman, Microsoft, does NOT make server software, they make a REALLY poor attempt at low security crap, that you have to buy SCADS of aftermarket software to support, JUST to get it working RIGHT. And, don't use their Name server software, If it ain't BIND, it don't work. I got TIRED of finding a message on my 2003, that said, DNS server service has stopped. In a bubble on my screen when I wake up in the am. BUT, since it was a trial thing (for me), no big loss, It wasn't really serving anything, except a couple of pages NOBODY looked at. My SERVERS use Sun Solaris, and Digital Unix. Yep, OLD stuff. But, It works, 4.4 too ;-)

 

[Shadow703793]

^^^^^FUD

 

[starcraftfanatic]

there are no dual 775 boards, only 771, if there is a dual 775 board, the proccesors would be completely independent and buggy, or one would simply not work. I'm taking a wild guess here, but I believe intel will be releasing the 45nm proccesors for the server market soon, which is why they let the old ones go out of stock. Your 775 quad will not work on a 771 board.

BTW, they make two types of xeons. One type is basically a rebranded Core 2, and only supports single socket, while the other is the dual socket version. I believe the single socket one does work on socket 775.

If your going to be virtualizing servers, then 8 cores might help alot, I suggest getting the two quads are around 2GHZ.

 

[chookman]

Oh, and too Chookman, Microsoft, does NOT make server software, they make a REALLY poor attempt at low security crap, that you have to buy SCADS of aftermarket software to support, JUST to get it working RIGHT. And, don't use their Name server software, If it ain't BIND, it don't work. I got TIRED of finding a message on my 2003, that said, DNS server service has stopped. In a bubble on my screen when I wake up in the am. BUT, since it was a trial thing (for me), no big loss, It wasn't really serving anything, except a couple of pages NOBODY looked at. My SERVERS use Sun Solaris, and Digital Unix. Yep, OLD stuff. But, It works, 4.4 too ;-)

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.

 

[boner]

holy $#!#%

 

[jbhaire2004]

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.

 

[nhobo]

[I have used multi-processor systems since the PIII socket PGA370s and have always seen increased liability]

I hope you have a good lawyer.

 

[Joe_The_Dragon]

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

 

[Xwris Onoma]

I am running a quad Xeon X3220 (2.4 GHz) on a DELL made LGA775 motherboard and I could n't be happier.

Unfortunatley, this is a "U" designated procesor, meaning it is not designed to run in any configuration other than by its own.

So even if there is a dual cpu 775 mobo out there you can't use the "Uniprocessor" intended xeons.
And this is definitely a shame!

 

[MRFS]

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

 

[zippy93]

my advice is to wait for the intel skulltrail to come out as it has two slots holding intel core 2 extreme

 

[NGCooper23]

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.

 

[Gabrial]

I know I'm necro'ing this thread. But reading through the replies I couldn't help but chuckle at what people were saying in 2007.

"What are you planning to do with 8 cores? a quadcore should serve you well enough."

There was another reply basically saying the same thing it's just humorous to see how people thought years ago (for me anyway).

As an aside, computer technology seems to be slowing down somewhat. In 2008 I bought a (then) top of the line Phenom II quad core 2.4 CPU with 4 gigs of Ram and 1 Gig GPU total Crossfiring two 512 video cards. 7 years later 8 cores and around 4gigs are pretty much top of the line for gamers, excluding the ultra high end systems.

 

[MRFS]

The rate of change is not the same for all discrete components.

Back in 2007, the relativeLY slow speeds of storage components
were generally well understood, and well documented.

HDDs still move around 200 MB/second at the Read/Write heads,
despite a 6G interface.

To illustrate further, compare the raw bandwidth of a PCIe 3.0 chipset --
supporting an 8 GHz clock rate and 128b/130b "jumbo frame" --
with the stagnation that persists with the 6G SATA-III clock rate
and obsolete 8b/10b "legacy frame".

At the Storage Developer Conference back in 2012, we proposed
that the next "SATA-IV" standard incorporate both features.

Thus, it was not a surprise when the USB 3.1 spec incorporated
both features, bumping the clock to 10G and implementing a
128b/132b jumbo frame.

The fact that a 12G transmission clock is only available now
in very expensive storage subsystems, should tell you a lot.

One theory we entertain is our suspicion that high performance
storage is being deliberately priced out of the reach of individual
Enthusiasts and DIY builders.

If true, the industry in general is now dominated by political
considerations which favor large organizations over
"garage door" inventors.


MRFS