Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

LGA 1156 Core i5

Last response: in CPUs
Share
April 15, 2009 2:23:44 PM

Intel is going to release the LGA 1156 socket, as if LGA 775 and LGA 1366 aren't enough. This will be used by Lynnfield ( Core i5) and uses the P55 chipset. It is the mainstream version of Nehalem. It will support DDR3 only and in dual-channel mode.

Here's a pic from Guru 3D http://www.guru3d.com/news/core-i5-socket-lga-1156-sighted/

And here's an Anandtech article: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3461





More about : lga 1156 core

April 15, 2009 2:27:42 PM

well supposedly they might drop lga1366 too because of future proofing reasons and the processors can't have a QPI any faster than it is now.
April 15, 2009 2:30:42 PM

When will we first see 6/8 core CPUs from Intel/AMD?
Related resources
April 15, 2009 2:34:54 PM

a 6 core is already out from intel, albeit it costs $1500 and is a 603 server chip.

6 core from amd? late 2009 and an 8 core from intel around the same time, the amd will come in server and desktop versions iirc, intels will only come in server versions.
April 15, 2009 2:37:22 PM

That will again mean new sockets I suppose.
April 15, 2009 2:42:18 PM

no, wasn't thinking about server chips in my first post.

they're might drop 1366 for desktops but keep it for servers due to the higher bandwidth.

and I believe the shanghai cpu will work on Socket F which is a current socket.
April 15, 2009 2:45:08 PM

They arent dropping 1366, where are you people supposedly hearing this from? Good grief. 1366 is for their highest end chips and Xx8 chipsets (X38..48...58..) which are the enthusiast market. LGA 1156 targets the mainstream and apparently whatever gap between that and enthusiast.
April 15, 2009 2:46:01 PM

Do they really need to introduce new sockets one after the other? If you choose a socket, you're stuck with it.
April 15, 2009 2:48:36 PM

x38 and x48 don't use LGA 1366. x58 saw a transition to LGA 1366. Similarly, P35 and P45 used LGA 775, P55 will see a transition to LGA 1156.
April 15, 2009 2:49:38 PM

rags_20 said:
x38 and x48 don't use LGA 1366. x58 saw a transition to LGA 1366. Similarly, P35 and P45 used LGA 775, P55 will see a transition to LGA 1156.


It was a reference to the chipsets. I never said X38 and X48 used LGA 1366.
April 15, 2009 2:49:52 PM

it gives them more profit and allows cpu's which use more bandwidth to be produced.
April 15, 2009 2:53:04 PM

Yeah, but why market 2 sockets at the same time? They could've stuck with 1366 for mainstream or used 1156 for enthusiast.
a b à CPUs
April 15, 2009 2:56:25 PM

http://www.nordichardware.com/news,9078.html
Quote:
Intel postpones Core i5 launch (even further)


http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&ta...
Quote:
We're not sure when to expect the actual launch, as we've heard August-September from some and now we're hearing as late as October. Maybe Intel is biding their time, as they don't feel enough pressure from AMD and the Core 2 range is still doing pretty well in comparison to the Phenom II.

The Core i5 platform isn't exactly exciting, as it seems to have a lot of drawbacks and very few advantages to the consumer over the Core 2 platform and unless it offer something better, we doubt that people will bother to upgrade, especially considering the current economic climate, which could also be a reason why Intel is holding things back.
April 15, 2009 2:56:40 PM

They know that enthusiasts will pay more for their PC's and do so more often than people buying a mainstream pc. although one could argue i7 is in the mainstream now since you can get one for under $1000.

edit: also intel ran 478, 479, 603, 604 and 775 at the same time so it's not the worst they've done.
April 15, 2009 3:00:31 PM

and if they are postponing it then someone had a really bad marketing strategy unless it's so they can produce more powerful i5 processors.
April 15, 2009 3:21:43 PM

Well, we aren't really seeing games which can fully utilize 4 cores/ 8 threads other than GTA IV.
a b à CPUs
April 15, 2009 3:27:15 PM

Intel's desktop will eventually settle into 2 main tiers - the i7 1366 high end and i5 1156 mainstream. And probably some Celery low-end tier as well.

Pay no attention to the fanbois claiming Intel will be dropping the high-end - according to Otellini during the Q1 conference call, Intel is happy that they've shipped over 1M Nehalem CPUs (which would be all i7's since the i5's aren't out yet). As prices continue to drop, the i7's will ramp up sales like the C2Quads, which the fanbois also said weren't selling about a couple years ago because they weren't "true quad cores". Deja vu all over again :) .

In the meantime, netbooks are storming the market according to the Q1 report, despite or maybe because of the lousy economy. AMD forgot to compete here (well actually they have a Neo solution, but it stinks battery-life-wise according to some reviews, and that is the 2nd most important consideration when buying a netbook).
April 15, 2009 4:15:42 PM

dont you guys get it? i7 1366 is server platform. Releasing X58 on 1366 gave them a cheap and fast option to sell their nehalems to consumers as well. This way then can differenciate the market while still selling the same product.

1156 socket will be the sensible reengineerd socket designed for business use and consumers. Ie lower idle power, cheaper to fabricate, no triple channel support. This senseable, since these business machines just dont need insane memory bandwidth. Im sure they will rerelease X58 for 1156 too.

In the end, you dont need server like bandwidth to play videogames. You need a high CPU clock and a GPU that is suited for your resolution. So 1156 will be sufficient even for top performance, and without the serverstyle costs.

Still i7 is pretty nice since enthousiasts have been able to cut in line and instantly get intels top architecture instead of waiting for it to be released to consumers.
April 15, 2009 4:21:18 PM

no they won't release it for 1156

they have P57 instead.

this is all very confusing, I don't think amd is going to pull through and consumers might not be happy with i5 when it releases.
April 15, 2009 4:45:00 PM

Oh, why not? Its not P57, its P55. So, if buy i7 now, I will not be able to get Core i5. That stinks. Shouldn't that drop i7 sales among consumers?
a b à CPUs
April 15, 2009 5:04:30 PM

^^actually, P57 is supposed to be a beefed up version of the P55, or so i've understood...
April 15, 2009 5:32:14 PM

Isn't 5 mainstream - P35, P45 and 8 enthusiast - X38, X48? Then where does P57 fit in?
a b à CPUs
April 15, 2009 6:16:14 PM

rags_20 said:
Yeah, but why market 2 sockets at the same time? They could've stuck with 1366 for mainstream or used 1156 for enthusiast.


The reason is because some of the stuff on the current i7, especially the tri channel memory controller, is quite expensive as far as die space is concerned, as well as motherboard costs. However, they can't change the memory controller without also changing the socket. Therefore, if they want to make something competitive in the low end, it can't have stuff like tri channel memory, especially if they want to keep motherboards down to a competitive low end price. Therefore, they need a new socket for the low to midrange stuff, or else they can't make it cheaply enough. 1366 will stay however, and remain as the high end socket, including a 6 core Nehalem die shrink when 32nm comes.
April 15, 2009 11:26:28 PM

So LGA 1366 supports 6-core? Also, will this 6-core CPU be true six core or 3 dual cores?
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 12:36:47 AM

True 6 core, 12 thread. One die, as of the last time I heard. Probably with a single, shared L3, and per core L1 and L2.
April 16, 2009 2:22:57 AM

Isn't 6 odd? I mean, 1, 2, 4 ,8 isn't that the way its supposed to go? Even Phenom x3s have 4 cores physically.
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 3:42:57 AM

It's probably because an 8 core is too large to be easily and cheaply done, and would take too much power and die space to be practical, but they do have some extra headroom at 32nm to improve on a quad.
April 16, 2009 4:08:27 AM

So how powerful is the integrated graphics going to be? Just like Intel's GMAs or what? I really don't see the point. Even if you have integrated graphics, most people are going to get cards anyway.
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 7:57:08 AM

Well, the 6 core won't have any integrated graphics, as it is intended for the high end market (where, as you said, people will get their own graphics anyways). The LGA1156 parts though (duos and perhaps quads) will get something a bit (but not a lot) faster than the current Intel GMA. The advantage will be in power and heat dissipation - the CPU will still use around the same power level (95W or so), but that includes graphics, reducing system power. Of course, you could add discrete graphics if you want - nothing will prevent that.
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 8:46:25 AM

rags_20 said:
Intel is going to release the LGA 1156 socket, as if LGA 775 and LGA 1366 aren't enough. This will be used by Lynnfield ( Core i5) and uses the P55 chipset. It is the mainstream version of Nehalem. It will support DDR3 only and in dual-channel mode.


Heh and i thought AMD was innocent with Socket A, Socket 754, Socket 940, Socket 939, Socket 940 "AM2", there dead end 4x4, AM2+ and now AM3? hmmmmmm.....

Reguardless of socket both companies are appalling when it comes to upgradability - manufacturers not making bios's or VRM designs to support future chips etc make "future proofing" a BS term - no such thing.

Socket 1156 is just the replacement for 775 - good riddens to the ageing FSB design that *still* puts AMD in place! (at a price), and second its the MAIN STREAM PRODUCT not high end like 1366 etc
April 16, 2009 8:58:47 AM

^ You joined in 1970? Did TomsHardware exist in 1970? Wow!
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 9:11:57 AM

apparently so! :D 
April 16, 2009 9:38:41 AM

i7 itself would be a waste for most people wouldn't it? Games don't even utilise 100% of the cpu.. I hope the i5 would be a much more affordable step up.. :) 
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 10:18:34 AM

Core i7 = MULTITASKING monster + great gaming performance, and since when does a system only run one app (aka a game) - no friggin way - your running firewall, antivirus apps, messenger/chat apps, file sharing apps plus windows - all that across 8 threads is sweet.

Also when a game isnt limited by the CPU or cant use multiple threads (or beyond 2-4 etc) ofcourse it reports a lower then 100% load, but why would you use a low end video card with a high end platform?

What Intel is trying to do here is make those "extreme" and high end markets use the i7 platform because of the capability of using 3+ video cards etc and tri channel memory (if not for performance then for sheer memory volume) and when you get that 8 core upgrade the tri-channel memory controller will make sence, where as that i5 platform with no QPI, dual channel and "only" 16 pcie lanes will start to limit its self.
April 16, 2009 11:06:28 AM

Like someone posted earlier, I also think that i7 is mainly aimed at servers. i5 will be what is targeted at consumers. Also, i5 also has 4 cores (8 threads) so that's not a problem. I read somewhere that the starting i5 will host a 2.13 GHz clock. I can't imagine that going past 3.2 GHz on an OC. Maybe the highest end i5 will have a 3 GHz clock and the Extreme edition a 3.2/3.33. I read about the 2.13 somewhere, but the other clocks are pure speculation.
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 11:17:47 AM

rags_20 said:
How did you change your joined date? Take a look at this. TH was founded in 1996. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Toms_Hardware


nah when they updated the forums a while back all the oldies here got there dates set back along way to 1970 - check around - theres a few originals here with the same thing
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 11:21:20 AM

oh and the Integrated graphics - closer to the cpu/imc + the same production process should be an advantage (eg what, 90 or 65nm chipset production vs 45nm if integrated into the cpu, more cooling etc too) - not a massive jump but perhaps ~30% if we are lucky, but poor drivers will keep it below nvidia/ati alternatives but acceptable for basic use
April 16, 2009 11:46:50 AM

How well will the GPU get cooled? I mean, both the CPU and the onboard GPU have just one common HSF, right?
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 11:58:28 AM

yup same packing, die etc so same cooling, in the same socket etc

also makes the posibility of adding some sort of cache to the IGP, and adding more power each series, and perhaps extreme overclocking of the IGP? (although at the end of the day its an Intel IGP LOL)
April 16, 2009 1:30:29 PM

Yeah right. But you can't OC the Integrated graphics, at least as it is in the mobo now.
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 1:35:38 PM

ummmm yes you can - for a while now
April 16, 2009 1:55:12 PM

you can it just doesn't make it that much better and you need a specialized cooler for it.
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 2:06:44 PM

apache_lives said:
yup same packing, die etc so same cooling, in the same socket etc

also makes the posibility of adding some sort of cache to the IGP, and adding more power each series, and perhaps extreme overclocking of the IGP? (although at the end of the day its an Intel IGP LOL)


No benchies yet, but here is a link to an Asian manufacturer who just got an ES of the Clarkdale:

http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=22...

The IGP is at 45nm while the CPU is 32nm. Supposedly the IGP has 4X the transistors of the standard Intel 4500 IGP
April 16, 2009 4:41:44 PM

Did you count and see if there were 1156 contacts? lol
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 4:51:22 PM

rags_20 said:
Did you count and see if there were 1156 contacts? lol


Of course :D 

BTW - my 700th post - hopefully now the moniker under my avatar no longer says I'm "a dick" :sol: 

[edit] OK now I'm an "old hand"... Wonder where Toms gets these nutty post-number designations from?? At least it doesn't say "old Fart!" LOL
a b à CPUs
April 16, 2009 5:49:28 PM

apache_lives said:
oh and the Integrated graphics - closer to the cpu/imc + the same production process should be an advantage (eg what, 90 or 65nm chipset production vs 45nm if integrated into the cpu, more cooling etc too) - not a massive jump but perhaps ~30% if we are lucky, but poor drivers will keep it below nvidia/ati alternatives but acceptable for basic use


Actually, the IGP will still be at a larger process than the CPU will. Though they are both in the CPU socket, it will still be 2 separate dies, with the CPU at 32nm and the IGP at 45nm.
April 16, 2009 8:31:35 PM

Read further into your link. If eveythings the same, the igp will be 2x that of the current 65nm process at 45nm to come. The 4x number was brought out under the misconception that it was to be 32nm as well.
Hopefully doubling the transistor count will allow Intel to almost catch up in performance.
!