1366 i7 vs 1156 i7?

Is LGA1366 i7 better than that of the LGA1156 one? If so, in what aspect?

Does HT give more than 10% performance increase?
52 answers Last reply
More about 1366 1156
  1. The LGA1366 i7 is better equipped for multi-GPU operation, while the LGA1156 is not perfect for that role. IIRC, all of Core i7s offer HyperThreading.
  2. yomamafor1 said:
    IIRC, all of Core i7s offer HyperThreading.


    I am aware of that. I just wonder how well the HT can improve the performance.

    Will the i7 with HT on beat the i7 with HT off by 10%?
  3. Depends on the applications. In gaming, you won't see much difference, if at all, between HT on and off. In other applications, such as video encoding, you may see a noticeable difference between them.
  4. In gaming, its been shown that HT actually gives worse performance, by trying to do the extra threading, it actually is slower than just using the core threads
  5. What exactly is video encoding? Is it just video format conversion? If so, what software do you guys use for it? Thanks
  6. Encoding is the process of converting an original video file to another format, usually with some level of compression involved. Transcoding is essentially the same as encoding but usually refers to the 2nd or more conversion to another format, but you could use it in the same way as encoding. The two terms are often interchanged.

    The software you use depends on:

    1) Your budget(if you buy commercial software)
    2) What your input files are
    3) What output file you want (note that many files are just containers that can store data in several different formats, like MP4 and AVI)
    4) Whether you want CPU or GPU (CUDA/Stream) transcoding.
    5) Whether you also want an integrated video editor/transcoder
  7. @randomizer:

    The price is not an issue as there are heaps of commercial software offered to engineering students for free at my university, including Windows 7 Pro, Photoshop ...etc :) . What software do you use for encoding?
  8. I use Handbrake for encoding using x264 (ie. H.264 format). I don't use anything else because I don't encode to any other formats. It depends what you want to do.
  9. randomizer said:
    I use Handbrake for encoding using x264 (ie. H.264 format). I don't use anything else because I don't encode to any other formats. It depends what you want to do.

    Any suggestion on AVI, MKV and HDTV encoder?
  10. Those are containers, but I assume you'll be using H.264 right? You could store other encoded data in those containers as well, but H.264 is the most common for HD stuff now.
  11. randomizer said:
    Those are containers, but I assume you'll be using H.264 right? You could store other encoded data in those containers as well, but H.264 is the most common for HD stuff now.


    Sorry I am noob, so I don't really understand what you are talking about. Could you please provide some links regarding the H.264 for me to read? Thanks
  12. Probably contains far more useless info than you need but there's the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H.264/MPEG-4_AVC

    Basically you have two components to most files. The compression/encoding standard and the container. Containers are things like AVI, MKV, MP4 etc. They describe the data they contain and how it is meant to be read. The data will be encoded using a particular standard such as MPEG-1, MPEG-2, WMV and H.264. The standard used partially determines the quality, file size and compatibility of a video file. A .mp4 file may contain one of several different standards, which means that if your program can read one MP4 it may not be able to read another. The video playback program must support both the container and the standard to work.

    To be even more confusing some standards go by multiple names. H.264 is also called AVC and MPEG-4 Part 10 (usually not the latter).

    This might be of help too: http://www.dvd-guides.com/content/view/143/59/
  13. @randomizer:

    The info in the links provided by you are really helpful. Thanks a lot.
  14. i use handbrake and xtodvdconverter. Both use my i7 real nice super fast.

    A buddy of mine just got a job for $500 to convert 700 DvDs to digital, lol way undercut himself, he found out after he started. Thank god him and I both use newsgroups instead of torrents cause he just ended up downloading most of them already converted saved weeks of time. Its nice to Download 11gigs per hour.
  15. You might as well get socket 1366, so its cheaper to upgrade to i9. No socket 1366 no i9 for you. Also 1366 uses triple channel ram and 1156 uses dual channel. "Fail"
  16. I've noticed that HT does drag down my gaming performance. I shut it off. I wish it helped...I like the idea.
  17. Problem is, theres alot of interaction between the cpu and the gpu, and the cpu, with HT on, keeps wanting to thread it out to 8 threads, which takes time/cycles, and its not needed, so you end up losing those cycles/time.
    Other apps however dont have that interaction, and either show no loss or gain either, and some apps use the extra threads, and are much quicker

    PS me too
  18. daship said:
    You might as well get socket 1366, so its cheaper to upgrade to i9. No socket 1366 no i9 for you. Also 1366 uses triple channel ram and 1156 uses dual channel. "Fail"

    I heard that i9 is EE which is too expensive to me. Hence, I only want to get 1156 so that I can upgrade to a much cheaper mainstream CPU later.
  19. Until certain things change, dual channel is all we currently need on DT
  20. 1366 is better because it has more pins ........duh.....
  21. and i dont think the 1156 versions will get stock clocks over 3ghz, only with turbo, 1366 is more of a haha you cant afford this platform, who will need tripple channel memory in a desktop environment, or twelve threads?
  22. xaira said:
    and i dont think the 1156 versions will get stock clocks over 3ghz, only with turbo, 1366 is more of a haha you cant afford this platform, who will need tripple channel memory in a desktop environment, or twelve threads?


    1156 gets 3.46GHz + turbo to 3.8GHz.

    although it is a dual core, but it has SMT.
  23. Clock for clock 1156=1366 in gaming
  24. ^ anything else though, 1366 > 1156, and by a good margin as well.
  25. True, not everything, but like we see it against other cpus, P2, C2D, where its MT with HT can stretch its legs.
    Will have to see, Im thinking itll be a better gamer, and a lil under i7, depending on model.
    The highend 1156, may turn out to be the fastest of all, just no unlocked multi
  26. ^ for gaming it might depend on if you can turn off HT with 1156, if it can't then 1366 i7 minus HT will beat the 1156 by a fair margin in quad threaded and below games.

    and then when we move into eight threaded games, I think we'll see the 920 (with HT on) pull ahead, die to the higher IPC.
  27. I dont think so.
    Reason? Pricing. Simple as that. Too early to call yet, theres bios being made as we speak
    Intel cant possibly sell their top 1156 for 500+$ and expect buyers, it just wont happen, theyd all opt for 1366 and a 920 right? However, they did manage to neuter it some more
    http://www.digitimes.com/NewsShow/NewsSearch.asp?DocID=PD000000000000000000000000011326&query=BRAIDWOOD
  28. Don't buy into the triple channel marketing, it's just a way for memory providers to sell more ram we know where near the bandwidth used by dual channel memory yet hence why there's no difference in real benchmarks between LGA1366 and LGA1156 clock for clock.
  29. I thought 1156 was aimed at people who wanted quad core performance for the price of a dual core (core i5 and i3)

    and also at gamers who knew the higher clocks at stock on i5 and i3 would give them a boost over i7.

    @Jeanluc, yes there is a difference between dual and triple channel performance wise. Look at the apps i7 1366 is marketed at.
  30. I really dont think Intel plans on selling huge amounts of i7s for DT
    Look at their own projections. 1% 6 months in,not 6 months into 09, but after i7 release, and 5% by the end of the year, but that includes i5 and the 1156 i7s and i3s as well
  31. What is DT?
  32. desk top
  33. ZZZzzzz...... lazy, really lazy!
  34. Helloworld_98 said:
    1156 gets 3.46GHz + turbo to 3.8GHz.

    although it is a dual core, but it has SMT.


    i was talking about quad i7 not dual i5
  35. ^ you said 1156 however, and that refers to the whole platform from Pentium Gxxxx to i7 8xx.
  36. Shouldn't us gamers be considering how much worse the 1156 i7 will be running Crossfire/Sli as 8x 8x configuration whereas the 1366 i7 has the ability to do it as 16x 16x? Or will the 1156 come with the nforce 200 chip that allows 16x 16x and 3 way Sli?
  37. killtacular said:
    Shouldn't us gamers be considering how much worse the 1156 i7 will be running Crossfire/Sli as 8x 8x configuration whereas the 1366 i7 has the ability to do it as 16x 16x? Or will the 1156 come with the nforce 200 chip that allows 16x 16x and 3 way Sli?

    You are forgetting that the 1156s have an intergrated PCI-E controller, while the 1336s still communicate by the chipset.

    The 1156s seem to be great overclockers, beating the 1336s by horselengths ;)
  38. ^ the 1156's use more volts than the 1366's however.

    and yes, some 1156 boards will come with an NF200 for extra PCIe lanes, however for the price you're paying for them, 1366 saves you more money than before.
  39. Helloworld_98 said:


    and yes, some 1156 boards will come with an NF200 for extra PCIe lanes, however for the price you're paying for them, 1366 saves you more money than before.


    Hmmm. That's what I was thinking. NF200 equiped 1156 boards will be priced close to a lot of very good x58 boards such as the MSI Eclipse Plus, that's what I am predicting. It may be a better idea to go with X58 as the upgrade path seems better with Gulftown....Also, I usually hate being an early mobo adopter as usually the BIOS is always flacky and it takes months before it is good enough. X58 boards would have pretty much rock solid BIOS' now, I would think.....hmmmm decisions, decisions...
  40. UltraO said:
    You are forgetting that the 1156s have an intergrated PCI-E controller, while the 1336s still communicate by the chipset.


    I don't quite follow this? What do you mean?
  41. The PCIe on 1156 is connected directly to the CPU. On 1366, PCIe is connected to the northbridge, which is then in turn connected to the CPU by the QPI interface. Some have speculated that the extra latency of having the chipset in between could make a significant difference in performance. As far as I know, no one has done a study of the situation.
  42. Thanks. I guess we will have to wait and see what the offical verdict is on 1156 as per Anand, Guru3D etc....
  43. One thing I dont like, it may just so happen this gen of gfx card wil flood the 8x lanes, and thatll force people to go 1366 whether their wallets want them to or not.
    Not liken this 2 tier stuff much
    Unless they come out later with 2 full 16x lanes on 1156
  44. Hmmm. Evga have announced a few P55 boards with NF200. That would give you 2 full 16x lanes and 3 way sli possibilty. However, I am sure the price will be right up there with a good x58 board. Still, you can save around £100 on not having to buy triple channel ram, but, for the sake of £100, I would just go with x58. Ta Jaydee!
  45. well, unless AMD or nvidia pumps out chips that actually see difference in 8x/ 8x vs 16 x / 16x the extra band width is useless...

    Or better yet, if AMD / nvidia made it so that communication with the 2 gfx is all contained in the CF/SLI bridges, and that data can be drawn from all the gfx as a single entity that allows 4 cards to safely share a single x16 lane since all 4 cards operates at 4x each, but operates in tandem with each other and shares information via some extra wide CF/SLI bridge
  46. Thats just it. nVidia charging board makers 30,000$ and then 5$ per board over that for SLI, plus the chips, itll run up the 1156 price to 1366 range.
    You could still run your 1366 in 2 channel, as 3 channel offers nothing on DT, and save a few bucks, making it just as cheap, or as expensive, depending on how you look at it, as the 1156
  47. heres some links about BW
    http://alienbabeltech.com/main/?p=2249&page=11
    http://forums.amd.com/devforum/messageview.cfm?catid=328&threadid=110351
    http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=54321
    http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=225823

    The new card will be at least twice as fast, the fastest single slots will be more than twice as fast as the 280 in my first link
  48. well, then, guess the 1366 is the platform for me when 58xx/300 comes out and drops the prices a little, I'm planning on spending 600 CAD on some CF/SLI comes out and then another 200 (I hope) for a nice 1920*1200 screen
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Performance Intel i7