Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

LGA-1366 or LGA-1156???

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 4, 2009 9:34:23 PM

So, I have been diligently attempting to create a build for an i7 processor, but have recently been shown a possible error I have made: the difference in socket types. I am very new to computer hardware, and this would be my first build. I do a lot of video editing, so i need it to be powerful. I was ready to make a purchase, when I was told that the LGA-1156 socket creates a bottle-neck, which makes using a processor with a LGA-1366 socket better performance-wise.

Is this true? And can you give me any insight on this?

Also, I looked up some benchmarks between the i7 920 and 860, and it appears that they are nearly the same (besides power consumption, of course).

Am I missing something here, or are they nearly the same performance-wise?

Thanks in advance!

More about : lga 1366 lga 1156

a b à CPUs
October 4, 2009 9:50:42 PM

nope. you are correct. The 1156 and 1366 core i7 cpus perform the same. Even in dual graphics card set up (where on the 1156 run the 2 16x pci-e slots at 8x and the 1366 runs both slots at 16x) runs practically the same with no noticeable performance difference.

So you don't have to worry about the 2 different socket type performance. All you need to do is make sure you have the right socket cpu with a motherboard with the same socket.

So just get the one that will job done.
m
0
l
October 4, 2009 9:59:41 PM

Thank you, but just to clarify:

On Intel's site, the 920 has a bus speed of 4.8 GT/s QPI, while the 860 has a bus speed of 2.5 GT/s DMI. The first thing I notice is the difference of 2.3 GT/s between them. The second thing I notice is that one is QPI and the other is DMI.

So, does this have no effect on processor intensive activities?

And if so, why include it as a specification?
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
October 4, 2009 10:27:15 PM

iharvey92 said:
Thank you, but just to clarify:

On Intel's site, the 920 has a bus speed of 4.8 GT/s QPI, while the 860 has a bus speed of 2.5 GT/s DMI. The first thing I notice is the difference of 2.3 GT/s between them. The second thing I notice is that one is QPI and the other is DMI.

So, does this have no effect on processor intensive activities?

And if so, why include it as a specification?


Well here a quote from another thread that may clear that up, http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/266032-28-tomshardwar...

Quote:
"Anonymous wrote :

200 Mhz difference doesn't matter. Has anyone looked at the stats on Intels website for the 920 vs 860?

http://www.intel.com/products/proc [...] ations.htm

Bus speed is 4.8 Gt/s for a 920 and 2.5 Gt/s for a 860. Even if an 860 is a little faster if the bottleneck is smaller BY HALF, then you push less data through. Its pretty simple! Turbo boost and over clocking don't mean anything again if you can only push through HALF the data of a 920's Bus. I would also agree with the earlier post of 920 = 24 GB of RAM and 860 = 16GB, if you want a power house for video encoding, gaming, or apps 920 wins again. Bus speed is key! Overclock your heart out of a 860 if you can't match the bandwidth (i.e. Bus Speed) of a 920 with triple channel memory then you can't come close to the power. Why would anyone think a 860 is faster?"



Misconception, and I'm hoping my email is going to get that fixed. :( 

QPI is the connection between CPU and northbridge, and DMI between northbridge and southbridge. On 920, the 4.8GT/s is between the 920 and the X58 and there is a 2.5GT/s DMI port between X58 and the southbridge. On 860, the northbridge is on the CPU silicon (as is the QPI), and the DMI is between the CPU and the PCH (southbridge). There's no penalty on the 860 due to DMI vs QPI.

Bus speed is really a meaningless concept from that perspective, and other than "tradition" I don't know why it's specified in those terms on the website.


Hope this helps.
m
0
l
October 4, 2009 10:53:35 PM

I had this dilemma and went for 1366.

My reasons for this: Equal performance despite 1366 having been out longer so 1366 is a better known platform so problems have already been found and a more mature BIOS. Also in the event I ever want to go multiGPU 1366 offers more performance. Pricing is about the same.

m
0
l
a c 327 à CPUs
October 5, 2009 12:25:25 AM

Today, both the i7-860 and i7-920 perform mostly the same. Do not get caught up in some of the specs; look at the real application benchmarks that represent best YOUR workload.

If your applications use multiple cores, and lots of ram, then I would favor the 1366 platform. Most of the 1366 motherboards have 6 ram slots, and can have 12gb of ram today, going to 24gb when 4gb sticks become reasonable. Next year the 32nm 6 core gulftown processor will launch, and they will run on today's 1366 motherboards with only a bios update.

The 1156 based systems are a bit cheaper today though. I also like the more aggressive turbo mode if not all cores are used.

You really can't go wrong with either.
m
0
l
October 5, 2009 12:31:33 AM

geofelt said:
Today, both the i7-860 and i7-920 perform mostly the same. Do not get caught up in some of the specs; look at the real application benchmarks that represent best YOUR workload.

If your applications use multiple cores, and lots of ram, then I would favor the 1366 platform. Most of the 1366 motherboards have 6 ram slots, and can have 12gb of ram today, going to 24gb when 4gb sticks become reasonable. Next year the 32nm 6 core gulftown processor will launch, and they will run on today's 1366 motherboards with only a bios update.

The 1156 based systems are a bit cheaper today though. I also like the more aggressive turbo mode if not all cores are used.

You really can't go wrong with either.


+1

Which begs the questions, what will you be running on your system? If you don't mind mentioning.
m
0
l
October 5, 2009 1:45:10 PM


I will be running XP 32-bit until windows 7 64-bit comes out, at which time I hope to switch over to that (probably waiting a little for bugs to be worked out). Something else I am interested in is running a linux OS, just so that I can have an alternative to windows (I have never used and linux OS, and am going to wait until I make this build).
m
0
l
October 5, 2009 4:26:59 PM

iharvey92 said:
I will be running XP 32-bit until windows 7 64-bit comes out, at which time I hope to switch over to that (probably waiting a little for bugs to be worked out). Something else I am interested in is running a linux OS, just so that I can have an alternative to windows (I have never used and linux OS, and am going to wait until I make this build).


What type of software will you be running? Adobe? Maya?

As for Linux, I will be running Debian Sarge on my 860. The CPU isn't much of an issue when it comes to Linux, so you should have no problems. You will want to make sure drivers for you other components work (ie video card).

The reason I ask about software if because there are times when the 920 will outperform the 860 based on the type of application being run. In most situations, they are dead even, but in some, the 920 will perform better (specifically, memory-greedy apps).
m
0
l
October 5, 2009 11:58:43 PM

I play a lot of video on my computer, and plan on getting an HD monitor with the build (probably 1600x1200 or 1920x1200). Even more than playing video, I do A LOT of editing with Pinnacle Studio (if there is a better, cheaper one I should know about, please let me know). And of course, I play a lot of games (it can be assumed that they will be high end, played on high settings).

Once again, thanks guys! :D 
m
0
l
!