Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question
Closed

LGA 1156 owners, beware

Last response: in CPUs
Share
October 16, 2009 7:52:19 PM

Lynnfield owners beware


The guys over at Anandtech have run into trouble after trying some extreme overclocking of the Core i7 870, but it turned out that the culprit was the actual socket, which is manufactured by Foxconn. And by trouble, we mean frying a few motherboards as well as CPUs.

After closer analysis, it turned out that the actual socket suffers from little or no pin-to-pad contact. This significantly reduces the power delivery, the end result being fried CPUs and motherboards.

Unfortunately, Foxconn makes LGA1156 sockets for many manufacturers, including Gigabyte, Asus, MSI and DFI, but there are alternatives in LOTES or Tyco AMP-made sockets, which have so far worked perfectly fine and exhibited no such behaviour. An example of this would be EVGA's top-tier P55 motherboards, as they're exclusively using LOTES.

On the other hand, buying EVGA's P55 FTW model E657 gives you a 50%-50% chance to end up with Foxconn's socket instead of Tyco AMP's one and some already shipped batches of MSI's and DFI's motherboards allegedly come with LOTES sockets, although we can't confirm that with certainty. Furthermore, DFI claims to have dropped the usage of Foxconn's sockets alltogether.

Apparently, the LOTES and Tyco AMP sockets have been and are in short supply which left some market space for Foxconn. It now seems that such a move has backfired on both Foxconn and the rest of the affiliated companies, and it clearly points to a sluggish execution of a seemingly mundane mechanism. On the other hand, the problem will not affect regular users nor those who overclock their CPU in a "non-extreme" way, meaning LN2 is out the window. So, if you've got a Lynnfield CPU and a P55 motherboard, and plan to do some extreme overclocking, you better check your socket manufacturer before you attempt to push your CPU to the limit.


The actual above quote here: http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16000/35/


Anandtech Article;

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3661

Edited by 4ryan6 adding the Anandtech Article

More about : lga 1156 owners beware

a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 8:01:36 PM

Exactly my thoughts. A cheap, short lived failure platform from Intel everyone is so freaking hyped about.
Score
0
October 16, 2009 8:08:41 PM

Perhaps but what comes after the arrandale stuff? newer faster quad cores? and will one out grow i7 860 in a year or two? my feeling is probably not.
Score
0
Related resources
October 16, 2009 8:12:37 PM

LGA1156 is just a tweacked faster quadcore platform...
Intel in performance/price?
This idea was already too freaking weird to begin with.... It seems it really was too good to be true after all..

http://www.guru3d.com/article/radeon-hd-5770-in-3way-cr...

With i7-870 already bottlenecking something like 3way crossfire for the WEAKEST new GPU cards on a EVGA classified mobo, I dont think staying Quad will be a very good idea when GPU are improving twice as fast as the CPU horsepower needed.
Score
0
October 16, 2009 8:27:02 PM

You must really hate the 1156 socket... :) 

Thank you, though, for bringing this to our attention. How can we check the manufacturer of the socket? I have an Asus board. Will it say somewhere on the board? Manual? I'd like to know for sure before I do any major overclocking!

I don't think the 1156 will die anytime soon. It caters to mainstream market well and let's face it, the mainstream market makes the money, not power PC users. I admit, I don't consider myself a "mainstream" user, but I went with 1156 for its price/performance ratio. Until there is absolute proof it is a dead socket, it's currently a very competitive one.

Forgive my bias remarks, but as you can see by my sig I am an 1156 owner and will defend it when someone tries to *** on it :) .
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 8:29:01 PM

AM3 ftw dude :D 
Score
0
October 16, 2009 8:49:19 PM

Well of course I never said LGA1156 is not a mainstream socket or a bad socket.

I think tho that the i5 is very deceiving, the i7 860 being the best mainstream CPU..
But I am rather a long living build type.
Socket 775 was the Sh!t man. Lasted for about 5 years.
So for me the LGA1156 is not very interesting because in about a year, the GPU might become a problem (I didn't mention 6cores because you won't see any "application" or "general use" advantage, we will have to wait abit for some software updating.) .
As you saw a 3way with the weakest gpu of the new era is already facing bottleneck on a i7 870....
So a more powerfull Horsepower will surely be required in about a year.

But yes, the LGA1156 IS a good build if you look performance/price wise.
I am just criticizing the life of this socket because I like being future proofed for a good amount of years.
Also, for the same price you got LGA1156 build, you couldv got a AM3 build (for a very small non noticeable in performance. VERY small) but I guess we didn't know about GPU bottlenecking and OC issues back when you got it.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 8:50:49 PM

I5=PII<I7 in raw power, however I still chose AM3.
Score
0
October 16, 2009 8:53:51 PM

In raw power, i5 has just a LITTLE advantage over PII, non noticeable tho. Quite not to be frank, especially not in gaming where PII seems to even match a i7-965.
Score
0
October 16, 2009 9:47:18 PM

bboynatural said:
Socket 775 was the Sh!t man. Lasted for about 5 years

Hardly.....Unless of course you used the same P4 all those years, it doesn't matter how long LGA 775 went, as revision after revision were required to utilize the latest in CPU technology. First it was the 945/965/975 chipset requirements for Pentium D, then it was VRM revision 11 for Core 2 CPUs, then it was FSB 1333 for Wolfdale support (with the consequent loss of a lot of P4/Celeron D/Pentium D support). Sorry, but upgrading the motherboard for a cpu essentially breaks the longevity argument for LGA 775. And, if you indeed did keep a P4/early 915/925 chipset combo together for the last 5 years, then the importance of socket longevity is moot altogether.


Heh....LGA 775 lasting 5 years.... that's like boasting about socket 370.
Score
0
October 16, 2009 9:54:52 PM

the C2D and C2Q did last for 3 years, and thats good enough, especially when to use one or both, you didnt need to upgrade anything.

I got a C2Q when the mobo's chipset were stabilized, so I didnt know about all those chipset issues, but even 3 years is a damn good bargain.
Thats why AMD got raped back then.

But now, people are sticking to the past and dont want to give AMD another chance, but if they care doing a little research like I did (and got flammed for pretty badly by some haters that had no skillz in arguing with a stable thesis) they would realize that the only reason they are rejecting AMD until now, is because they read everywhere on the forums that i7 is a must.

MANY people are ignoring AMD because of the damn forums nowadays.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 16, 2009 10:14:56 PM

whu buys foxconn anyway, just get msi or gigabyte
Score
0
October 16, 2009 10:17:33 PM

You didnt quite get the point did you...
foxconn are a SOCKET manufacturer before being a mobo's.


"Unfortunately, Foxconn makes LGA1156 sockets for many manufacturers, including Gigabyte, Asus, MSI and DFI, but there are alternatives in LOTES or Tyco AMP-made sockets, which have so far worked perfectly fine and exhibited no such behaviour. An example of this would be EVGA's top-tier P55 motherboards, as they're exclusively using LOTES."

Both Gigabyte and MSI have their socket made by foxconn =/
Score
0
October 16, 2009 10:18:50 PM

xaira said:
whu buys foxconn anyway, just get msi or gigabyte



M8 have you read his thread where he is saying:
"Unfortunately, Foxconn makes LGA1156 sockets for many manufacturers, including Gigabyte, Asus, MSI and DFI, but there are alternatives in LOTES or Tyco AMP-made sockets, which have so far worked perfectly fine and exhibited no such behaviour. An example of this would be EVGA's top-tier P55 motherboards, as they're exclusively using LOTES."
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 16, 2009 10:19:27 PM

that sucks ass, msi ur the biggest board manufacturer on the planet, dont you think its time to make ur own sockets
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 10:36:51 PM

Here is more about the P55 (Foxconn) socket problem.You can read the entire threads.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showthread.php?t=23...
Forum user dctokyo says "pushing excessive voltages and clocks into the processor just shows the problem sooner, but the problem is there as it seems that the CPU does not touch all of the pins.......... over time this will become a problem even with normal voltage IMHO."
Score
0
October 16, 2009 10:45:14 PM

LGA1156 dommed.
Score
0
October 16, 2009 11:09:04 PM

what can i say, the 1156 it's a socket that was designed for a specific public, for example for those who are used to run SLI or Crossfire it's a bad choice but for those who buy 1 VGA and want to get the most out of it,s it's a great freaking deal.

It's a high end CPU compared to a normal core2duo or a core2quad, it hast most of the best side of a high end CPU but the things that makes it good for SLI and CrossFire.

It has a great OC capability as well.

I'm not sure if it's going to be a last long socket, but it's a good deal, it would be a better deal for me if I had the US prices, a core i5 costs me around 280 American dollars, the motherboards around U$S200 so it's not a easy choice.

the i7 9xx's family price is outrageous for those who usually buy within the price range of core2duo; not so much for core i5 so make your own conclusion, with the price range/overall performance of the 1156 socket and tell me that's not a good choice.

about the problem with the motherboards.. well it's to be expected to find "bugs" in the production of the first series of compatible hardware, nothing that can't be fixed, well expect for those ruined motherboards and CPUs.

Cheers!
Score
0
October 16, 2009 11:13:46 PM

I just don't see why 1156 is really doomed at all. I see my current build lasting me 3-4 years from now. So I don't get what you're basing your reasoning on really...

Is it from your own opinion? Are you doing this based on speculation? Fud articles? I can run pretty much any application right now and I'm pretty sure quad core CPUs will run any application in the future (mainly 3-4 years from now). Hell, a dual core can handle most applications nicely right now.

I really don't think the 1156 is doomed especially since there are new chips coming out for it. Sure, they may not be 6core or 8core CPUs, but why would mainstream users need it? Why would gamers do 3-way CF to handle later games when there will, by then, probably be single card solutions that work just as well?

Is it because AM3 has the 6-core options? Future proofing is such an idiotic concept to me because by the time new chips are released for the same board you were using 2 years ago, newer features such as USB 3.0 will be available as well, which means new board, right?

I'd like to know your thoughts on this because future-proofing seems to be your base, but there are more things that affect a system's "future" than CPU and socket.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 16, 2009 11:26:38 PM

Actually for running crossfire LGA 1156 is a good choice not much of a loss really (only around 2 to 3 percent on average) as compared to 16 X 16 on the X58 Platform.I don't know about SLI but it shouldn't be too bad.I would just wait a few months until the bugs are worked out.
Score
0
October 16, 2009 11:41:16 PM

era86 said:
I just don't see why 1156 is really doomed at all. I see my current build lasting me 3-4 years from now. So I don't get what you're basing your reasoning on really...

Is it from your own opinion? Are you doing this based on speculation? Fud articles? I can run pretty much any application right now and I'm pretty sure quad core CPUs will run any application in the future (mainly 3-4 years from now). Hell, a dual core can handle most applications nicely right now.

I really don't think the 1156 is doomed especially since there are new chips coming out for it. Sure, they may not be 6core or 8core CPUs, but why would mainstream users need it? Why would gamers do 3-way CF to handle later games when there will, by then, probably be single card solutions that work just as well?

Is it because AM3 has the 6-core options? Future proofing is such an idiotic concept to me because by the time new chips are released for the same board you were using 2 years ago, newer features such as USB 3.0 will be available as well, which means new board, right?

I'd like to know your thoughts on this because future-proofing seems to be your base, but there are more things that affect a system's "future" than CPU and socket.


Very good reply but we don't see the "life" of a socket the same way.
Of course you will be able to use it in 3-4 years.
But the by "life" I talk about upgrades.
In 3 years, 8 cores would have already been releaased on both camps by a year already, so the "mainstream" will probably moved by quite enough into 6 cores because of 2year old prices (so probably very affordable by now) and intel would not need a Quad core socket anymore. By not need, I mean that they will stop making chips for this particular socket, so you will not have any more "upgrade", and will have to buy a whole new system.

Even if you do have upgrade, I think those will probably be around the cost of a AM3 6 cores. With the i5-670 realeased at 280$ US, Intel is going the other way they should be, making huge prices for a mainstream socket. AMD will probably try to snatch LGA1156 users that realized this, thus making good good prices on 6 cores.

The AM3 and LGA1366 life looks very long, because CPU have long past the requirement to run any software and no new socket architecture will be needed for quite a few years. So those LGA1156 users who have enough money left will probably move toward the very affordable AMD setup that still have a good 3 years to live (2010:6cores 2011:8cores 2012:12cores), ESPECIALLY during this hard time of economic crysis.

Now I would really need you to give me examples of what should need to be upgraded because I really don't know...
For USB tho, those can be added through PCI slots, just like I did with my old usb 1.0 mobo when they released USB 2.0
But do you have anyother example?

I am not bashing at LGA1156, and I respect your build If it does what you need.
I am just braggin the merits of my own build if you see what I mean XD
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 17, 2009 12:30:54 AM

Hopefully somebody will give Foxconn a slap and get their manufacturing sorted out to rectify this problem - socket 1156 is a good idea in principle giving Nehalem and strong single graphics card goodness to the masses without the price investment of the full socket 1366 platform.

I'd hate to see it die just because a supplier couldn't get their plastic bits made properly.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 17, 2009 12:44:14 AM

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3661

But that will be fixed.... Foxconn will lose a couple bucks and everything will go back to normal.

IDK but i like the P55 platform... Only downside is the PCI-E lanes, but then that is what the 5870 or GT3XX is for.... If I had money to burn i would def get a P55/750/DDR3 ....
Score
0
October 17, 2009 12:46:16 AM

Why not just upgrade that CPU of yours to a PII 955 and save a Sh1tload of money for the same performance...? o.o
Or do you do productiv work maybe?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 17, 2009 12:56:56 AM

I am going to get a 955 eventually but just because I would be stuck with 2 PC's if I wanted to switch over.... none the less the 450.00$+ i have too spend ....



Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 1:48:11 AM

Now we have defective Intel sockets -AND- defective Intel push-pins:

http://www.supremelaw.org/systems/heatsinks/warning.htm

G-R-E-A-T!!!


I'll stick with our P45 chipset and 16GB of RAM
until we can afford a quality LGA1366 motherboard
+ the rest of that enchilada.

The latter socket has not experienced this same problem, has it?


p.s. All the above is yet another reason
to avoid the "bleeding edge". :) 


MRFS
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 1:51:26 AM

DFI do not use Foxconn sockets now, they changed to LOTES for this reason. It's a non-issue though. Only extreme overclocking will reproduce the problem.
Score
0
October 17, 2009 1:53:11 AM

Well who doesnt overclock until he get stable, as in he reached the limit, as in extreme overclocking? (going from 2.6 to 4.2, thats pretty extreme)
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 2:07:29 AM

Check the world record and you'll see that 4.2GHz is not even close to extreme. You can do it on air, that's just average.
Score
0
October 17, 2009 2:09:02 AM

Yeah but im quite shure anandtech did not go over the 4.2 limit...........
Well we still don't know they shuold probably tell us what KIND of extreme overclocking.
Cause the moment you overclock, your already going "extreme" and you void warranty and things like that...so it's very imprecise.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 2:12:27 AM

Quote:
The picture above is after our Core i7 870 (LGA-1156) processor was overclocked up to 5.19GHz using our cascade with a -102° Celsius evaporator head temperature under full-load. Processor VCC power draw at these frequencies is around 160W (this is possible only due to subzero cooling)


Is sub-zero extreme enough to make this a non-issue?
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 17, 2009 2:17:28 AM

Yea 4.2Ghz is average for a 750.... I have seen 4.5Ghz on air it it won't flinch....



using a cheap 29 dollar cooler.... this pic is actually from a user here on toms named slickncghia ......
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 7:44:58 AM

era86 said:
I just don't see why 1156 is really doomed at all. I see my current build lasting me 3-4 years from now. So I don't get what you're basing your reasoning on really...

Is it from your own opinion? Are you doing this based on speculation? Fud articles? I can run pretty much any application right now and I'm pretty sure quad core CPUs will run any application in the future (mainly 3-4 years from now). Hell, a dual core can handle most applications nicely right now.

I really don't think the 1156 is doomed especially since there are new chips coming out for it. Sure, they may not be 6core or 8core CPUs, but why would mainstream users need it? Why would gamers do 3-way CF to handle later games when there will, by then, probably be single card solutions that work just as well?

Is it because AM3 has the 6-core options? Future proofing is such an idiotic concept to me because by the time new chips are released for the same board you were using 2 years ago, newer features such as USB 3.0 will be available as well, which means new board, right?

I'd like to know your thoughts on this because future-proofing seems to be your base, but there are more things that affect a system's "future" than CPU and socket.


OvrClkr said:
Yea 4.2Ghz is average for a 750.... I have seen 4.5Ghz on air it it won't flinch....

http://i683.photobucket.com/albums/vv199/OvrClkr/4515Ghz.jpg

using a cheap 29 dollar cooler.... this pic is actually from a user here on toms named slickncghia ......




Don't even bother to read what he comment on the Intel or nVidia products as he is the greatest AMD fan boy here.

Are you going to trust someone who said that Phenom II 955 beats up the i7? LOL
Score
0
October 17, 2009 8:29:37 AM

omfg here we go again.

I said phenom II 955 beats i7 IN SOME GAMES, and he only is capable of beating it IN GAMES.

I showed benchmarks man how can you even "not bother to read"??

Same goes here

http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16000/35/

It's an actual ****** ARTICLE. IT IS TRUE. So how can people not " bother to read"

Are you stupid or something??

Every single thing I wrote was a FACT. a **** fact, with **** benchmarks.
All you keep doing is contradicting me with your own words, nothing consistent to back them up.

On the i7vsPII thingy, you kept saying "but i7 is faster for other things" WHILE THE IT WAS CLEARLY WRITING (GAMERS ONLY) ON THE **** THREAD.
Gosh how more idiot can you be then THAT? I did assume you are stupid and don't read titles, SO i mentioned it SO MANY TIMES THAT I AM ONLY TALKING ABOUT GAMING, NOT VIDEO ENCODING NOR ZIPPING (the main things where i7 beats pII).

It comes down to this: Iknow it's hard for this info to go inside your little inuyasha freak head, but here it is ONCE AGAIN. Yes, WANT IT OR NOT, PII DID BEAT i7 IN MANY GAMES:
http://www.tomshardware.com/review [...] 278-9.html
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/cha [...] 6,77&tid=2
http://www.hardwarecanucks.com/cha [...] 6,77&tid=4
http://www.modreactor.com/english/ [...] rhead.html
http://www.modreactor.com/english/ [...] r-Sky.html
http://www.modreactor.com/english/ [...] Cry-4.html

Quote:
Are you going to trust someone who said that Phenom II 955 beats up the i7? LOL


In games? Yes it does. "Bother reading" and you will probably understand that it really does. No wait, Im talking to an idiot that never offered me any real consistent proof of whatever he said, While I shoot SO many benchmarks straight to his little puppy manga dog face =)

Quote:
Don't even bother to read what he comment on the Intel or nVidia products as he is the greatest AMD fan boy here.


http://www.fudzilla.com/content/view/16000/35/

Once again, it's a fkin article, A FACT, like what I ALWAYS give.
Your just a flammer, a teenager whos probably getting picked on at school and find a little safety in the anonyma that internet give him. But the internet sure didnt cover up for your lack of intelligence did it?
Seriously man who say not to bother reading an ARTICLE someone showed...man today you reached the maximum stupidity in the whole world, I dont think you will ever look more stupid then you do right now
Score
0
October 17, 2009 8:31:51 AM

and then, were gonna say Im the bad guy here.
Score
0
October 17, 2009 8:47:23 AM

bboynatural said:
and then, were gonna say Im the bad guy here.


your not a bad guy your just too persistent and will not accept that Intel takes the cake as far as raw power goes. for the 650$ range AMD probably will take the cake.

Score
0
October 17, 2009 8:50:13 AM

I know this will be a triple post, but my final word is this :

Quote:
i always felt AMD vs Intel was pretty much like ATI vs Nvidia. Just like Nvidia used to have the best performing graphic cards but charged a premium that i thought wasn't worth it, Intel charges a premium for their better performing CPUs. I personally rather go AMD and have a well rounded pc, while saving money.

Quote:

Only part I had saw that was wrong was that 120hz is the upper end limit for monitor, not 75.

Quote:
The only reason you'd go with the i7 is if you were doing video encoding (with something like x264) or even more so with 3D rendering. If either of these tasks is your job, the extra $300 for the i7 will pay for itself in increased productivity pretty quick.

Quote:
For gaming there is no reason to go with i7, except perhaps for FSX, but a 2P workstation is better for that :D 

Quote:
From my point of view a gamer needs :
- a decent CPU (triple core or mid-range quad < 200$),
- a high-end GPU (4870+ , with nowadays standard 5850+),
- a big monitor (22' with at least 1680x1050),
- fast response keyboard,
- fast response mouse,
- perfect sound gaming headset.

Because of the resolution the main item in the build is the GPU which should run all games at max detail with 4xAA (at least). Anything less IMHO is not a gaming rig. If your rig has at least 60 FPS in all current FPS games that dont suck @ss (this means no Crysis) and 30-40 in RTS, 50-60 RPGs then you dont have anything to upgrade too. Now, all this can be made with both Intel/AMD + ATI/nVidia parts with less than 1000$. If you put more money into a rig, I think you are overcompensating for something else :p , because there will always be some1 else with the specs I mentioned that will own your @ss in any game even if you have a I7 975+ quad 5870 (or 3 SLI 285). My lame 2 cents.



Quote:
Cool story bro.

Meanwhile, I recently purchased an i7-920 ($215 @microcenter) + Asrock extreme mobo ($170) + 3x2gb Corsair xms3 ($130) = $515 (usd).

OC'd the processor to 4.0gz with an after-market air cooler & the memory to 1600mz on this "cheap" motherboard. Prime95 stable for 48 hours. No hiccups since.

Coupled with a 5870, the gaming performance is spectacular (despite the 1st gen, non-optimized gpu drivers and games that are not yet built for directx11 and maximizing multi-threaded/multi-core cps). Even if I didn't benefit from the i7's performance with fairly regular video encoding, I'd have still selected this combo simply for the gaming performance now and into the future.

I can drop in another 5870 (in the second x16 slot) and still have enough pci lanes/slots to maintain my tv tuner card, wireless card and and parallel port card (for the old laser jet). Plus, I can drop in an i9 and there's also plenty of room for 6gb additional memory (or more) in a few months (or years) if I so choose.

If you choose to save a couple dollars and take the hit to gaming performance, enjoy your AMD system and your cherry-picked benchmarks. I could have downgraded to an AMD system, but the savings versus permormance hit + future upgradability constraints were not worth the meager savings.

But yeah, if I were to build a low budget gaming rig, I'd probably pick an AMD cpu.


The actual support I got here. And this is from another forum : http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.php?showtopic=...

Quote:
Very Comprehensive! smile.gif and i agree with you, I've lost count of the times where i was flamed on other forums (which i never visit now, due to the sheer fanboyism and Ignorance!) by saying that AMD is the better choice for a Gaming rig. Everyone automatically assumes because its an i7 it 'pwns all' and is a jack of all trades or something dry.gif


Quote:
Thank you very much! smile.gif

I was just being tired that AMD is getting kicked out of the buisness because some idiots can't make some decent research about WHAT they are getting AND the actual competition in the market.
If just some few could reconsider their SUPER SPECIAL AWESOME i7 rig that they will probably never use for it's true purpose, then maybe AMD could provide us with some better CPU and more bang for our buck...
Btw can you tell me on wich forum did you get flammed?
I don't think no gamer with a decent mind can say that i7 is worth it after reading this.


Quote:
great post and info......
Amd has actually done very well with the phenom2 lineup, Better then you may know. am not sure but it seems you are on the view that AMD is still in the shape is was a yr ago. AMD probably did better then they expected with the phenom2 line up they have recieved much love. They hype is now over, but it was a homerun all the same. And it didnt even surpass intels last generation CPU entirely. So you must understand that it did very well and barely match intels last generation of CPUs. Intel has a huge gain on amd, but the gap is much closer now, and already they had great success. Many ppl are ready to show AMD love, and they got a fair bit. But the hype of the phenom2 is over, and the reality is intel is still a good bit ahead. Yes your right we dont need all that power, but also anyone with a core2 has no real reason to upgrade to a phenom2 either. If they upgrade, guess what, its got to be an i7, or they aint gaining much, basically zero for gaming.

I agree with you mostly, but i think amd has already made some good progress, especially considering they merely matched the core2 performance at best. they done well but before I go any furth, please explain what you mean by referencing "AMD is bleeding money" over and over. Where does it come from and what do you mean?


Quote:
Hi magekyou. Thanks for the article!

I have all along been an AMD person since my first comp and now I am seriously contemplating on a 965 or an i5.

I've read reviews saying that i5 saves more power because they have this idle technology whereby when you are not using all 4 cores, they will switch off 2 idle cores and BOOST the speed of the other 2 working cores. Something about current leakage.

Whereas for the phenom II, it does not have this function and it wastes alot of current and it does not boost the 2 working cores when the other 2 cores are idle.

Is it true? Pls advise.

Quote:

cant core i7/corei5 processors be overclocked to 4.0 ghz+ on air, id think if one was maxed out overclocked it MIGHT do a little better..but not to make it worth the cost. but yea.. gamers should def stick with AMD if thats all they are doing


Quote:
I'm looking forward to upgrading my AMD PC
about December or January.
You intell I7 owners should be great full AMD has not been put out of business, Imagine the prices if Intell had no other competition? then we all would be getting WTFRAPED.


Quote:
Try posting this on [H] laugh.gif

Good info btw, thanks for taking the time to gather all this info smile.gif


Quote:
I think for most that the GPU will be far more important than the CPU so the AMD CPU makes sense in a gaming rig. However running two nvidia cards proves much more difficult with the highest end AMD platform. The i7/X58 and i5-i7/P55 doesn't suffer this limitation. They allow you to use both Crossfire or SLI(there are some limited motherboard exceptions). The user has more options and choices so for those gamers using 2 or more cards. The GPU really is the most important part of a gaming build after all. This is a generalized statement as there will be exceptions but overall.

The Lucid chip may change all of this but I'm unsure how available on various chipsets or how effective it will be. That should clear up soon.

The 965 was released as a direct competitor with the i7 975. To the layman the 965's 3.4Ghz is better than 3.33Ghz of the i7 975 and 75% cheaper. This is for the salesman of pre-built systems. It's may also be for the overclocker. The higher multiplier gives them a lot more options for both platforms.

When I built my last system gaming was up towards the top of the list but it wasn't the #1 reason. I chose an i7 for the 8 threads for a particular DC application and the future upgrade path to the i9 and the freedom to use either 2 ATI or 2 nvidia cards. Makes the upgrades easy and I can decide which graphics solution is best for me when new video cards are released. It just made the most sense for me and my system. It's much easier to just upgrade your video card to see more gaming performance if you need it.

There's no proving one is better than the other because we all have different needs for our systems and different ideas what is best for our particular points of view. It's like trying to prove that oranges taste better than apples. It's too subjective and not everyon's needs fits into the same slot. You seem to be looking at this from a budget only standpoint.

You also need to keep future upgrade paths in mind. This is difficult as we don't always know exactly what is planned and often don't get a complete picture until the actual hardware is out. Some hardware we can see a little better with what is coming out so there is a bit of an educated guess.


Quote:
+1 good post. When i was formulating a new build earlier this year, I was initially gonna go with i7 (woulda cost me an arm and leg but, meh) then the Phenom II came out. and it ws like Hellloooo A.M.D. =P they boasted much improved performance over the I series, great OCability and much much less expe nsive then i7. with the money I was going to just spend on the mobo, cpu, and mem for the i7 setup, i was able to get all that for the phenom ii rig plus a better psu, audio card, and much bigger and faster hdd.
I don't have the world's greatest video card at the moment, but when i get a 5870, my system will pretty much pwn for a while smile.gif

However, I really don't see a problem, necessarily as you do, of gamers choosing an i7. Some ppl are just Intel fanboys just as there are ATi or Nvidia fanboys, and same with AMD... and for a lot of people, their PC is bragging rights, some people just want the best of the best of the best, and don't care too much for money.

I'm also a little confused, i suppose, why you posted this here at OCC. I have found OCC to be actually amazingly balanced and fair, in regard to pretty much everything, including the CPU and GPU markets.

Quote:

I don't doubt the power of the AMD overclocking and gaming potential. I've owned a pair of PII 940s and a pair of PII 965s. They were great for gaming. They just didn't meet the needs I had for every application I run overall. In the Official Socket AM2 / AM2+ / AM3 Overclocking Competition Thread http://forums.overclockersclub.com/index.p...howtopic=1... I put in a couple of entries. Really loved the 940s as they were price/performance winners for me. If I didn't run an application that took full advantage of 8 threads I would have stuck with a 965 most likely. The systems were far cheaper overall and did everything else I required.


Quote:
I can see where an i7 would have been a good choice for me as well. Most of the videos I end up rendering are over 10min long and in 720p or 1080p and these can take 15+ minutes to finish. An i7 would undoubtedly cut through these significantly quicker than my current processor. But seeing as I'm not exactly wealthy the Phenom II was a GREAT alternative for me. Now all I need is a better motherboard so I can overclock this little guy some more, being stuck at 3.5GHz with only 1.4v has me feeling like a race horse stuck behind the starting gates bah.gif


Quote:
For anyone choosing an i7 simply because the MOBO allows for Both Crossfire AND/OR Sli I would Go Here: http://www.xdevs.com/e107_plugins/content/....php?conte...

All i say now on this matter is Enjoy. wink.gif

Now on to other things, me being a Gamer (and overclocker) Primarily MY aim is to get the best performance in my Games, Anything Else such as zipping, video encoding Ect... Can wait.
We tailor make our PC's
to Suit our individual needs, or atleast thats what we should be doing tongue.gif

I came from an Intel Pentium 4 Up to a Phenom 2 and the performance gains have been Phenomenal to say the least, Keeping this in mind i am More than willing to have a little PATIENCE and simply wait the extra 10 mins or whattever for a big file to finish zipping, hell id probably use the time to make me a hot pocket! Enjoy your life while you still can people! laugh.gif

Senital, Signing out cool.gif


Quote:
Very informative and top notch post dude. I have both a 955BE and an Intel i7 860. Both are overclocked and perform very well. The 860 gets a slightly higher score than the 955 but the 955 "seems" to run alot smoother in games. I will probably end up selling the 860 setup in favor of the 955 setup being topped with 5870's just because the differences are very minimal at best in what I do with my computer. So what if it takes a whole 1.1 second more to winzip my entire hard drive or two seconds more to rip a DVD to my hard drive with the 955.




As you see, while most of you flammers here were trying to flame me with simple words, no back up, no nothing,
On a FAR more mature forum, I had NO flame at all, I was rather extremly praised for taking to time to gather so much information and to probably help some people that are still wondering what they should buy. I did get contradictions tho, but guess what? THEY ALL CAME WITH PROOFS ON THE TABLE.

You understand andy?
YOU are the troller, YOU are the flammer, and YOU are the one that makes nosens, just like so many did in that thread (COUGHmichaelCOUGH)

As you see, there is FAR more to this world then just the people who backed u up in flamming me because I OMFG DARED to say (AND PROVE) that i7 isnt that much of a big deal in gaming.
Score
0
October 17, 2009 8:53:51 AM

kelfen said:
your not a bad guy your just too persistent and will not accept that Intel takes the cake as far as raw power goes. for the 650$ range AMD probably will take the cake.

It's not that man, You read how many times I did admit that i7 IS more amazing then Phenom II right?
But THAT WASNT THE POINT OF THIS THREAD, I WAS ONLY TALKING ABOUT GAMING!
Now with ALL those proofs, you can't possibly say im wrong and i7 is better then Phenom II 955 EVEN in gaming??
actually, IT IS, but only in some very demanding RTS like world in conflict.
But RTS are like 1/10 games released so It doesnt REALLY matters.

I still couldnt believe that after SO much proofs, and ESPECIALLY WHEN I DID MENTION THAT I WAS ONLY TALKING ABOUT BUDGET BUILDS FOR GAMING, some stupid idiots still found a way to call me a fanboy, a troller, a flammer or what ever. Funny thing was, they had nothing to contradict me.

I took so much time in gathering all that, and with hopes that I will probably help many peoples, I end up getting flammed by some stupid post teenagers who probably doesnt even know a single sh!!t about REAL computing.
AT LEAST, do like me, work a bit and find (if there is) proofs that I HIGHLY wrong.
Thats like, the MINIMUM respect ya know.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 17, 2009 9:13:11 AM

wow alot of fanbois and misunderstandings going on here

cheap components (or poor quality should i say) are at fault here - not intel.

The intel platform 1156 is not in any sort of trouble, and even then its only at extreme overclocks so there is no issue here.
Score
0
October 17, 2009 9:15:31 AM

of course it's not intel's fault.
I just said that this problem came at a very bad moment, with the x8scaling and life of the socket being highly questioned in many forums..
No fanboy, speculations.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 17, 2009 9:15:42 AM

bboynatural said:

As you see, there is FAR more to this world then just the people who backed u up in flamming me because I OMFG DARED to say (AND PROVE) that i7 isnt that much of a big deal in gaming.

As the owner of an i7-965, here's my opinion:

The i7 isn't really significantly better at gaming than the PhII in most cases (the exception being that it seems to scale better with >2 cards). It certainly isn't worth getting the top end i7s for gaming alone. However, you seem to be bound and determined to claim that the i7 isn't faster. It is. I do solidworks rendering and simulation, as well as significant amounts of matlab programming, and in those tasks, the i7 and the PhII aren't even close. Honestly, the PhII is nice as a budget CPU, but if someone wants a good all around CPU and can afford it, an i7 (especially the lower end ones that go for ~$200-$300) is well worth the money. The only time this is not the case is if they only ever game, and don't do anything else on their computer that could benefit from the additional computational power.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
a b V Motherboard
October 17, 2009 9:24:00 AM

bboynatural said:
It's not that man, You read how many times I did admit that i7 IS more amazing then Phenom II right?
But THAT WASNT THE POINT OF THIS THREAD, I WAS ONLY TALKING ABOUT GAMING!
Now with ALL those proofs, you can't possibly say im wrong and i7 is better then Phenom II 955 EVEN in gaming??
actually, IT IS, but only in some very demanding RTS like world in conflict.
But RTS are like 1/10 games released so It doesnt REALLY matters.

I still couldnt believe that after SO much proofs, and ESPECIALLY WHEN I DID MENTION THAT I WAS ONLY TALKING ABOUT BUDGET BUILDS FOR GAMING, some stupid idiots still found a way to call me a fanboy, a troller, a flammer or what ever. Funny thing was, they had nothing to contradict me.

I took so much time in gathering all that, and with hopes that I will probably help many peoples, I end up getting flammed by some stupid post teenagers who probably doesnt even know a single sh!!t about REAL computing.
AT LEAST, do like me, work a bit and find (if there is) proofs that I HIGHLY wrong.
Thats like, the MINIMUM respect ya know.


hehe, looks like you put some serious time into all that posting.....anyways you are being flamed left and right. Same thing happen to me when I started posting here on Tom's.. My advice to you is try and ignore whoever disagrees with you. It's not worth the time, hassle, whatever you wanna name it.....Just try and help people out without starting a pointless discussion. Worked for me, so it should work for you....
Score
0
October 17, 2009 9:51:34 AM

cjl said:
However, you seem to be bound and determined to claim that the i7 isn't faster. It is. I do solidworks rendering and simulation, as well as significant amounts of matlab programming, and in those tasks, the i7 and the PhII aren't even close. Honestly, the PhII is nice as a budget CPU, but if someone wants a good all around CPU and can afford it, an i7 (especially the lower end ones that go for ~$200-$300) is well worth the money. The only time this is not the case is if they only ever game, and don't do anything else on their computer that could benefit from the additional computational power.


OMFG BUT THATS THE THING I NEVER DID!!!!!! >___<
I said faster IN GAMING!!
As you can see in the benchmark I collected, that is what we see, even with 2HD4890 on!
So even if that might be wrong, i didnt claim anything on my own, I just said what the review said!

I NEVER said phenom II 955 was overall faster then i7! I even claimed in BOLD that I KNOW i7 is OVERALL BETTER.
I just said that EVEN at winrar and video encoding (the two benchmarks used)
i7 is around 1minute faster then 955, so I would PERSONALLY rather not pay 300$ more for 1 minute.
PERSONALLY.

Thats what so many flammers (mainly two idiots I will not name COUGHandyCOUGHmichaelCOUGHCOUGH) did NOT understand and kept saying "but still i7 is faster"
NO SH!!T SHERLOCK?? BUT YOUR OFF TOPIC HERE WERE TALKING GAME WISE.

And seriously the worst one of them (...no wait they are both the same. =) ) even said "but i7 performs better in gaming".
Yes, and all those benchmarks are the fictional creation of some evil masterminds that created a council to RULE THEM ALL.

He even said that Phenom II 955 is ALREADY bottlenecking 2HD4890 on crossfire. When the actual benchmark showed that the phenom II 955 had 10 fps more then i7. If phenom II 955 was bottlenecking 2HD4890, then wtf was i7 doing? bottlenecking + stick his manhood inside? That was SO wrong on SO many levels. First of all, the BENCHMARK was complitely obliterating what ever that duche was claiming (excuse the mild language, but he insulted me pretty bad so I dont have no respect for him.), but worst of all is that ALL he was claiming was benchmark-less/proof less. And he still acted like hes the one whos right.

Seriously some people should not be allowed to post here on toms.
Reducing the idiots would surely help the name of tomshardware because I was informed that i should "get ready to be massively flammed" on other forums I posted at. Funny thing is, from all the forums I posted, toms is where I got the worst reception (and what a heck of a reception that was.), overclocker club being the best.
Score
0
October 17, 2009 11:48:29 AM

bboynatural said:
Thats what so many flammers (mainly two idiots I will not name COUGHandyCOUGHmichaelCOUGHCOUGH) did NOT understand and kept saying "but still i7 is faster"
NO SH!!T SHERLOCK?? BUT YOUR OFF TOPIC HERE WERE TALKING GAME WISE.


And seriously the worst one of them (...no wait they are both the same. =) ) even said "but i7 performs better in gaming".
Yes, and all those benchmarks are the fictional creation of some evil masterminds that created a council to RULE THEM ALL.


He even said that Phenom II 955 is ALREADY bottlenecking 2HD4890 on crossfire. When the actual benchmark showed that the phenom II 955 had 10 fps more then i7. If phenom II 955 was bottlenecking 2HD4890, then wtf was i7 doing? bottlenecking + stick his manhood inside?


http://www.legionhardware.com/document.php?id=807&p=0

Crysis warhead
i7 downclock to 2.1GHz__1920x1200 39fps
PII overclock to 3.6GHz__1920x1200 36fps

Company of heroes
i7 downclock to 2.4GHz__1920x1200__8xAA 113fps
i7 downclock to 2.1GHz__1920x1200__8xAA 108fps
PII overclock to 3.6GHz__1920x1200__8xAA 107fps

Left 4 dead
i7 downclock to 2.1GHz__1920x1200__8xAA 124fps
PII overclock to 3.6GHz__1920x1200__8xAA 120fps

Unreal Tournament 3
i7 downclock to 2.1GHz__1920x1200__8xAA 135fps
PII overclock to 3.6GHz__1920x1200__8xAA 133fps

World in Confilict
i7 downclock to 2.4GHz__1920x1200__4xAA__16xAF 55fps
i7 downclock to 2.1GHz__1920x1200__4xAA__16xAF 51fps
PII overclock to 3.6GHz__1920x1200__4xAA__16xAF 49fps

Far Cry 2
i7 downclock to 2.1GHz__1920x1200 85fps
PII overclock to 3.6GHz__1920x1200 79fps

As you can see i7 at 2.1GHz beat the PII OC at 3.6GHz. Now imagine the difference if the i7 was OC at 4.2GHz…


http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/phenom-versus-i7,23...
AMD Phenom II X4 955 Black Edition (OC 3.7 GHz) with 2 x HD 4890
Intel i7-920 (OC 3.4 GHz) with 2 x HD 4870

HAWX
Phenom II 3.7 GHz __ 2x HD 4890 __ 1920x1200 very high 99fps
Intel i7 920 3.4GHz __2x HD 4870 __ 1920x1200 very high 113fps

World in Conflict
Phenom II 3.7 GHz __ 2x HD 4890 __ 1920x1200 very high 63fps
Intel i7 920 3.4GHz __2x HD 4870 __ 1920x1200 very high 88fps

far cry 2
Phenom II 3.7 GHz __ 2x HD 4890 __ 1920x1200 very high 71fps
Intel i7 920 3.4GHz __2x HD 4870 __ 1920x1200 very high 92fps

Prototype
Phenom II 3.7 GHz __ 2x HD 4890 __ 1920x1200 4xAA high 54fps
Intel i7 920 3.4GHz __2x HD 4870 __ 1920x1200 4xAA high 70fps

Fallout 3
Phenom II 3.7 GHz __ 2x HD 4890 __ 1920x1200 4xAA high 82fps
Intel i7 920 3.4GHz __2x HD 4870 __ 1920x1200 4xAA high 92fps

i7 (with slower graphic cards) shows a solid lead over the Phenom II(with faster graphic cards).

I think that I prove my point that the i7 is not only faster in everything else but also in games.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 11:53:33 AM

@michaelmk86:

Why would you bother to show him the TRUTH? He will never ever admit it anyway!

The best way to make fanboys shut up is ignoring all the craps from them!
Score
0
October 17, 2009 11:56:03 AM

^ You are right ;) 
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 12:18:28 PM

andy5174 said:
Don't even bother to read what he comment on the Intel or nVidia products as he is the greatest AMD fan boy here.

Are you going to trust someone who said that Phenom II 955 beats up the i7? LOL


Are you going to trust an ignorant Intel fanboy? Hell no, except if you are one yourself.
Score
0
a b à CPUs
October 17, 2009 12:20:33 PM

cjl said:
As the owner of an i7-965, here's my opinion:

The i7 isn't really significantly better at gaming than the PhII in most cases (the exception being that it seems to scale better with >2 cards). It certainly isn't worth getting the top end i7s for gaming alone. However, you seem to be bound and determined to claim that the i7 isn't faster. It is. I do solidworks rendering and simulation, as well as significant amounts of matlab programming, and in those tasks, the i7 and the PhII aren't even close. Honestly, the PhII is nice as a budget CPU, but if someone wants a good all around CPU and can afford it, an i7 (especially the lower end ones that go for ~$200-$300) is well worth the money. The only time this is not the case is if they only ever game, and don't do anything else on their computer that could benefit from the additional computational power.


PII is not a budget CPU, for people like you it may seem so though. Budget CPUs: sub $150 area. PII can kick I7's ass in a lot of things including a better gaming experience, so why not get it if you are a gamer?
Score
0
!