Solved

Intel's Stance on LGA 1156

Hey guys,

Almost thinking of upgrading to a nice shiny i5. Well, until something flashed into my mind.

Do you think the LGA 1156 socket has any forward momentum? Just because it supports 45nm quads, doesn't mean it will support 32nm ones. The current positioning of the LGA 1156 is interesting as it covers the entire mainstream segment. This is interesting because the chip I plan to buy almost overlaps with the LGA 1366 socket market.

So here's my question, since Intel's premier platform is almost parrallel LGA 1156, do you think that Intel will make 32nm quads an incentive to upgrade platforms? Or will a hex-core CPU fill that role?

Thanks.
18 answers Last reply Best Answer
More about intel stance 1156
  1. Best answer
    I'm honestly confused as to where socket 1156 is going myself. I don't see the hex-core i9 coming to socket 1156 so where does socket 1156 go? Refined quad cores with lower thermals and slightly tweaked clocks? Or stay as the single platform for low-to-mainstream usage with the i3 and i5?

    I don't even get why the i7 8xx was even created - treading on the toes of the high-end socket 1366 much?

    Personally, I'm going with the socket 1366 route - I will make use of triple channel memory and hyperthreading, and in the future (when they're not stupidly expensive) I'll benefit from having a hex-core.

    But then again I expect everything to get changed again when Sandy Bridge comes out.

    I don't think Intel need to/will offer an incentive to upgrade - people will always buy new kit, and when the door is properly closed on LGA 775 its users will be forced to upgrade to a new platform anyway.

    So it all boils down to the same old way of thinking: unless you find yourself on the cusp of a radical leap in architecture buy what you can afford NOW, there's little point waiting.

    And if you do switch to i5, do we call you "intelconvertgirl" instead? :-P
  2. i think that 1156 has some forward momentum. As far as modern processors go, intel can barely get a processor under 200$, where they are losing a lot of money. So, intel needs to keep a lower end for the 32nm processors. Also, intel had 3 socket changes very recently so why would they change it again.
  3. LePhuronn said:
    I'm honestly confused as to where socket 1156 is going myself. I don't see the hex-core i9 coming to socket 1156 so where does socket 1156 go? Refined quad cores with lower thermals and slightly tweaked clocks? Or stay as the single platform for low-to-mainstream usage with the i3 and i5?

    I don't even get why the i7 8xx was even created - treading on the toes of the high-end socket 1366 much?

    Personally, I'm going with the socket 1366 route - I will make use of triple channel memory and hyperthreading, and in the future (when they're not stupidly expensive) I'll benefit from having a hex-core.

    But then again I expect everything to get changed again when Sandy Bridge comes out.

    I don't think Intel need to/will offer an incentive to upgrade - people will always buy new kit, and when the door is properly closed on LGA 775 its users will be forced to upgrade to a new platform anyway.

    So it all boils down to the same old way of thinking: unless you find yourself on the cusp of a radical leap in architecture buy what you can afford NOW, there's little point waiting.

    And if you do switch to i5, do we call you "intelconvertgirl" instead? :-P


    I'm just saying, if I invest in LGA 1156 only to find out it doesn't go anywhere, I'll be annoyed. If I overspend and end up with LGA 1366 I'll be annoyed.

    I wish we had some level of certainty.

    I remember when AMD did the same thing... jeez...

    Maybe we'll end up with another socket.
  4. I can see Sandy Bridge being on a different socket. Can just feel it.

    Personally, I've decided on socket 1366 - it does everything I want now, has some legs in the short-term with Gulftown and has enough PCI-E lanes to go stupid with triple graphics if I want. By the time my system is underpowered for what I do (usually 7-10 years for me) I'll be so out-of-date I'll need a whole new platform anyway.
  5. Well, I have a shorter upgrade cycle of 3 years. I bought into Am2 with the hope it could run Phenom IIs. I knew nothing really bottlenecked the interfaces at the time.

    I want a socket that I can purchase with the assurance it will be upgradeable in 3 years. It costs alot less simply to just upgrade a CPU rather than an entire platform. So then my computer in theory would have lasted me 6 years as the Phenom II is roughly as fast as an i5 and that I could always upgrade the graphics to reduce bottleneck.

    However, this never went to plan and my mobo never supported more than Athlon X2s. Right now I'm trying to upgrade to a platform that I know I can upgrade in the future.
  6. amdfangirl said:
    Right now I'm trying to upgrade to a platform that I know I can upgrade in the future.


    I'd personally feel a little more confident going socket 1366 then if we're going the Intel route.

    What's the crack with Bulldozer though? Is that happening any time soon? Will that be compatible with AM3?
  7. Not sure.

    I wish Intel and AMD would at least give us some certainty.
  8. I'm really puzzled as to why people seem to have so much angst about socket futures. The motherboard manufacturers come out with new motherboards all the time to incorporate the latest technologies, and when they do the old ones become pretty much obsolete. We're just starting a new generation with USB 3, after that there'll doubtless be PCIe improvements and others.

    Sure, it may be possible to physically insert a 2012-generation LGA1366 CPU into a 2009 LGA1366 motherboard, but do you think that the vendors are going to update the mobo firmware to support it? They'll be busy writing firmware for the new boards, not the old ones.
  9. I think 1156 will be around until DDR2 become unfashionable and costs more than DDR3 then Intel will move budget/mainstream to 1366 and high end to the next socket.
  10. das_stig said:
    I think 1156 will be around until DDR2 become unfashionable and costs more than DDR3 then Intel will move budget/mainstream to 1366 and high end to the next socket.



    DDR2 is already unfashionable and same price as DDR3 what is your point here? No to mention DDR2 has nothing with s1156.


    AFG going Intel, WOW!
  11. nothing is really upgradable - buy the best to your budget and overhaul your rig every 2-3 years after its done the job for you.
  12. sminlal said:
    I'm really puzzled as to why people seem to have so much angst about socket futures. The motherboard manufacturers come out with new motherboards all the time to incorporate the latest technologies, and when they do the old ones become pretty much obsolete. We're just starting a new generation with USB 3, after that there'll doubtless be PCIe improvements and others.

    Sure, it may be possible to physically insert a 2012-generation LGA1366 CPU into a 2009 LGA1366 motherboard, but do you think that the vendors are going to update the mobo firmware to support it? They'll be busy writing firmware for the new boards, not the old ones.


    When I bought my 690G in 2006, it had all the bells and whistles I needed. In 2009, it still has the bells and whistles I need. Nothing really saturates the SATA 2 interface or my PCI-Express 1.0 x16 slot. You can hardly tell the difference between HT1 and HT3. Now, if this motherboard supported Phenom II like it was supposed to, I'd be happy.

    I'm not fond of spending more money on a new motherboard, CPU and RAM when I can simply upgrade the computer to a faster CPU and only take a ~5% performance penalty. It's much more cost effective that way. I was one of the few reasons I decided to opt for an AMD computer in the first place.
  13. amdfangirl said:
    Hey guys,

    Almost thinking of upgrading to a nice shiny i5. Well, until something flashed into my mind.

    Do you think the LGA 1156 socket has any forward momentum? Just because it supports 45nm quads, doesn't mean it will support 32nm ones. The current positioning of the LGA 1156 is interesting as it covers the entire mainstream segment. This is interesting because the chip I plan to buy almost overlaps with the LGA 1366 socket market.

    So here's my question, since Intel's premier platform is almost parrallel LGA 1156, do you think that Intel will make 32nm quads an incentive to upgrade platforms? Or will a hex-core CPU fill that role?

    Thanks.

    Well I'll put it this way...

    Had the LGA 1156 been available at the time I bought my two Phenom II rigs... I would have bought two of those instead. Intel's has upcoming LGA 1156 32nm i5s and i7s which will be drop in compatible with current LGA 1156 motherboards. In the case of the 32nm LGA 1156 i7s they will come with Hyperthreading (which for my uses, is not a gimmick at all).

    Hyperthreading is often cited as being a gimmick due to it not often offering much of a performance boost in games. The odd part is that under most games there is little to no performance boost going from dual core to quad core yet the same folks who make these claims generally use Quad Core CPUs themselves. Are Quad Cores a gimmick? Of course not.

    LGA 1156 has a bright future ahead of it. We all know the triple channel memory is overkill for a Quad Core under an overwhelming amount of circumstances. LGA 1366 is just not really worth it if you're concerned with factoring costs.

    You're also aware that you have an entire community over at x c p u s as well which would assist you in overclocking that LGA 1156 to 4GHz ;)

    BTW: Core i7 860 on sales for $229.99USD http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0317378 :)
  14. Well upgrading from an Athlon X2, that'd be cost 1/3 of the amount of upgrading and getting a new motherboard and RAM.
  15. Quote:
    LGA 1366 is just not really worth it if you're concerned with factoring costs.

    Depends on where you live really. For me, the i7 920 was an obvious choice since it was more or less the same price at Microcenter ($200 USD), which is about the same as a i7 860. Anyways, I do a lot of CAD/CFD, vid editing,etc and I hate waiting for things to finish, so the possibility of getting a 6 core i9 down the road is a good idea.
  16. ElMoIsEviL said:
    Well I'll put it this way...

    Had the LGA 1156 been available at the time I bought my two Phenom II rigs... I would have bought two of those instead. Intel's has upcoming LGA 1156 32nm i5s and i7s which will be drop in compatible with current LGA 1156 motherboards. In the case of the 32nm LGA 1156 i7s they will come with Hyperthreading (which for my uses, is not a gimmick at all).

    Hyperthreading is often cited as being a gimmick due to it not often offering much of a performance boost in games. The odd part is that under most games there is little to no performance boost going from dual core to quad core yet the same folks who make these claims generally use Quad Core CPUs themselves. Are Quad Cores a gimmick? Of course not.

    LGA 1156 has a bright future ahead of it. We all know the triple channel memory is overkill for a Quad Core under an overwhelming amount of circumstances. LGA 1366 is just not really worth it if you're concerned with factoring costs.

    You're also aware that you have an entire community over at x c p u s as well which would assist you in overclocking that LGA 1156 to 4GHz ;)

    BTW: Core i7 860 on sales for $229.99USD http://www.microcenter.com/single_product_results.phtml?product_id=0317378 :)


    Couldn't have said it better myself, bravo elmo.

    The point is, LGA 1156 is in no way a dead socket, no more so than LGA 1366. Intel had to invest a LOT of money into creating LGA 1156, evidence of this is the PCIe controller, so they fully intend to support it and make money off of it along side LGA 1366 for a good long time.

    Fangirl, What motherboard are you looking at? If you plan on using dual cards and want a good overclocking board with x8/x8 at a great price then look at the Biostar T5 XE SLI CFX. People are getting extreme clocks of 5GHz+ on it, with LN2 of course, and it is working fine with air cooled i5 750s/i7 860s @ 3.8 GHz to 4.0 GHz, and a local says he can get 4.2 GHz @ 1.4v easily off the board.
  17. x264 is the killer app for me. Need it all the time.
  18. ElMoIsEviL said:
    Hyperthreading is often cited as being a gimmick due to it not often offering much of a performance boost in games. The odd part is that under most games there is little to no performance boost going from dual core to quad core yet the same folks who make these claims generally use Quad Core CPUs themselves. Are Quad Cores a gimmick? Of course not.
    You have to be careful because when two threads are running on one hyperthreaded core they use the same execution units. If, for example, both threads are busy executing a string of floating point instructions, you're not going to get any better performance than a single core since they're both contending for the same floating point hardware. (This is a slight oversimplification because there are multiple FP units which do slightly different tasks, but you get the idea). So it's a lot less likely that a quad-threaded game which issues a whole bunch of similar instructions will get a performance boost from hyperthreading than four disparate programs will.
Ask a new question

Read More

CPUs Intel Socket