Concerned about new cpu from Intel

[photog10]

Hello all,
I'm looking to get a new PC. I'm still in the 780i/q6600 world. I'm concerned as I'm wondering if the new cpu's will be different sockets. I'm loving the New Asus R3E but was wondering if what Intel is bringing out is compatible with this board?
I don't understand why are they changing the socket after such a short time? Money..yea, sure, but I don't think that's the main reason..

Actually I'm kinda confused though, is it the gulftown, or the sandy bridge that's coming out..Sorry, not really up to date..

 

[Lmeow]

Gulftown is the codename for the Intel Core i7 32 nm six core CPUs, and have already been released (i7 980X for example). Sandy Bridge is being released later this year, and during next year.

The Core i7 980X is compatible with the Asus R3E but I doubt they'll release any new arch. CPUs for LGA 1366.

 

[Herr_Koos]

Sandy Bridge is a new architecture and will be on a new socket design AFAIK.

 

[Emperus]

You've a pretty good setup.. So It'll be no problems, i guess, for you to wait till the next Intel architecture (Sandy Bridge) rolls out and benchmarks are released.. May be then the current line of CPU's will go down in price making a upgrade path more logical and clear to you..

 

[Stupido]

AFAIK.

sorry for the stupid question (look who's asking but what AFAIK means?

 

[Herr_Koos]

As Far As I Know, only to be used by insanely lazy people..

Similar to IIRC.

 

[fazers_on_stun]

And it looks like AMD's Bulldozer will also be on a new socket. From TechPowerUp's article on the Hot Chips BD Details :

At the chip-level, there's a large L3 cache, a northbridge that integrates the PCI-Express root complex, and an integrated memory controller. Since the northbridge is completely on the chip, the processor does not need to deal with the rest of the system with a HyperTransport link. It connects to the chipset (which is now relegated to a southbridge, much like Intel's Ibex Peak), using A-Link Express, which like DMI, is essentially a PCI-Express link. It is important to note that all modules and extra-modular components are present on the same piece of silicon die. Because of this design change, Bulldozer processors will come in totally new packages that are not backwards compatible with older AMD sockets such as AM3 or AM2(+).

 

[yannifb]

And it looks like AMD's Bulldozer will also be on a new socket. From TechPowerUp's article on the Hot Chips BD Details :

At the chip-level, there's a large L3 cache, a northbridge that integrates the PCI-Express root complex, and an integrated memory controller. Since the northbridge is completely on the chip, the processor does not need to deal with the rest of the system with a HyperTransport link. It connects to the chipset (which is now relegated to a southbridge, much like Intel's Ibex Peak), using A-Link Express, which like DMI, is essentially a PCI-Express link. It is important to note that all modules and extra-modular components are present on the same piece of silicon die. Because of this design change, Bulldozer processors will come in totally new packages that are not backwards compatible with older AMD sockets such as AM3 or AM2(+).

While i take this with a grain of salt since it hasn't been confirmed yet, it makes sense. BD has way too many new changes to use AM3 (didnt they say the NB is integrated now). Still if it is a beast i guess its worth buying a new mobo for. I wont have to change anything else so its not too bad.

 

[iqvl]

While i take this with a grain of salt since it hasn't been confirmed yet, it makes sense. BD has way too many new changes to use AM3 (didnt they say the NB is integrated now). Still if it is a beast i guess its worth buying a new mobo for. I wont have to change anything else so its not too bad.

+1

Unlike AMD, every recent Intel generation has huge boost and change over the previous and so AMD fanboys should stop complaining that Intel keeps changing socket.

For example, 1156/1366 has integrated memory controller and on-die PCI-E controller(1156 only) which 775 doesn't and hence the socket change is required.

 

[Timop]

+1

Unlike AMD, every recent Intel generation has huge boost and change over the previous and so AMD fanboys should stop complaining that Intel keeps changing socket.

For example, 1156/1366 has integrated memory controller and on-die PCI-E controller(1156 only) which 775 doesn't and hence the socket change is required.

Say that about LGA1155. You get a marginal ~20% performance boost, with no major architecture changes that require a socket change. In fact, they just took out a contact, changed to physical socket and called it a day.

The LGA2011 is only barely passable, Quad-channel is just mostly gimmickry for desktops.

 

[iqvl]

Say that about LGA1155. You get a marginal ~20% performance boost, with no major architecture changes that require a socket change. In fact, they just took out a contact, changed to physical socket and called it a day.

The LGA2011 is only barely passable, Quad-channel is just mostly gimmickry for desktops.

20% is amazing given the fact that there's no extra core added! Had you ever seen any recent AMD generation gives 20% over the previous?

No major change?! BEST ON-DIE GFX INTEGRAED! In addition, do you think similar architecture would give 20% performance boost?

 

[Timop]

20% is amazing given the fact that there's no extra core added! Had you ever seen any recent AMD generation gives 20% over the previous?

No major change?! BEST ON-DIE GFX INTEGRAED! In addition, do you think similar architecture would give 20% performance boost?

Yes, its like Nehalem and Core, the principle architecture has not changed much.

On the AMD side, K10 is a healthy 15% better than K8 clock for clock (link), did AMD need a socket change for that? No.

Claiming "best IGP" now is a irresponsible and fanboish statement without knowing its competition. It is very possible AMD shoves a HD5570-class GPU on Llano, which would put the SB-IGP into shame.

My point is, there's no point in LGA1155 other than the sake of "new series, new socket, more money from chipsets", Intel could have made SB 100% compatible with 1156 but they just didn't feel like it.

 

[iqvl]

Yes, its like Nehalem and Core, the principle architecture has not changed much.

I just realized that the one arguing with me is a totally noob....

Integrated memory controller and on-die pci-e controller gives super faster "communication" between RAM and GFX which is a huge change!

RAM and GFX on LGA775 MB have to connect to CPU via MB instead of connecting to CPU directly. There is just no way for it to support Nehalem!

There is no point debating with someone who talks with no knowledge at all. I will end here.

 

[Timop]

I just realized that the one arguing with me is a totally noob....

Integrated memory controller and on-die pci-e controller gives super faster "communication" between RAM and GFX which is a huge change!

RAM and GFX on LGA775 MB have to connect to CPU via MB instead of connecting to CPU directly. There is just no way for it to support Nehalem!

There is no point debating with someone who talks with no knowledge at all. I will end here.

Spiffy, apparently the person who speaks information has no idea what CPU architecture mean.

Is the Memory controller part of the architecture of the CPU core? No.

All I said basic architecture for the CPU core in Nehalem and core is Very close and it is possible to raise performance by 20% with similar architecture. Never said 1156 was unnecessary, just rebuffing you point that an 20% isnt possible with similar architectures.

Why am I talking with a person who has no sense of spelling and grammar anyways?

 

[fazers_on_stun]

I doubt many here on THG will be getting a Sandy Bridge with the on-die GPU - it ain't gonna hold up for the next generation of games where you'd want a couple of 460's or 5870's . However that ~20% IPC improvement over Nehalem would be quite a selling point, seeing as how on Anandtech's preview the non-working-turbo i5-2400 quad pretty much kept up with the turbo-working 6-core Westmere on some benchmarks anyway.

So, gimme an 8-core unlocked multiplier SB, and hold the GPU, Intel! .

 

[iqvl]

Spiffy, apparently the person who speaks information has no idea what CPU architecture mean.

Is the Memory controller part of the architecture of the CPU core? No.

All I said basic architecture for the CPU core in Nehalem and core is Very close and it is possible to raise performance by 20% with similar architecture. Never said 1156 was unnecessary, just rebuffing you point that an 20% isnt possible with similar architectures.

Why am I talking with a person who has no sense of spelling and grammar anyways?

RAM and PCIE on LGA775 are controlled by mb and can not communicate directly with CPU directly, noob!

There is no way for RAM and PCIE on LGA775 to work with Nehalem, because they can NOT communicate with CPU, noob!

Why does Intel make the change? For super fast connection, noob!

20% performance boost is possible with similar architecture?! noob!

Keep showing off your ignorance! It suits AMD fanboys well.

 

[Timop]

RAM and PCIE on LGA775 are controlled by mb and can not communicate directly with CPU directly, noob!

There is no way for RAM and PCIE on LGA775 to work with Nehalem, because they can NOT communicate with CPU, noob!

Why does Intel make the change? For super fast connection, noob!

20% performance boost is possible with similar architecture?! noob!

Keep showing off your ignorance! It suits AMD fanboys well.

Like it was Intel who pioneered on-die memory controllers for desktop CPUs.
I guess calling me "noob" 4 times is just one way of blatantly avoiding how pointless it was for Intel switching from 1156 to 1155.

Its pretty sad talking to some ignorant Intel fan-boy who can not even spell right, and has no idea what "similar" architecture mean......

 

[iqvl]

Huge boost alright........a boost that costs you three times as much.

Gosh! Why are there so many morons who don't realize that they can get the performance of $1000 CPU by OCing the $200 ones?

How many times should we remind you about the OCing?

AMD fanboys just keep hitting the "wall" of fantasy again and again!

 

[iqvl]

Like it was Intel who pioneered on-die memory controllers for desktop CPUs.
I guess calling me "noob" 4 times is just one way of blatantly avoiding how pointless it was for Intel switching from 1156 to 1155.

Its pretty sad talking to some ignorant Intel fan-boy who can not even spell right, and has no idea what "similar" architecture mean......

]Like it was Intel who pioneered on-die memory controllers for desktop CPUs.

Did I state that? Where? Day dreaming again?

I only stated the fact that older LGA775 MB just can NOT support Nehalem!

Admit that integrated memory/pcie controller is a huge change and require new platform, noob ***!

p.s. It doesn't matter who apply integrated memory controller first. Performance is all that it matters.

 

[Timop]

Did I state that you could use Core and Nehalem on the same platform then? You must been hallucinating.

Go read the "knowledge" so you speak, the difference between the CPU cores between Core and Nehalem isn't as big as you think. Nehalem without the integrated PCIe/Memory controller would still be a potent CPU.

 

[iqvl]

Did I state that you could use Core and Nehalem on the same platform then? You must been hallucinating.

Go read the "knowledge" so you speak, the difference between the CPU cores between Core and Nehalem isn't as big as you think. Nehalem without the integrated PCIe/Memory controller would still be a potent CPU.

Then why would AMD make integrated memory controller? Because they are not as ignorant as someone who would say "integrated memory controller" doesn't matter!

Oh and according to your "PRO" statement, AMD shouldn't need any platform change since Athlon 64 as it already has integrated memory controller, noob!

 

[Timop]

Then why would AMD make integrated memory controller? You don't even need AM2+ if they didn't.

I don't understand your logic.

My point is you can make the CPU perform better simply by tweaking the core architecture, keep the socket and not mess with the IMC. The IMC on-die is definitely a welcome addition nevertheless. (Thus I never said anything about the 775->1156 swap in the first place, it is a nice step forward.)

Just answer my question before anymore usage of the word "ignorant", what is the importance of LGA1155 besides the sake of a "new platform", did Intel add anything new this time that requires a socket swap?

 

[iqvl]

I don't understand your logic.

My point is you can make the CPU perform better simply by tweaking the core architecture, keep the socket and not the IMC. The IMC on-die is definitely a welcome addition nevertheless.

Just answer my question, what is the importance of LGA1155 besides the sake of a "new platform", did Intel add anything new this time that requires a socket swap?

You just don't get it! Let me tell you!

Intel can of course make Nehalme with LGA775 pin, but you will still have to buy a new MB because the old LGA775 ones does NOT support integrated memory/pcie controller.

Not matter Nehalem is in LGA775 or LGA1156/1366, you need a NEW MB with NEW design!

Just answer my question, what is the importance of LGA1155 besides the sake of a "new platform", did Intel add anything new this time that requires a socket swap?

Stop the crap and read the article below before you speak.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row

 

[Timop]

You just don't get it! Let me tell you!

Intel can of course make Nehalme with LGA775 pin, but you will still have to buy a new MB because the old LGA775 ones does NOT support integrated memory/pcie controller.

Not matter Nehalem is in LGA775 or LGA1156/1366, you need a NEW MB with NEW design!

I'm not talking about Nehalem/Core. Obviously That is true and I agree with that.

I'm talking about Sandy bridge, in what technical stand point does sandy bridge require a new socket compared to Nehalem/1156? It is entirely possible for SB to be backwards compatible with 1156(P55/H55) then releasing a new chipsets(H67/P67) so you can get all the features like they did with the P4/C2D.

Thank you VERY much.

 

[iqvl]

I'm not talking about Nehalem/Core. Obviously That is true and I agree with that.

I'm talking about Sandy bridge, in what technical stand point does sandy bridge require a new socket compared to Nehalem/1156? It is entirely possible for SB to be backwards compatible with 1156(P55/H55) then releasing a new chipsets(B65/P65) so you can get all the features.

Thank you VERY much.

Read the article and get some knowledge before you speak.
http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/the-sandy-bridge-preview-three-wins-in-a-row/2