Sign-in / Sign-up
Your question

Getting pissed waiting...LGA2011

Tags:
  • Motherboards
  • Intel
  • AMD
  • Product
Last response: in Motherboards
a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 4, 2011 5:16:37 AM

Anyone else getting sick of the INTEL marketing BS? I was all set to go the I7-920/930/950 route. I decided to postpone for a few months.

Then Intel trashes the entire 1156 line. Then Intel has the entire 1155/1155 "B(andaide)3" mess. And now, we have P67 replaced with Z68. The Sandy Bridge series shouldn't have been released until it was ready. But, Intel was worried that AMD was going to steal some of their thunder. From what I've read, AMD's bulldozer will now not be released until next year. With every update on "Bulldozer", the expectations drop another peg or two. Neither Intel or AMD is fulfilling my CPU shopping list. So........I'm still waiting (unless I decide to spend my money on something else).



More about : pissed waiting lga2011

a c 717 V Motherboard
a b å Intel
July 4, 2011 3:23:17 PM

Well the LGA 2011 would be released right around now if the P67 wasn't such a disaster. Intel deliberately delayed the LGA 2011 to allow the P67 'lost' sales time to catch-up. The latest 'guess' is the LGA 2011 will be here sometime in November.

This doesn't bother me too much since I'm running X58. Meanwhile Intel will continue to pepper the market with new chipsets and newer CPUs, the Ivy Bridge might be released late this year along with the SB-E {LGA 2011} or after the new year 2012.

Chipsets -> http://www.anandtech.com/show/4318/intel-roadmap-ivy-br...

Once you are off the Consumer level like the LGA 1156/1155 shorter shelf life and on the Enthusiast LGA 1366/2011 the timing between releases isn't that big a deal. I can go head to head easy on my older 980X versus i7-2600K. I'm just hoping that the SB-E will offer an 8-core option as originally speculated!

Bulldozer the last time I checked July-August, but the 'Question' is how much an improvement, if any, over the current Sandy Bridge.
a c 125 V Motherboard
July 4, 2011 5:00:56 PM

For the record: Sandy Bridge was ready -- there's nothing wrong with the CPU. There was a possible problem with the SATA controller on the Cougar Point chipset. Who knows how many people would have actually been affected by it, but Intel went ahead and fixed it anyway. Everyone that bought early has a replacement, and there hasn't been any reported problems with the B3 revision.

Anyway...

The newest rumors put SNB-E and the X79 chipset here in January 2012. IVB and the various Panther Point chipsets won't come until April 2012.

Haven't really paid attention to Bulldozer's date, as I just don't think it's going to be a top contender. I would be happy to be proven wrong though...

terry:
Get a nice X58 mainboard, one of the lower-end i7-9xx CPUs, 6GB of quality DDR3, and overclock the hell out of it. It's not like you'll be disappointed with the performance.

Or you could be like me, happily running a 4.8GHz Sandy Bridge machine. I bought the parts in late January and got it assembled literally the day before the news broke about the possible SATA problem. I didn't panic and the world didn't end. I continued to revel in the awesome performance of Sandy Bridge while I waited until April for a fixed board to be shipped to me. It came, I installed it, and I continued happily along.
Related resources
a c 717 V Motherboard
a b å Intel
July 4, 2011 5:35:20 PM

The dates, ALL of them, are supposed 'Leaked' dates so it depends on whose 'crap' your read. I've found AnandTech to have the least stinky 'crap.' I see the CPU core count change like the direction of the wind. Granted the native Ivy Bridge chipsets are in to be released in 2012 the CPU's themselves may get an earlier release and will work on the older P67/Z68/etc chipsets -> http://motherboardnews.com/2011/05/27/ivy-bridges-backw...

Everywhere I've seen still shows the X79 Q4 2011; I ignore forum speculation.

IMO - Even though 'LGA 2011' has (2011) in its' name it only refers to the CPU pin count, but I feel the 'Public' will look at Intel as another 'Sandy Bridge' FAILURE if its' release date stretches into 2012.
a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 5, 2011 1:11:51 AM

jaquith said:
Well the LGA 2011 would be released right around now if the P67 wasn't such a disaster. Intel deliberately delayed the LGA 2011 to allow the P67 'lost' sales time to catch-up. The latest 'guess' is the LGA 2011 will be here sometime in November.

This doesn't bother me too much since I'm running X58. Meanwhile Intel will continue to pepper the market with new chipsets and newer CPUs, the Ivy Bridge might be released late this year along with the SB-E {LGA 2011} or after the new year 2012.

Chipsets -> http://www.anandtech.com/show/4318/intel-roadmap-ivy-br...

Once you are off the Consumer level like the LGA 1156/1155 shorter shelf life and on the Enthusiast LGA 1366/2011 the timing between releases isn't that big a deal. I can go head to head easy on my older 980X versus i7-2600K. I'm just hoping that the SB-E will offer an 8-core option as originally speculated!

Bulldozer the last time I checked July-August, but the 'Question' is how much an improvement, if any, over the current Sandy Bridge.

Hi,
I agree. If I had purchased the I7-950 & 1366, I would be the owner of a very nice system. But I know myself. and I would have regrets once SB-E & LGA 2011 released.
a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 5, 2011 5:35:52 AM

Leaps-from-Shadows said:
For the record: Sandy Bridge was ready -- there's nothing wrong with the CPU. There was a possible problem with the SATA controller on the Cougar Point chipset. Who knows how many people would have actually been affected by it, but Intel went ahead and fixed it anyway. Everyone that bought early has a replacement, and there hasn't been any reported problems with the B3 revision.

Anyway...

The newest rumors put SNB-E and the X79 chipset here in January 2012. IVB and the various Panther Point chipsets won't come until April 2012.

Haven't really paid attention to Bulldozer's date, as I just don't think it's going to be a top contender. I would be happy to be proven wrong though...

terry:
Get a nice X58 mainboard, one of the lower-end i7-9xx CPUs, 6GB of quality DDR3, and overclock the hell out of it. It's not like you'll be disappointed with the performance.

Or you could be like me, happily running a 4.8GHz Sandy Bridge machine. I bought the parts in late January and got it assembled literally the day before the news broke about the possible SATA problem. I didn't panic and the world didn't end. I continued to revel in the awesome performance of Sandy Bridge while I waited until April for a fixed board to be shipped to me. It came, I installed it, and I continued happily along.

Hi,
The Sandy Bridge CPU and LGA 1155 are absolutely linked. Both are linked to the Intel public relations black eye. I was impressed with the CPU and disappointed with the mother boards, before the scandal broke. I didn't like the bottleneck in the PCI express lanes in LGA1156, and the bottleneck is worse on the LGA1155. Intel could have fixed the bottleneck while maintaining the mid level price point, but they chose not to. After all, they need a reason to roll out a new socket (not backward compatible of course) next year dont't they? :D 

You say you didn't panic. Which is all very well. But, I doubt that you were very pleased with the situation either. You are correct. These aren't world changing events.
a c 717 V Motherboard
a b å Intel
July 5, 2011 12:55:08 PM

terry4536 said:
...I didn't like the bottleneck in the PCI express lanes in LGA1156, and the bottleneck is worse on the LGA1155. Intel could have fixed the bottleneck while maintaining the mid level price point, but they chose not to. ...

Yeah, I foresee the same pointless arguments of LGA 1366 vs LGA 1156 with both Sandy Bridge choices. It's simple, if the SB LGA 1155 had say PCIe 3.0 16-lanes verses LGA 2011 PCIe 3.0 32-lanes then the lines would be a bit more blurry to some. Regardless of the number of lanes, Intel deliberately crippled the LGA 1155 to make way for the LGA 2011. The Consumer lines will always be this way.

July 5, 2011 2:38:40 PM

jaquith said:
It's simple, if the SB LGA 1155 had say PCIe 3.0 16-lanes verses LGA 2011 PCIe 3.0 32-lanes then the lines would be a bit more blurry to some.


Asrock and MSI just rolled out 1155 z68 boards that have PCIe 3.0 x16. So the benefit of this as I understand it is, at some point in the future when PCIe 3.0 cards actually exist, PCIe 3.0 is there when you want it. Instead of dumping the whole board looks like you can just upgrade the CPU to Ivy Bridge (according to the Asrock Fatal1ty z68 manual; don't know about MSI) when the time comes.
a c 717 V Motherboard
a b å Intel
July 5, 2011 3:17:20 PM

Correct, you'd have to use an Ivy Bridge CPU, ASRock must have Jerry-Rigged some chip to make it all work. From what I know only the upcoming e.g. Z77 Panther Point and SB-E Patsburg X79 support PCIe 3.0. However, I realize the GPU PCIe lanes go 'directly' to the Sandy Bridge.

I've stated this before, most GPU's currently can barely saturate x8 PCIe 2.x lanes much less even come close to x16 PCIe 2.x, and my 'assumption' is the number of lanes {Native} is where it's all at instead of the PCIe '1GB/s' per lane. Yes, you can add latency and more NF200's with PCIe 3 over PCIe 2 and achieve the same bandwidth.

I could foresee 4-WAY SLI on Ivy Bridge with PCIe 3 which is why I said "...would be a bit more blurry".

The only question in my mind about early PCIe 3.x GPUs vs the same or similar GPU with PCIe 2.x. Meaning how much an improvement 'Interface' will yield, if it's like SATA3 HDD vs SATA2 HDD it'll be nothing, if the GPU's being internally bottle-necked by bandwidth then it'll be improved.
a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 6, 2011 12:39:14 AM

roscolo said:
Asrock and MSI just rolled out 1155 z68 boards that have PCIe 3.0 x16. So the benefit of this as I understand it is, at some point in the future when PCIe 3.0 cards actually exist, PCIe 3.0 is there when you want it. Instead of dumping the whole board looks like you can just upgrade the CPU to Ivy Bridge (according to the Asrock Fatal1ty z68 manual; don't know about MSI) when the time comes.

Hi,
I assume that PCIe 3.0 x16 was designed to be backwards compatible at least. When I was researching Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge was described as an economy level series of CPU's. They are to be based on 22 nm architecture(with low power requirements), but I don't know that they will be an upgrade to a I5-2500K (for example).
a c 125 V Motherboard
July 6, 2011 2:16:16 AM

Ivy Bridge will also be getting all of the optimizations Intel has learned with the Sandy Bridge architecture in addition to the die shrink. These optimizations will make Ivy Bridge faster, clock for clock. Just how much faster we don't know yet, despite Intel's estimates/targets.

And yes, PCIe 3.0 will be backwards-compatible. For full PCIe 3.0 mode, you need an Ivy Bridge CPU and a board that specifies 3.0 mode (either one of the few Z68 boards that can do it or one with the upcoming 75 and 77 chipsets).
a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 6, 2011 3:02:27 AM

jaquith said:
The Ivy Bridge is considerably faster than Sandy Bridge -> http://vr-zone.com/articles/ivy-bridge-to-have-20-perce... The Sandy Bridge is about 16~20%+ faster than the i7-8xx.

Hi,
That was a good article. The last I read on this topic did indicate a possible bump in speed, but the emphasis was on the low power consumption and its application to tablets. The research I cited earlier was just after Sandy Bridge was released.

a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 6, 2011 4:34:13 AM

Leaps-from-Shadows said:
Ivy Bridge will also be getting all of the optimizations Intel has learned with the Sandy Bridge architecture in addition to the die shrink. These optimizations will make Ivy Bridge faster, clock for clock. Just how much faster we don't know yet, despite Intel's estimates/targets.

And yes, PCIe 3.0 will be backwards-compatible. For full PCIe 3.0 mode, you need an Ivy Bridge CPU and a board that specifies 3.0 mode (either one of the few Z68 boards that can do it or one with the upcoming 75 and 77 chipsets).

Hi,
I'm more concerned with X79 and LGA 2011. Ivy Bridge is a long way off. At this rate, I would say at least a year and a half. Look at how long they have been talking about USB 3.0, and it is still a work in progress. I just did a search for USB 3.0 cables (from internal motherboard header to case). I didn't have a lot of luck.
a c 125 V Motherboard
July 6, 2011 7:39:44 AM

X79 still doesn't have native USB3 -- it requires a separate chip, just like Cougar Point chipsets do. But at least they seem to have gotten the SATA situation right, with lots of ports built in. For whatever reason, Intel doesn't want us to have both yet. That'll have to wait until the next generation beyond Patsburg (X79) and Panther Point (75 and 77 series).
a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 6, 2011 9:21:42 AM

Leaps-from-Shadows said:
X79 still doesn't have native USB3 -- it requires a separate chip, just like Cougar Point chipsets do. But at least they seem to have gotten the SATA situation right, with lots of ports built in. For whatever reason, Intel doesn't want us to have both yet. That'll have to wait until the next generation beyond Patsburg (X79) and Panther Point (75 and 77 series).

Hi,
If they insist on sacrificing PCI lanes to USB 3.0, at least Intel had the insight to include extra PCI lanes for LGA 2011.
a c 717 V Motherboard
a b å Intel
July 6, 2011 2:09:41 PM

terry4536 said:
If they insist on sacrificing PCI lanes to USB 3.0, at least Intel had the insight to include extra PCI lanes for LGA 2011.

Yeah Buddy! :)  Gigabyte is notorious for this exact problem, their new 'USB Turbo' ties into the PCIe 16 lanes. Worst I've seen (2) major problems with damned if you do or don't. USB 3 Turbo issues: e.g. UD7 {Enabled} = x8/x8 and {Disabled} = x16/x16 ; other GA MOBOs {Disabled} = Second PCIe OFF and {Enabled} = Second PCIe ON. DUH!?

Trust this too, my paranoia induced by the P67 B2, Early Adopting -> IMO let the LGA 2011 simmer for a month or two until the 'bugs' are identified and there's at least 1~2 BIOS revisions.
a c 129 V Motherboard
a b À AMD
July 7, 2011 5:35:50 AM

jaquith said:
Yeah Buddy! :)  Gigabyte is notorious for this exact problem, their new 'USB Turbo' ties into the PCIe 16 lanes. Worst I've seen (2) major problems with damned if you do or don't. USB 3 Turbo issues: e.g. UD7 {Enabled} = x8/x8 and {Disabled} = x16/x16 ; other GA MOBOs {Disabled} = Second PCIe OFF and {Enabled} = Second PCIe ON. DUH!?

Trust this too, my paranoia induced by the P67 B2, Early Adopting -> IMO let the LGA 2011 simmer for a month or two until the 'bugs' are identified and there's at least 1~2 BIOS revisions.

Hi,
That's my plan. I want to see some reviews on the new hardware before I jump in.