Will any current motherboards support Ivy Bridge?

[aadamszc]

Hey,

I'm planning a new build and I find all of these motherboard choices simply overwhelming. At the very least, I need the motherboard to support SLI/Xfire. The SSD caching of the Z68 might be nice, but it isn't a necessity.

The real feature that I would like, though, would be a motherboard that could support Ivy Bridge when it comes out. Since they are both LGA1155, that would lead me to believe that a motherboard for Sandy Bridge would be fine for Ivy Bridge. But do the Ivy Bridge motherboards need something special on them that no current LGA1155 has?

Will p67 work? How about z68?

Thanks,
-Adam

 

[jaquith]

Everything I've seen so far confirms the Ivy Bridge will work on 'most' LGA 1155 MOBO/chipsets. Both the P67 & Z68 will run the Ivy Bridge, but you'll lose the PCIe 3.0 support.

So yes it work'ish.

 

[crisbx99]

why will it lose psie 3.0 suppurt

 

[IntelEnthusiast]

While some of the motherboard manufacturer have already made their boards PCI-e 3.0 compatible, some have not. The 2nd generation Intel Core processors don't support PCI-e 3.0, so some motherboard manufacturers have saved money by making their boards not forwards compatible to PCI-e 3.0.

Christian Wood
Intel Enthusiast Team

 

[geekapproved]

PCI-E 3.0 is not supported by Sandy Bridge, you must have an Ivy Bridge cpu.

 

[jaquith]

In order for PCIe 3.0 to have any benefits on LGA 1155: 1. Ivy Bridge, 2. MOBO supporting PCIe 3.0, & 3. GPU supporting PCIe 3.0. Otherwise no PCIe 3.0 and you get PCIe 2.x; weakest link.

Guessing, if there's an example GTX 580 PCIe 2.x & (IF) GTX 580 PCIe 3.0 version the FPS gain 0~3 (margin of error); Apples to Apples. A single GPU 'today' can barely saturate x8 PCIe 2.x let alone x16 or PCIe 3.0 x8 and not a prayer of PCIe 3.0 x16.

What 'really' needs to be increased is the SATA port speed, we are in dire need of a 'SATA IV' the OCZ Vertex 3 saturates the SATA3 port today ie NOW. If you want faster then you're stuck with either RAID 0 SATA3 or PCIe based SSD which internally is H/W RAID 0 {no comparison}.

 

[galta]

In order for PCIe 3.0 to have any benefits on LGA 1155: 1. Ivy Bridge, 2. MOBO supporting PCIe 3.0, & 3. GPU supporting PCIe 3.0. Otherwise no PCIe 3.0 and you get PCIe 2.x; weakest link.

Guessing, if there's an example GTX 580 PCIe 2.x & (IF) GTX 580 PCIe 3.0 version the FPS gain 0~3 (margin of error); Apples to Apples. A single GPU 'today' can barely saturate x8 PCIe 2.x let alone x16 or PCIe 3.0 x8 and not a prayer of PCIe 3.0 x16.

What 'really' needs to be increased is the SATA port speed, we are in dire need of a 'SATA IV' the OCZ Vertex 3 saturates the SATA3 port today ie NOW. If you want faster then you're stuck with either RAID 0 SATA3 or PCIe based SSD which internally is H/W RAID 0 {no comparison}.

+1 on SATA III/IV. I would just add that Intel would be acting on the best interest of the community if it fully suported not only SATA III (or IV, when it comes), but also USB 3.0. Buying a $300 mobo and experiencing long boot times, even though you have an SSD, just because JMicron and Nec controllers are initializing, is very frustrating. Instead, we see them investing on Thunderbolt technology.
I don't know. Just have the feeling it could be the new Firewire, or IBM's PS/2, for anyone close to 40s. Lol.

 

[jaquith]

^ Try changing the Primary boot drive to priority 1; often the problem is media in the ODD and you are waiting on a SATA time-out.

 

[crisbx99]

PCI-E 3.0 is not supported by Sandy Bridge, you must have an Ivy Bridge cpu.

where you got that from

 

[galta]

^ Try changing the Primary boot drive to priority 1; often the problem is media in the ODD and you are waiting on a SATA time-out.

I've done that from start.
The point is, when system is booting, you go through a NEC controller initializing screen, then a JMicron's. Together, they take some 20s. Considering Win7 starts in 8s, after the logo is finished, it's too long.

 

[jaquith]

...when system is booting, you go through a NEC controller initializing screen, then a JMicron's. Together, they take some 20s. Considering Win7 starts in 8s, after the logo is finished, it's too long.

In the BIOS try Disabling them on at a time, start with JMicron if nothing's connected. If something is connected externally they 'unplugging' the component could be defective.