metallifux :
well if your keen on having the latest then its not a bad deal as it looks like ivy will work LGA 1155 so you can get a Sandy set up now then drop in an Ivy later. However if you want quad channel RAM and possibly native USB 3.0, you will need to wait till Q3 this year for the LGA 2011 socket.
LGA2011 appears to be the successor to LGA1567, which also has a quad-channel memory controller. LGA1567 works only with Xeon 6500s and 7500s, which are relatively low-clocked chips with enormous dies and enormous price tags. You wouldn't want one for a gaming system since the least-expensive LGA1567 chip is the Xeon E6510, which is a 1.73 GHz, 105-watt quad-core with HyperThreading, 12 MB L3 cache, no Turbo Boost, and its IMC capped at DDR3-800 speeds, yet it costs nearly as much as a Core i7 970 ($744.) Good luck finding a board for that too, as the only one that I can find is a massive quad-socket Supermicro unit that costs a fuzz over a grand.
What you want is one of the LGA1356 units that have triple-channel memory and 8-core CPUs with Turbo Boost and the all of the rest of the bells and whistles and a considerably lower price.
I myself was going to wait until bulldozer, but since that is only going to be coming out in April and will at best be comparable to Sandy since it will be built on 32nm i'm now reconsidering intel.
I'd wait for Bulldozer to ship before automatically writing it off as "at best be comparable to Sandy Bridge." AMD has a history of pretty significant performance increases with new or heavily-reworked microarchitectures- think of K7 (all-new) and K8 (heavily reworked.) Anyway, process node doesn't mean squat for performance. If you follow that line of thinking, Intel's 65 nm Pentium D Preslers should have been far faster than AMD's 90 nm X2 Manchesters and Toledos. We all know how that one turned out. Microarchitecture >> process node for determining processor performance.
fazers_on_stun :
I dunno about the benefits of quad-channel for desktop - IIRC the Nehalem tests on some review site where they benched with all 3 channels and then again with one bank pulled showed the tri-channel vs. dual-channel difference to be something like 1% in most apps. But quad would be a great way to double your memory using the cheaper 2-gig modules, if you need a lot of RAM.
4 GB DDR3 modules are pretty much exactly double the price of 2 GB DDR3 modules right now, so there's really no reason to not go for 4 GB modules if you need a lot of RAM. If you need more than 24 GB of RAM, get a multiple-CPU workstation with support for registered memory and two CPUs' worth of DIMM slots.