Intel LGA 2011 roadmap : Affordable SNB-E and no LGA 1356

[saaya]

What exactly is 2011 about?
Instead of 50x100 I can run 25x200
Maybe a few extra mhz out of the CPU
Memory tweaking
Extra CPU cores
Extra memory channel
Extra pciE lanes
Extra SATA slots

Boards will cost at least 300$ I guess
Cpus will cost at least that much as well...
None of this will notably affect performance for me... ill pass... :/

After Intel making everybody who went for a 1366 highend platform look like an idiot by releasing a mainstream CPU that bests anything available on their current highend platform for 1/3 the cost... I somehow feel reluctant to empty my pockets to buy into their next highend platform...

[trn]

What exactly is the point of 2011?

more.

Thats the point. More everything vs 1155, coArz! , DIMM slots, PCI, SATA, options.... and i'll have it all


*disclaimer, at this point its all speculation anyways. But you can keep your quad cores, thats sooooo 2007

[glen]

more.

Thats the point. More everything vs 1155, coArz! , DIMM slots, PCI, SATA, options.... and i'll have it all


*disclaimer, at this point its all speculation anyways. But you can keep your quad cores, thats sooooo 2007

The biggest thing to think about is if you are stuck with an 1155 socket, there are no plans for anything more than quad core.

Considering software dev is heading toward multi core, in a few years a quad core could be as obsolete as a dual core lga775. So the main reason to buy a 2011 socket is octocore cpu's which should remain viable much longer than any Ivy Bridge 1155.

Basically if you buy a motherboard you plan to keep more than a few years I'd say socket 2011 or BD is what you would want. Socket 1155 IB/SB is geared toward mainstream with its low power consumption and on die gpu. Sure you can run an unlocked SB at 5 ghz but I bet the K line is pulled as soon as 2011 is released as the warranty claims on these will be a losing game for Intel.

[vitaminc]

hope they cann 1356 or just use the same server socket...

[dartaz]

The biggest thing to think about is if you are stuck with an 1155 socket, there are no plans for anything more than quad core.

How do you know that ?

Considering software dev is heading toward multi core, in a few years a quad core could be as obsolete as a dual core lga775. So the main reason to buy a 2011 socket is octocore cpu's which should remain viable much longer than any Ivy Bridge 1155.

Core i3 dual core is not obsolete, and performs very well against some of AMD quad core. In gaming, i3-2100 can compete with AMD fastest processor on the market. And here we are talking about dual core, not a quad core

Saying that quad core is going to be obsolete in few years is far from the truth, specially when we are talking about fast quad cores like sandy-bridge.

[glen]

How do you know that ?




Core i3 dual core is not obsolete, and performs very well against some of AMD quad core. In gaming, i3-2100 can compete with AMD fastest processor on the market. And here we are talking about dual core, not a quad core

Saying that quad core is going to be obsolete in few years is far from the truth, specially when we are talking about fast quad cores like sandy-bridge.

There is no means to fit a hexacore and the bigger igp, yes I have dissected a SB cpu at work and taken measurements (we engineers can't help but take things apart or break things as our boss puts it ), it just ain't gonna happen even with the die shrink, sorry. Plus you must have missed intels announced plans for IB 1155 being quad only.

As far as i3 dual core not being obsolete, it has hyperthreading, so by your argument we should all be buying the i2600k over the i2500k if hyperthreading is that good (for future proofing) . Not only that if you are saying these dual cores compete with AMD's top CPU in games today, then it will surely be a huge bottleneck for big ticket games released in the future. In a year a lot of folks will be gaming on 120hz HD, I just don't see a dual core keeping up. And in 2 years my gut says a quad anything won't be enough. Sotware is using multi threaded programming more and more than people give credit.

hence why I am sticking with a bargain basement SB setup for now, the platform just isn't worth the investment for long term viability. The socket 2011 motherboards will be the ones to pour money and time into. If I was an X58 or even LGA775 owner I would be waiting on socket 2011. JMHO, but if you think investing in a nice P67 MB right now makes sense I would love to hear your reasoning, this is a good discussion.

[sdsdv10]

<snip>
hence why I am sticking with a bargain basement SB setup for now, the platform just isn't worth the investment for long term viability. The socket 2011 motherboards will be the ones to pour money and time into. If I was an X58 or even LGA775 owner I would be waiting on socket 2011. JMHO, but if you think investing in a nice P67 MB right now makes sense I would love to hear your reasoning, this is a good discussion.

That's what I was thinking as well. But another member in this thread was explaining why 1155 will be the better setup. http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/...7&postcount=25

Oh well, I guess when Intel finally releases SKT2011 we'll get the real answer.

[Movieman]

What exactly is 2011 about?
Instead of 50x100 I can run 25x200
Maybe a few extra mhz out of the CPU
Memory tweaking
Extra CPU cores
Extra memory channel
Extra pciE lanes
Extra SATA slots

Boards will cost at least 300$ I guess
Cpus will cost at least that much as well...
None of this will notably affect performance for me... ill pass... :/

After Intel making everybody who went for a 1366 highend platform look like an idiot by releasing a mainstream CPU that bests anything available on their current highend platform for 1/3 the cost... I somehow feel reluctant to empty my pockets to buy into their next highend platform...

I would take exception to that statement.
As nice as the 2600K SB is for pure power it can't touch a 980x or 990x in a decent X58 board.
The SB is an excellent mid priced system but it's a quad and can't match the hex's..
BUT bang for the buck the SB is the winner by far..

[zanzabar]

I would take exception to that statement.
As nice as the 2600K SB is for pure power it can't touch a 980x or 990x in a decent X58 board.
The SB is an excellent mid priced system but it's a quad and can't match the hex's..
BUT bang for the buck the SB is the winner by far..

i would agree on the xeon 6-core x58 platform but the i7 is targeted to gamers, and for games the 1366 is slower than the 1155 and its also slower than the 1156 clove for clock with a quad. sure u could get a hex core but the cheapest one is $600 and for gaming its still slower than an 1155 or 1156 quad clocked the same.

[Movieman]

i would agree on the xeon 6-core x58 platform but the i7 is targeted to gamers, and for games the 1366 is slower than the 1155 and its also slower than the 1156 clove for clock with a quad. sure u could get a hex core but the cheapest one is $600 and for gaming its still slower than an 1155 or 1156 quad clocked the same.

I agree for gamers but notice I said " for pure power"
In WCG my 2600K at 4634MHz does app 41,000PPD
My 80 year old Mothers 990x at 4154MHz does almost 49,000PPD..

[-=DVS=-]

I agree for gamers but notice I said " for pure power"
In WCG my 2600K at 4634MHz does app 41,000PPD
My 80 year old Mothers 990x at 4154MHz does almost 49,000PPD..

But you pay 3x times more for CPU alone just to get ~19.5% more

[Movieman]

But you pay 3x times more for CPU alone just to get ~19.5% more

I know, I know, BUT when your 80+ year old Mother wants a better system than the AMD 940( nice system) she had you get her the most powerfull system you can and damn the price!
Oh yea, it's in a GB UD7 board too..

[Kondik]

I know, I know, BUT when your 80+ year old Mother wants a better system than the AMD 940( nice system) she had you get her the most powerfull system you can and damn the price!
Oh yea, it's in a GB UD7 board too..

Gramps, we get it we get it no need for the heroic defence.
SB i5's and i7's never aspired as Top of the line, but in most cases they are as fast as the fastest and as cheap as the cheapest [ pun intended ]

Of course in our bussines where we fold or crunch anything with more cores and any GPU with more Steams will be better.

But I think Intel showed that even with a cheap clown you can make a hell of a circus.

I had myself a i7 975 and wen't for if 2500K. I don't weep for the lost performance, I rejoice for the halved power consumption , much lower temps and the same gaming FPS

It's the time of the year when companies make CPUs with more cores and is that time of year when Movieman gets a raging urge to OC and crunch the Saint Silicium God out of it.

I wonder why we don't call Sandies the GT 8800's of CPU Industry.

[Movieman]

Gramps, we get it we get it no need for the heroic defence.
SB i5's and i7's never aspired as Top of the line, but in most cases they are as fast as the fastest and as cheap as the cheapest [ pun intended ]

Of course in our bussines where we fold or crunch anything with more cores and any GPU with more Steams will be better.

But I think Intel showed that even with a cheap clown you can make a hell of a circus.

I had myself a i7 975 and wen't for if 2500K. I don't weep for the lost performance, I rejoice for the halved power consumption , much lower temps and the same gaming FPS

It's the time of the year when companies make CPUs with more cores and is that time of year when Movieman gets a raging urge to OC and crunch the Saint Silicium God out of it.

I wonder why we don't call Sandies the GT 8800's of CPU Industry.

I hear ya and what am I using?

[phantomferrari]

What I want is a clarification on PCI-E 3.0, the chipset says slides say 8x 2.0 lanes, but says nothing other than how it splits the lanes coming from the CPU (16x on two slots, or 8x on four slots).

Which is nice to know but all previous slides say SB-E is has a PCI-E 3.0 controller with 40 lanes and Intel is being vague about the subject. Does LGA2011 have both, or is it fully 2.0 now, and if so what happened?

i also want to know this. the same thing is happening with ivy bridge. some slides show only pci-e 2.0 while others show pci-e 3.0

really hope it comes with pci-e 3.0 to help future proof the system a little bit. i have a dual core core 2 duo and a 4870 so i like to ride my system until the proverbial wheels fall off

[Tenknics]

Intel had a nice run with its annual tick-tock strategy since 2006. Unfortunately it looks like 2011 is the year that it finally falls off schedule. No Ivy Bridge in 2011 saddens me, but I must congratulate Intel on keeping up such an aggressive schedule for so long.

I disagree. Tick-tock is still 'pretty' on schedule. The only reason it got changed is because of the economy and the majority of all the major OEMs had a lot of penryn inventory to clear in spring/summer of '09. The whole 32nm shrink was pushed back 2+ quarters.

Each perspective tick/tock has 1 year life cycles. Sandy bridge has only been out 4 months..don't know why you were expecting Ivy in '11 unless you were looking at old roadmaps/speculating.

Ivy is very early and an aggressive ramp compared to previous ticks.

Conroe was out 1 year before Penryn, Nehalem 1 year after that. Auburndale and Havendale being cancelled, the economy and the Westmere/32nm delay was what threw things off and came out almost 2 years after Nehalem. Sandy-B put things back on track being 1 year after West.

Ivy should be a '12 part..late '11 at best.

If anything, 2011 is the year that put Intel back on track with Tick-Tock.

i also want to know this. the same thing is happening with ivy bridge. some slides show only pci-e 2.0 while others show pci-e 3.0

really hope it comes with pci-e 3.0 to help future proof the system a little bit. i have a dual core core 2 duo and a 4870 so i like to ride my system until the proverbial wheels fall off

I think a lot of the confusion is coming from the fact that the PCI-e 3.0 lanes are coming from the CPU themselves and not the PCH/chipset/whatever they're calling it now.

I don't know if this is on Sandy-E or IvyB, but from what I read the 3.0 lanes come from the CPU.

[Andrew LB]

I disagree. Tick-tock is still 'pretty' on schedule. The only reason it got changed is because of the economy and the majority of all the major OEMs had a lot of penryn inventory to clear in spring/summer of '09. The whole 32nm shrink was pushed back 2+ quarters.

I also have a feeling that Intel knows exactly what kind of performance AMD is going to bring to the table with Bulldozer, and is not very concerned about it.

For BD to even achieve equal performance to Intel's lineup, the chip would have to make a such a massive leap in power over their current chips that it would make the gains made by the Core 2 Duo seem very tame.

If BD was the monster like many people here claim, they would have stomped Intel with it by now. Long and delays typically result from the product not living up to expectations.

[zanzabar]

I also have a feeling that Intel knows exactly what kind of performance AMD is going to bring to the table with Bulldozer, and is not very concerned about it.

For BD to even achieve equal performance to Intel's lineup, the chip would have to make a such a massive leap in power over their current chips that it would make the gains made by the Core 2 Duo seem very tame.

If BD was the monster like many people here claim, they would have stomped Intel with it by now. Long and delays typically result from the product not living up to expectations.

when did BD get a delay, it was always h1 11 so they are still on track. and amd dose not care as much about desktops they want per watt servers and apu laptops/low end (aka were the profit is.) and the BD seams interesting with the multi threaded optimization but im guessing in single thread intel will not have anything to worry about but then u cannot oc the sub $300 chips now on intel so they should fear amd since the mass amount of system building on amd will move some people who dont clock to amd as thats waht gamers are using.

[flexcore]

I think BD is a going to be a good arch, but AMD is at the mercy of GloFo process tech. AMD need GloFo to get good perf/yield on 32nm.

[[XC] Synthetickiller]

What exactly is 2011 about?
Instead of 50x100 I can run 25x200
Maybe a few extra mhz out of the CPU
Memory tweaking
Extra CPU cores
Extra memory channel
Extra pciE lanes
Extra SATA slots

Boards will cost at least 300$ I guess
Cpus will cost at least that much as well...
None of this will notably affect performance for me... ill pass... :/

After Intel making everybody who went for a 1366 highend platform look like an idiot by releasing a mainstream CPU that bests anything available on their current highend platform for 1/3 the cost... I somehow feel reluctant to empty my pockets to buy into their next highend platform...

Going p55 1156 was the best choice I've ever made. $200 cpu that does 4ghz on air on a $100 mobo and does everything as well for real world use.

2011 doesn't see amazing unless there's another big CPU jump (doubt it). For guys running SLI/Tri-SLI, great you will have full 16x slots, but for guys that can't afford it, p67 is looking better and better from a perfromance standpoint.

I'd rather have a 2600K and a gtx580 than having to dump another $300+ in a system that will maybe increase performance 10% (just guestimating).

[Nikolasz]

I'd rather have a 2600K and a gtx580 than having to dump another $300+ in a system that will maybe increase performance 10% (just guestimating).

Yea, slow steps, too small ones, to pay alot to have 10%

My smart bruther atm as he still got
core 2 duo 6600
ddr2 800 2gb
8600gts

Only thing what he need is good graphics, 560, 580.

[Pillo-kun]

Yea, slow steps, too small ones, to pay alot to have 10%

My smart bruther atm as he still got
core 2 duo 6600
ddr2 800 2gb
8600gts

Only thing what he need is good graphics, 560, 580.

sorry but i had a e6600 and when i switched to a lousy athlon x4 i got smoother gameplay and of course duble fps. so you need a quad nowwadays.

[saint-francis]

And a SSD.

[Postmodum]

We're reaching a point that for gamers and users that really don't want to go that "ballistic" with benchmarking ... the mainstream platforms are delivering more than enough power and specs ...

[rge]

So if I upgrade to Sandy E at end of this year for $$$, then a couple months later at first of next year a mainstream IVY bridge (2500K equivalent) will be faster for 90+% tasks at a fraction of the cost? Strange marketing.