- Joined
- Jan 27, 2009
- Location
- Gurnee, IL
Any word on the socket 1366 replacement? Specifically 6-core cpus. Want to know if I should upgrade to the 980X or wait a bit. (Currently running 920 at 3.8GHz stable).
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Leaked review of Sandy Bridge....
- Thread starter Wega!
- Start date
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2002
Anything extra running or even idle will generate heat. That's the main reason I'd prefer any embedded graphics function it to be turned off or non-existent.
A dual socket 1366 hex core system looks pretty good to me right now. By the time I can afford the build there should be some decent benching/use data on Sandy Bridge systems to see if there is any cost/performance advantage over a dual 1366 build.
You can always wait until the next new thing comes out, but then there will always be a still newer thing on the horizon to wait even longer for.
A dual socket 1366 hex core system looks pretty good to me right now. By the time I can afford the build there should be some decent benching/use data on Sandy Bridge systems to see if there is any cost/performance advantage over a dual 1366 build.
You can always wait until the next new thing comes out, but then there will always be a still newer thing on the horizon to wait even longer for.
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2010
- Location
- Maryland
Since they come already at 3.5ghz area and they are all 32nm, it seems that doing 4.5ghz on air should be easy if those specs hold true. And apart from the IGP, what is so revolutionary about Sandy Bridge? When X58 came out that was a complete overhaul in memory, graphics and Hyper Threading. Seems like AMD's Bull Dozer will be more impressive.
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Location
- Michigan
On XS, I asked if the 2500K would be better than a i7 860 (considering the 2500K will be right around $200, and right now you can buy i7 860 on forums for $200), and here's one of the responses I got.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4666844&postcount=109
And one of the guys in the thread already bought a retail chip.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4665104&postcount=40
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4666844&postcount=109
And one of the guys in the thread already bought a retail chip.
http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/showpost.php?p=4665104&postcount=40
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2008
Interesting. One guy saying that the limit is different on every CPU. I know I saw a screenshot of a SB CPU using a 57x multiplier, but his is only 47x max. If the max multipliers are that low, what's the point in benching them?
EDIT: It was a 2600K using the 57x multiplier, whereas in that XS link it's a 2500K.
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Location
- St. Paul, MN
Audioaficionado said:
As far as I know all Sandy Bridge chips will have IGP... so you'll be out of luck on that one. Maybe they'll release some down the road without IGP
Might be a while. My uderstanding is Sandy Bridge IGP is DX10.x and 12 EU's, while Ivy Bridge plans are to go to DX11 and 24 EU's.
I've can't find anything pointing to non-IGP chips, desktop or mobile, before Socket R (LGA2011).
BigTerminator said:
Might be something in here you haven't seen or read?
*
Last edited:
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2005
- Location
- Michigan
Yes, the difference being the 2600K has HT, and the 2500K is a straight up quad-core. Also the final retail stepping is 7, while most of the ES I saw were 6 (D1). So they may have changed it yet again from the ES to the retail chips. I doubt Intel would change the max multi for each batch.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2002
- Joined
- Oct 31, 2009
- Location
- California
Dont know if you guys have seen it, but someone leaked it:
http://www.hardwareonline.dk/nyheder.aspx?nid=10600
I know most of you dont get the text, but the graphs speak for them selfs.
Apparently Intel is also locking the clock generator, as it is build into the chip, leaving no way of overclokcing the chip, as the multiplier is locked as well. No BCLK clocking.
So with sandy we HAVE to buy the "OC" version of the chip, that is marked with a "k" at the end, to be able to overclock at all.
Try this: http://translate.google.com/transla...heder.aspx?nid=10600&sl=da&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8
Google Translate isn't exactly perfect, but it is understandable.
x509
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2003
- Location
- St. Paul, MN
Yea, it would seem AMD has an edge in that respect since they've designed there AM3+ boards to accept AM3 chips. But, it's just a matter of time before socket changes are needed and it's always a tough pill to swallow. Personally, I'm not so bothered by the socket change as much as how there are two lines running concurrently (1156 & 1366), which are both being replaced (1155 & 2011(unconfirmed)). Really makes upgrading a hassle.
- Joined
- Apr 29, 2002
I'd only be interested in the socket 2011 systems. Otherwise I'll go with a dual socket 1366 w/hexcore CPUs.
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2005
- Location
- Camarillo, CA!
... i seem to remember not long ago.... Amd, socket A, 754, then 939 in a VERY short time... then AM2, AM2+ and AM3....
Intel had 775 for what... 5-6 yrs? 1336 and 1156 for 1.5-2 yrs now?
i dont see it as all that bad that intel needs to change sockets... although 1156 to 1155 coulda probably been forgon, i see their reasoning.
Regardless... those graphs make me feel good about my cheap i5 760 build... i had thought bout waiting till sandy bridge came out but just couldnt pass up the i5 760 and mobo i got... ad similar performance clock to clock, at MUCH less in price im fine with that haha.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2004
Let's try again. First off, you've missed 423 and 478.
Pentium IV - 423/478/775 - three sockets, one CPU
Duron/Athlon/Athlon (X/M)P - A - one socket, five CPUs
Core/Core 2 - 775 - one socket, two CPUs
Sempron/Athlon 64 - 754/939 - two sockets, two CPUs
i3/i5/i7 - 1156/1366 - two sockets, three CPUs
Athlon 64/Phenom - AM2(+)/AM3 - technically two sockets, but maybe only counts as 1.5, because AM3 CPU will run in AM2(+) socket, 2 CPUs
Intel total - 6 sockets, 6 CPUs
AMD total - 4 sockets, 8 CPUs
Feel free to correct me, I'm sure I missed something.
Back on topic, what task other than gaming needs a strong FPU? We have GPUs for those annoying non-integer numbers, and they're not often needed for anything but gaming. Also, even outside of gaming, GPU makers have been doing it better for longer and likely can produce better performance for it than Intel will be able to any time soon (Tesla, FireStream).
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2002
but the durons, athlons and axp's were pretty much all the same architecture, weren't they?
with the p4's, there was willamets on 423 and 478, northwoods on 478, gallatins on 478, presscots on 478/775, and cedarmills on 775. also, if you are counting durons, you had better count all the celeron revisions as well.
the 'core' you speak of doesn't exist. there was just core2duo. unless you mean the pentium m -> core solo...those are mobile cpus.
anyways, both companies have had lots and lots of sockets. both have had long lived sockets and short lived sockets. that doesn't make anyone better than anyone else.
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2004
anyways, both companies have had lots and lots of sockets. both have had long lived sockets and short lived sockets. that doesn't make anyone better than anyone else.
That was my point
