CPU Are you waiting for LGA2011? Need your feedback on budget.

Lifespan? I built this rig I'm using now in February 2009. There's still so few machines I could build that would be faster I haven't bothered. This is why I'm desperate to get my hands on LGA2011. Not because I need it, but because I've not had my rig building fix for over 2 years.

X58 was too expensive for mainstream.. hence SB.. that's the main reason they did that. I agree that the 1156, 1155 thing was a little annoying, but overall, this X58 rig has been the longest lasting rig I've ever had in over 20 years of computing. It can still hold it's own against anything anyone in this thread could throw at it. So yeah... it's annoying that intel release new sockets, but they mainly do that for the mainstream retail crowd. The length of time between high end enthusiast sockets is much longer. IMO you should always go for the high end chipsets. They are replaced less often, and you won't really need to replace the CPU anyway. Realistically, how much would I gain if I replaced this i7 920 with a 6 core Gulftown chip? Certainly not enough to warrant the cost, that's for sure, but if I wanted to squeeze some more life from this rig, I could wait for LGA2011 to be released, and then grab a gulftown at a knock down price.. making last even longer.

All in all.. stay away from the consumer products and you always have had long life in intel sockets. Besides, I don't think it's a fair accusation, when we had 775 which lasted from 2004 until pretty much now. LGA1366 was launched in 2008 and is still the most powerful platform for high end PCs. What do you want, architecture to have a 10 year lifespan? How would we make progress then?

Like I said.. avoid the consumer/mid range architecture and go high end.. you'll get far more use and value for money long term. This is why 2011 gets my vote, and why I think it's worth paying a premium for high end motherboards and CPUs.

Just my 2p.

 

RE: 775 - It might have been one socket, but the compatibility changed constantly through its life.

You couldn't use the first dual core parts on some chipsets previous to 955X iirc, due to the change in VRM requirement iirc (or BIOS).

You couldn't use the first Core 2 parts on some 975X motherboards (similar issue to above), which made a bit of a minefield.

DDR to DDR2 transition went through 925X and 915P, which made compatibility awkward.

Constant bus increments which meant the fastest parts couldn't use older boards at their required frequency.

Rose tinted glasses my friends

Pook - Also think what core changes have there been in the last 3 years? We've had USB 3 and SATA 6Gbps, but only really in the last 12 months have they become considerably more relevant. Soon we'll have native USB 3, require many SATA 6Gbps as SSD performance has taken off and PCI-E 3 is en-route. And that's not including Thunderbolt and whatever else might change in the next 24 months after that (PCI-E SATA?).

 

I am still very satisfied with the X58 (LGA1366) and H55 (LGA1156) hardware that I am running. Yes, I would love to go for a faster H67 (LGA1155) Sandy Bridge chip in one of my machines, but there wouldn't be much point because despite being satisfied with what I've got, a new build is on the cards for the start of the year, and I want to wait for LGA2011 so that I end up with a machine that's going to last me as long as, say, my X58 i7 rig has. Like Pookeyhead, I built it in early 2009 and going from a C2Quad to an i7 920 @ 4GHz was impressive. Then I dropped a 930 in it when those came out and that ran at 4GHz too. Right now I've got a 980x in it from one of my currently out of commission folding rigs, but it's lacking half it's RAM and only has 6GB of the usual 12GB. On an unrelated note, it also doesn't have the usual SSD boot disk in it (is gone for RMA) so for those couple of reasons it feels a little slow these days, but when I get my RAM back from the rig I borrowed it ro run and get the SSD back in there, it'll be fine until at least the start of next year.

 

I suppose. My point still stands, which was really.. you CAN build a high end rig, and have it last years and still have no great need to upgrade.

 

I do totally agree! I'm still running the same 940 - at stock - I was using in 2008.

While the CPU may still be enough, I'm not entirely sure such a 3 year luxury will happen again on motherboard technologies. I sure hope not. I like to get paiiiiid mofo.

 

I got about 2,1/2 years out of my old P4 before the urge to upgrade got me and then I went to a E2160 and then it all got silly with quads arriving then i7 and in between another AMD rig. Now I'm geared up for Bulldozer but if thats no good I'll have a good look at LGA 2011, I think after that I'll slow down.

 

Buyer's market dude

 

No surprise in prices

Source says that pricing will be similar to previous gen processors when they came out...

Core i7 3960X...USD999
>replace Core i7 980X

Core i7 3930K...USD583
>replace Core i7 980

Core i7 3820.....USD294
>replace lower end core i7s
>cheaper than core i7 2600K
>how will it perform?

vr-zone source...
http://vr-zone.com/articles/intel-s-sandy-bridge-e-priced-don-t-expect-any-surprises/13298.html

 

I like to be on the more down slope of tech. Its cheap, its still damn fast and overall it works very well. If I could afford to go cutting edge, I would. But I simply cant afford it.

 

will have to call my bank manager first for mortgage. i know what Intel's sales practices are like and it's $$$ they know bulldozer dose not have a chance in hell with ivy bridge what the consumer wants they have to pay over the odd's for. so we will all need to dig deep into our wallets when the time come's im staying with my 1090t...

 

+1

I've been using my x58 / 965EX setup since it launched in 09, it's the longest I've ever had a motherboard / CPU combo..

Even with LGA2011 on the horizon, I'm certain theres no real need to shift platform (that's not to say I won't )

Point is, for whatever reason you think might be the root cause, progress has slowed right down.
I don't understand what all these people saying "bring back 775 days" are babbling on about.
LGA1366 has been around for 3 years. That's a hell of a long time in computing terms.

Stop whinging...

 

this is what Intel is selling as a cooler for the LGA 2011 chips...

the difference between this and the stock LGA 1366 cooler is...

 

so the difference is not alot really? there both pants in my opinion, I almost can't see why intel would bother with such high end chips, I mean I would actually poke someone in the eye if they purchased any of those chips and then used the intel stock cooler.

 

Thats the same cooler as the intel gulftown cpus which in fairness is actually a reasonably good cooler.

 

Problem for most is , it's not technology that's slowed down but the development of software that has slowed down.

How many games use 4 cores and hyperthreading ( pretty small list )
How many games use 6 cores and hyperthreading ( 0 )
How much software can even max a 6 core System that is used by the general public ( picture and video editing main 2, can't think of much else.)

Most people upgrade every year because they set aside tiny unworkable budgets and compromise massively on parts they later say heh we needed that

First thing to get reduced is gpu or ssd both make a huge dif to how your pc runs.

Granted there's serial upgraders but they are rare and getting rarer, you ask around your friends and unless there big pc gamers the best pc in there house will probably some laptop the missus uses for bingo games, in my own house my parents get alot of my old stuff so they have a pc that's 3-4 times more powerful than they are likely to ever need.

 

True, but I'd say that rather than software dev slowed down, most of the innovation is less and less performance related nowadays.

It's a testament that something like Portal 2, widely acclaimed game, is not particularly resource intensive. The bottle neck in game development is not performance, but originality, good story writing, gameplay etc. There is also a case to be made that having to share games with (now) underpowered consoles is forcing games to downsize their requirements.

In the applications world it's even more drastic. All the innovation is on online/phone apps. Office 2010 doesn't require more resources than, say, Office 2003. And we can run 1080p movies on our phones now. Yeah, there is photo/video editing but who really does that regularly? It's more obvious for laptops now, the marketing/selling point is not performance anymore, it's slimness, battery life, ergonomics, etc. That's why netbooks became popular, they are "powerful enough", so now we can concentrate on size and cost.


It's all cyclical of course. When a new generation of technology start requiring more power then the performance arms race will restart. Dunno, maybe the next generation of games graphics with movie level real-time rendering, Virtual reality helmets, or perhaps some crazy artificial intelligence engines...

 

I have two 920's at different frequencies and have no plans to upgrade for gaming
I built a fairly good i7 SB machine in the office that runs almost silent mind you. which is a consideration
But ear phones on .. cancels out that issue

 

think of all the people who have just upgraded to sandy bridge then ivy bridge come's along then sandy bridge look's like a big joke

 

the OC levels that are available on the LGA 2011 is crazy...

source: http://vr-zone.com/articles/more-sandy-bridge-e-overclocking-details-come-to-light/13639.html

 

I'm waiting for Ivybridge to come out before I upgrade Mobo/ CPU/ GPU/ RAM.
No exceptions.
Well.
As long as nothing dies between now and IB.