1155, 1156, 1366 it's getting deep....

11 replies [Last post]
Werewolf486
Offline
Joined: 05/29/2009
Posts: 21

So I gotta ask your opinion and explanation on this. 1366, 1156, 1155(new?) so what's the differences, where are the benefits of one over the other, and what is the big idea of 1155 when 1156 has been out? I'm guessing 1156 processes with not fit the 1155 and viceversa right so what's the big benefit here ....

Just when I had everything simple and easy now we have 1155....

As always Rodney we are glad to have you around for these trying issues that affect us more than global warming and Barack Obama at the Super Bowl!

hnkftalnot
Offline
Joined: 10/14/2010
Posts: 262

1156 and 1366 were for the first generation Core i, 1156 for the midrange CPUs and 1366 for the high end CPUs.

Now there's the second generation Core i, where 1155 goes with Sandy Bridge (midrange) and supports on-chip graphics and some other changes in the platform. For the high end there will be a successor to 1366 which will be 2011 or something?

Why they changed the slots? They say it's needed for the new features... mostly platform-layout changes in my opinion, so they also need a new chipset (which is on the motherboard) to communicate with. But I'm just guessing the biggest benefit is more money because everyone has to buy a new board as well.

I bet someone could explain in a more detailed and Intel friendly way why this is needed, but I'm not liking it one bit. AMD seems to try to maintain a slot, or at least make it a bit compatible over generations when possible.

elkmanwsu
elkmanwsu's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/07/2007
Posts: 64

When Intel and AMD release a new micro-architecture it is usually completely necessary to change the slot...they wouldn't want to limit themselves to what they had in the previous generation so someone can save 150 bucks, especially when you're talking about newly added features (ex. on-die support for graphics, enhanced pci-e lanes, etc...)

I think anyone that has a core i7 or upper-end core i5 is wasting their money if they are upgrading their computers with every slot release. There really there isn't much of a point to upgrade from a core i7-1366 to a core i7-2011 processor, so really the only people the socket change should effect is those who have Core 2 Duo or Quad machines. Those are the people who more than likely still using the DDR2 memory standard, don't have SATA 6gb/s support, (like myself) and are holding off on their upgrades until the next generation (for more cores, DDR3 standard, and other perks like SATA III, and USB 3.0)

Motherboard: ASUS P5N-D
Processor: E8500 @ Stock
Memory: 2x2GB Corsair XMS2 DHX
Videocard: Radeon 4870 X2

Werewolf486
Offline
Joined: 05/29/2009
Posts: 21

Ok with that knowledge let me ask this bombshell. If you're running a 775 stock not OC'd how much of a performance gain do you get if you build a 1156/1366 and run it stock? Negligible?

I currently have a E8500 on an Asus Rampage Extreme with dual Asus Dark Knights 4870's, 8GB OCZ Reaper, 1220w Kingwin Psu, dual 80GB Velociraptors (Raid 0) and dual 750gb WD (Raid 1). I'm buying a Q9550S this week as I start my final upgrades to this rig. Eventually it'll have a 24" Asus monitor (LED) and be running Windows 7 Ultimate 64 bit and a Plextor BlueRay. I may OC it down the road, but only if I see major loss of performance with new games. Then I will likey pass it on to my oldest (8) like I did with my 478 rig which I gave him when he was 5 or 6 (now getting top scores in his Skills lab on Apples).

Thanks everyone!

hnkftalnot
Offline
Joined: 10/14/2010
Posts: 262

Core i is more powerful than Core2 overall, but real performance gain? I don't think one would really notice going from 775 to the 1156 equivalent (dualcore to dualcore for example), IMO it's more like when you build a new system you should look at the newest architecture. In that way I don't think it's an upgrade, just today's tech. Although hyperthreading is really nice on some of the Core i CPUs, but that wouldn't count as an equivalent CPU.

Your system is still very powerful I think, and a Q9550 would really make it complete. I wouldn't hurry for new sockets with such a system. Have fun overclocking it, it may help to squeeze the max out of that Crossfire setup :).

Werewolf486
Offline
Joined: 05/29/2009
Posts: 21

Thanks for the help. I'm trying to source a QX9650 now, problem is new is WAY high and I'm not to sure about a used cpu for $300. What do you think?

BTW When I build my first rig it was on 478 Abit IC7-Max3, 3.0e/ht, 750w Aero PSU, eVGA 5700le gpu (8 year old has it now) and 775 just came out. I never build on the newest stuff and the Sandy bridge issue would be why. I can't afford to build it and have it be a faulty piece if you know what I mean.

elkmanwsu
elkmanwsu's picture
Offline
Joined: 03/07/2007
Posts: 64

Werewolf, are you planning on using this machine for a long time to come and for CPU intensive tasks like 3D rendering? Because if so, then I guess I can see justifying the price of a Q9550s (even more so if you sell the E8500 to make up some of the price)...but if you are just upgrading for gaming (even at 1080p), then it is not going to do you much good...maybe a few extra FPS here and there.

It sounds like you have a rig that can play any game you throw at it, I am willing to bet you can play 1920x1080 on most games currently available. maybe you should invest in that Asus LED display instead of upgrading your processor.

hnkftalnot
Offline
Joined: 10/14/2010
Posts: 262

I kinda have to disagree and agree with elkmanwsu.
Disagree: the E8500 is by far the weakest part of the system (makes it a bit unbalanced) and most games nowadays benefit from quadcores over dualcores. Also a the E8500 is probably bottlenecking the Crossfire setup.
Agree: For just gaming, the benefit may not justify a $300 upgrade and at stock speeds, it depends on the game how much of an improvement you will see.

But why are you looking at an QX CPU? Those are the extreme editions with the only benefit being the unlocked multipliers, aren't they? Intel always charges a bunch for those, and then 300 dollars isn't that much.. but why do you want the extreme edition? Newegg has the Q9550 for $280: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819115041 and although the multi is locked you can still overclock those as well, just with a bit more hassle.

When it's just for gaming and not for particularly multithreaded apps like rendering, overclocking your E8500 will improve a lot, especially to get the most out of your Crossfire setup. But I still think a quadcore would suit your current build better and you can overclock that one as well of course.

Werewolf486
Offline
Joined: 05/29/2009
Posts: 21

Well to be honest I figured by now prices on the QX would have come down enough to justify it, but I'm really not sure about buying a used one for $300 and $700 for a new one is out of the question. I will likely go with the Q9550S just to drop with watts and temp instead of the q9550. I Know the biggest bottleneck is the E8500 I have.

The truly ironic thing is that we spend more time playing UT2004 on the weekends then I do anything else the rest of the week. Although I spend a fair amount of time playing MWLL (Mech Warrior Living Legends). So I have WAY more computer than I need for UT and not enough for MWLL. I was also REALLY playing with the idea of Joining Iracing.

hnkftalnot
Offline
Joined: 10/14/2010
Posts: 262

Well if you don't intend to overclock it there's no reason to get the extreme edition, as far as I know the unlocked multi is the only benefit and Intel tends to charge way too much for that. Aside from ease of overclocking the Q9550 or S will be exactly the same for you. As for used CPUs (or GPUs for that matter), there can't be much wrong with it unlike used PSUs that wear off much faster. Only thing is that if the CPU has been extremely overclocked the lifespan has decreased, but even then we're only talking about a few years off from about 10+ years of normal use. So even if it doesn't matter much, my only concern would be extreme overclocking when buying a used CPU.

But I guess new technologies are more like a hobby to you than something you really need ;). At least to me it is, although I'm still on a Deneb dualcore with 790 chipset.. At this point I don't need any more to be honest. I can see your need for running Crysis based games, so you definitely need a quadcore but I wouldn't spend too much on it now, when 775 is disappearing and used CPUs get thrown out like dirty handkerchiefs.

We're all watching it, but for now I think there's no platform exciting enough to make the jump.. Let's see how Bulldozer performs, or the supposed high-end socket from Intel..

Iracing looks cool, might try it myself :)

Werewolf486
Offline
Joined: 05/29/2009
Posts: 21

I don't intend to OC it for a while I want it to last a few years then I will OC it to keep pace with performance of other stock running PC's. I use my PC for gaming, email, internet, some web design, some work stuff.

I got the Q9550S and Sunday I start the revamp of my rig with that cpu and 7 Pro 64 bit. I've copied a ton of stuff from my current set up onto my external so I can put it back when I get done with the new OS. I know I've forgotten something though... I'm loading my OS onto my 2x80gb Velociraptors in Raid 0 and 2xWD 750GB blues in Raid 1 for Programs and storage, as I have them now. I wish there was an easier way to go from 32 bit windows 7 pro to 64 bit windows 7 pro, like a switch at the back of my computer!

massau
Offline
Joined: 04/05/2010
Posts: 236

eum there is no need for bouth if you have more than 3.5 gigs of ram than you need 64bit otherwise stay whit 32 bit but fo the rest it doesn't make that much of a difference (only higer preformance is some aplications)