Socket 1366 obsolete, SMT a 'gimmick'

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the Tom's Hardware community: where nearly two million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
Status
Not open for further replies.



Really? When do you need such a thing randomizer because you always push more cores. You really don't need 4 cores either. You just like using them as I have said numerous times. :lol: Get with the times.
 

You are talking about 3~4fps less on average! In addition, the difference between x8 and x16 is not as large as you think even in benchmarks.

Difference between x8 and x16 in 3Dmark Vantage is very small especially in extreme preset which is expected to be the FUTURE standard:

image001.png



Difference between x8 and x16 in 2/3-way HD5870 CF is minimal(3 fps max here):

image006.png


image007.png


In conclusion, 1366 is not more future proved than 1156.
 



Well, Considering that there wasn't any kind of processor bottleneck. I would conclude that TODAY the difference is no big deal, but "future proved" for sure 1366 is more, since in the so caled future those bottlenecks will be larger. You can state that when this ocur all x58 mobos will be "obsolete", and might be a brand new stunning x32 for the early adopters. I'm building my x58 based system and consider myself far from an early adopter. By the way do you know how much "horsepower" you need to push "3 or 4" FPS more on a so demanding game like crysis? Add this to more "3 or 4" fps from processor and memory bottleneck, another 1% diference due to the quality of the mobo and in the end those "3 or 4" here and there make the diference if you have a system that can run with full eyecandy or not.
 


Just like the Q6600 was 'future proof', right? :lol:
 


I would rather have an i5 and have paid the same when they both game out - especially considering Q6600 time dual cores were better optimized.
 


You will be able to get something much better for much less when 1366 shows ???extreme advantage over 1156 in the future.

Hence, you are just wasting your money on something that shows no/minimal advantage today and will be extremely outdated when future proof occur.

Q6600 is a good example of future proved CPU. Q6600 showed no advantage over C2D until recent days and it was much more expensive than i5-750 when released while being significantly worse than i5-750 at the same time.

Upgrade route (P4 -> C2D -> i5-750) costs much less than upgrade route (P4 -> Q6600 -> i7-9xx)

AND

(P4 -> C2D -> i5-750) plays only slightly worse (if not on par with) than (P4 -> Q6600 -> i7-9xx).
Click to expand...

 


But in the end in current times a Q6600 is better off than a E6850. Hell ask people who paid $200-$300 for a E6850 how well GTA IV played with that CPU and I can gurantee they went out and bought a new CPU. I didn't because GTA IV only runs smoothly on 3+ cores.

The Q6600 was a futre proof CPU. Now its obsolete in terms of raw performance but from the time it came out, the Q6600 was the one to go with to make sure you don't have to buy a new CPU every 6 months to a year.
 

Upgrade route (P4 -> C2D E6850 -> i5-750) costs much less than upgrade route (P4 -> Q6600 -> i7-9xx)

AND

(P4 -> C2D E6850 -> i5-750) plays only slightly worse (if not on par with) than (P4 -> Q6600 -> i7-9xx).

 


Huh. I guess it depends when you bought it. I went P4 -> Q6600 and am waiting for i5/i7.

At the time when I bought my Q6600, I paid $250 and the E6850 was still hitting about $200-$250 as well. Now it does depend on the games too. Most of the more popular games ame out before the i5s did so if people bought a E6850 and wanted to play GTA IV for instance, they would have ahd a harder time and had to upgrade.

But it depends. I really don't need to upgrade my Q6600 right now but most people with even a 45nm Dual Core would be more pressed to upgrade to a tri/quad and I bet my Q6600 will be fine until the next gen of GPUs from ATI/nV. And thats when i5/i7s will be pretty cheap.
 


Who cares about GTA4? That was the only game that ran 'better' on a quad core and that was due to horrible coding. A majority of games and APPLICATION still used dual cores. The concept of 'future proofing' a computer is complete horse manure as I have stated before.
 


The P55 boards that are able to keep up are $325, I woulnd't exactly call that more futureproof, id call it more expensive.

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813188058&cm_re=EVGA_P55_Classified_200-_-13-188-058-_-Product
 

That board has 3 slots for high end gpu's. Your midrange p55 board with 2 slots giving you 8x 8x are in the 160.00 dollar range. I noticed the first two 890gx AMD boards are coming 8x 8x pci-e lanes ,from Asus, Gigabyte. Both around 150.00 dollars.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813128435&cm_re=gigabyte-_-13-128-435-_-Product

If someone is planning on needing 3 or more gpu's , cost has to be second to everything else.
 


I guess, unless you want to do SLI and add a good SATA3 RAID controller, USB 3.0 card, better sound card, etc to your system without running out of lanes, then by all means.

How about we try stepping away from gaming benchmarks when discussing workstation class computing vs mainstream and let's see some VMware benchmarks on both platforms?
 
Assembling my new i7 930 setup today.

Just wanted to say, the 1366 platform is far from obsolete. But that's not to say it wont be replaced in a few years.

I personally don't care much about this, as upgrading the MB when you get a new CPU is usually a good idea anywho (newer features, better support, technology revisions).

I agree 100% with the final paragraph in the article, but the '1366 is obsolete' isn't really the case, its just not necessary for most people, and you may call it a 'waste of money', but obsolete is not the word to use.

Also here (New Zealand) the i5 750 + MB with NF200 works out at close enough to the same cost as an i7 930 + X58 setup anyway. So for me I figured I'd might as well just go with the enthusiast platform instead of mainstream (which was another preference of mine, to get an Intel X chipset). Also here often stock is old, so still wouldn't be sure if I was getting a bad Foxconn socket, or maybe a board model that couldn't provide enough power for overclocking? Issues that I haven't heard of in the 1366 world.
 

Don't lie! I am in NZ too.

Cheapest i5-750 $328.42

Cheapest i7-930 $492.58

The difference in CPU price alone is $164.16. Hence, it is impossible for 1366 to be on the same cost as 1156 unless you are comparing crappy X58 MB + highest end P55 MB.
 
You are paying $347.91 more for minimal performance gain and P55 owners can get a much better GFX with this extra:

Anandtech benchmark review: x58 vs P55


Difference between x8 and x16 in 3Dmark Vantage is very small especially in extreme preset which is expected to be the FUTURE standard:
image001.png



Difference between x8 and x16 in 2/3-way HD5870 CF is minimal(3 fps max here):
image006.png

image007.png

 


Thats the wrong mobo. He would have had to get the GA-P55A-UD6 for SLI support since the GA-P55A-UD5P does not have the N200 chip for SLI support.

In the US the UD5P is $209.99 and the UD6 is $249.99. I would have to look up the NZ prices for that:

http://www.computerstore.co.nz/motherboards.aspx#motherboards-intel-socket-1156

The P55-UD6 is $333.76 NZ and the x58 UD3R is $312.48 and still supports SLI since it has the X58 chipset:

http://www.computerstore.co.nz/GA-EX58-UD3R.aspx

http://www.computerstore.co.nz/GA-P55-UD6.aspx

The X58-UD5 is $402.08 but the biggest advantage is the better Voltage regulators and ability to do 3x CF or SLI like the P55 can but the P55 would have a lower PCIe 2.0 setting for 3 way CF/SLI while the X58 wont in the end which may matter in future cards.

So yours are a tad underpriced P55 wise and over priced X58 wise.

I do agree that the difference between x8 and x16 is very minimal but in the future it may make a difference. But by then PCIe 3.0 will hit and be 2x faster bandwidth than PCIe 2.0 and people will upgrade to that when PCIe 2.0s x16 wont be fully utilized and PCIe 3.0 x8 will be sufficient.
 
@jimmysmitty:

The P55-UD6 is $333.76 NZ and the x58 UD3R is $312.48
Click to expand...
Comparing low end UD3R with highest end UD6? WT.....

source: www.pricespy.co.nz
P55-UD3R: $212.57
X58-UD3R: $312.71 = $212.57 + $100.14

Besides, I would think LGA1366 Enthusiasts are poor if they could only afford low end MB like UD3R. In addition, low end X58 does NOT support 3-way CF/SLI.

The X58-UD5 is $402.08 but the biggest advantage is the better Voltage regulators and ability to do 3x CF or SLI like the P55 can but the P55 would have a lower PCIe 2.0 setting for 3 way CF/SLI while the X58 wont in the end which may matter in future cards.

So yours are a tad underpriced P55 wise and over priced X58 wise.
Click to expand...
Even high end X58, such as P6TD Deluxe, does not support 3-way CF/SLI. Only the immensely expensive highest end X58 do which will cost much more than P55. Hence, it's you underpricing X58 instead me underpricing P55

OK. Let's forget about N200 and LOOK AT NORMAL P55.

The difference between x8 and x16 is still minimal and 2-way CF gives you much less performance gain than 2 times.
Hence, the difference between x8 and x16 in 2-way CF will be minimal too.

Proof?
source: http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/p55-pci-express-scaling,2517.html
Test configuration(i7-860/i7-920 + 3xHD5870):
(1. Following charts show that the difference between two 8x and two 16x HD5870 CF is minimal.
2. Yes, X58 supports 3-way which P55 don't. However, there is almost no LGA1366 owner can afford 2X HD5870/GTX295, let alone 3.)

image016.png


image017.png


Note: Two 8x is merely 4.8fps less than two 16x in current standard resolution, 1920x1200. In addition, two P55 8x even beat two X58 16x by 1.9fps under future standard 2560x1600.
image019.png


Note: Two 8x is merely 4fps/1fps less than two 16x in "current / future" standard resolution, "1920x1200 / 2560x1600".
image023.png


I do agree that the difference between x8 and x16 is very minimal but in the future it may make a difference.
Click to expand...
X58 will be extremely outdated and weak by the time the x8 is saturated by all high-end gfx which is what 99% of us can't afford.
 
In conclusion, LGA1366 is a total waste IMO.

Reasons:
1. 99.99% of the LGA1366 owners can't afford the future proof, the $999USD Gulftown.
2. 99.99% of the LGA1366 owners can't afford 2 high end gfx to take the advantage of two 16x
3. LGA1366 will be extremely outdated and weak by the time 8x is saturated by gfx.
 
^It wasn't to say the N200 was important except the guy you were replying to wanted SLI as an option and only the UD6 has it in the P55. And yes I was comparing the UD3R to the UD6 because in essence, that 3 way GPU setup the P55 has is still lower end than the UD3R has. That will make a difference in later GPUs.

We have no idea what Intel has planned for LGA 1366. They could push their 22nm 8 cores to it. Until then we wont know. Will they have newer mbos such as the X68 that will have newer features? Yes. But that means LGA 1156 will also get a P65 with newer features.

Each one has plus and minuses. The UD3R is comparable to the UD6 in many ways. One less PCIe 2.0 slot but the UD3R still will have overall more PCIe bandwidth as well as a third channel for more system memory.

The biggest overall benefit of X58 is the SLI on chipset support. It gives more options right away without a extra chip that could hinder performance. It also has the 6 cores to look forward to. I am sure there will be a mid and low end version after the Extreme version whil LGA 1156 has no plans for it. LGA 1366 will also probably see a 8 core variant.

BTW, the majority of people who buy LGA 1366 are not some poor saps. Most buy it because they have the extra money. Its just like the people who bought Quad FX when AMD was in their prime or the QX based Core 2s.

Just to note, I think either platform is a great option. Core i5 or i7. For those who have and want to spend the extra cash for a bit better everything, X58 and Core i7. For those who want to save a bit there is Core i5 and P55.

In the end its all about what you can spend and what you want. For some, they have to go with a AMD system because that fits their budget.
 
My last post would be my reply to your future proof and 1366 advantage opinion.

In conclusion, LGA1366 is a total waste IMO.

Reasons:
1. 99.99% of the LGA1366 owners can't afford the future proof, the $999USD Gulftown.
2. 99.99% of the LGA1366 owners can't afford 2 "high end" gfx to take the advantage of two 16x
3. LGA1366 will be extremely outdated and weak by the time 8x is saturated by gfx.
Click to expand...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom