• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Socket 2011 extreme processors only?

Predicament said:
I don't see quadchannel memory in shops...
Would I expect to see it by the time these boards are released?
Click to expand...

Its 4 sticks of normal memory, its nothing special, its also 8-11 months away at this point. Though there will be over priced "quad channel memory packs" by then, which will contain 4 sticks of normal memory and be no better than 2 packs of dual channel memory.

Anyway, what they are saying about $999 and above processors I think they are more saying is, if you want an upgrade to CURRENT top end hex core i7's, the only new options will be the even higher hexcore i7's, IE they released a i7 990x, which is the only upgrade from a 980x and costs you $999 +.

The Sandy Ex platform end of year should have both hex and octo cores. I'd expect the octo cores to have around the same top end pricing as current hex cores, maybe a touch more, but hex cores should move from that $999 type pricing to a LOT lower.

THe highest quad core Sandybridge is what, $316, we'll probably see hexcores at around $400-700 and the new octo cores from $800-1000. So a hexcore won't be disgustingly expensive. The mobo's will be expensive though, quad channel memory, ouch, thats a lot of traces, signalling issues, added layers required(maybe not that bad as it looks likely they'll go two channels either side of the cpu socket on the mobo which makes it a little easier).

This is largely why AMD could have a great year, octo cores aimed at mainstream pricing. Top end AMD octo's will be around quad core Sandybridge pricing, probably $250-400 for various octo cores, with quad versions coming in at, dunno, maybe £125-250. Cheaper mobo's aswell as AMD ones are and still dual channel(as far as we know). Meaning AMD should pretty much spank Intel in the midrange/low end, in both actual performance, and performance/price ratio.


We'll have to wait till Haswell for midrange 8 core chips from Intel. Ivy bridge is Q1 next year, basically 22nm shrinks of Sandybridge chips, and end of 2012 will be 22nm new architecture chips with 8 cores finally hitting mainstream for Intel, though they should be pretty damn tasty performance.
 
socket 2011 will probably just mean exactly what socket 1366 means now - no sub £200 processors. There will probably be the £250 ish cpu like the 950 or the 920 was when 1366 started, then 1 or more vastly more expensive ones like the 940/970 and then an "extreme" £1000 one. im hoping 2011 will all be overclockable also.
 
2011 SB does seem way more expensive for most people. I am also interested in it's performance against 1155SB. If it's not huge then 1155 is the best bang for buck, but I get the feeling that 2011 SB octo cores processors will destroy 1155 SB quad processors. It's going to be just like the case of dual vs quad right now.
 
WingZero30 said:
but I get the feeling that 2011 SB octo cores processors will destroy 1155 SB quad processors. It's going to be just like the case of dual vs quad right now.
Click to expand...

Not quite.

We have a lot of apps/games now that can make use of quad cores or quad threads (i3's doing pretty well etc 2 cores + hyperthreading) but nothing really optimized for 4 threads+ apart from rendering and video conversion. So I dont expect the 2011 octo's to "destroy" 1155 SB's just yet, except for a handful of benchmarks - think when the first core 2 quads came out, nothing even touched the extra cores and the increased bandwidth of quad channel ddr? name me anything apart from real time graphics rendering that needs more than 21Gb/s bandwidth provided by a dual channel SB?

When mainstream apps and games catch up needing 5 cores+ a SB i7 already is able to handle 8 threads (ok not as good as a true 8 core, but still think current i3 performance in the quad core world...)

...is it good practice for mainstream software developers to produce code optimized for 5% of its target market (5%=probable 8 core systems in 2011/2012)

(btw games industry is worth more than the film and music industries put together it just isnt good business sense - pls check it out before flaming me for that statement, i assure you its true)
 
Last edited:
drunkenmaster said:
This is largely why AMD could have a great year, octo cores aimed at mainstream pricing. Top end AMD octo's will be around quad core Sandybridge pricing, probably $250-400 for various octo cores, with quad versions coming in at, dunno, maybe £125-250. Cheaper mobo's aswell as AMD ones are and still dual channel(as far as we know). Meaning AMD should pretty much spank Intel in the midrange/low end, in both actual performance, and performance/price ratio.
Click to expand...

As much as i would like to see AMD wipe the floor with bulldozer, i cant help but think this sounds like a similar strategy to thuban - more cores at bargain basement prices. Whilst they are pretty decent chips, its hardly been a revelation to the market - nearly everyone (ie not intense multithreaders) can get better performance out of a quad i7
 
Seems like it's going to be expensive. It looks like the enthusiast platform will have 4/6/8 cores, so I doubt we'd see a sub £400 hex core on release if Intel's previous pricing is anything to go by :(
 
Socket 2011 and Intel's high end Sandy Bridge processors are what i`m waiting on before upgrading from Socket 1366.

If Intel's high end Sandybridge processors have a very good decent performance gap compared to the i7 980X and
overclockes like mad, then this will probably be my next upgrade early next year.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom