1 2 Previous Next 20 Replies Latest reply: Nov 23, 2011 9:04 PM by Milasi RSS

DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?

bofors Community Member
Currently Being Moderated

Intel has already told me that the DX58SO has not been "officially" discontinued yet, but the board is disappearing from the channel.

 

NewEgg has deactivated the DX58SO, most Fry's stores (west coast) no longer carry it and ZipZoomFly, TigerDirect and Directron are out of DX58SO stock.

 

What is going on?  It is hard to believe that Intel is not going to have a consumer-level, socket-1366 board for Core i7/i9 in its desktop line up.

 

Has Intel announced or previewed an x58 successor to the DX58SO yet? 

  • 1. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    bofors Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    Since nobody here seems to have any answer to my question, I am going to post my working theory:

     

    1.) Intel has a DX58SO replacement, socket 1366 board in development and will release it with the Core i9 ("Gulftown," 6 core) early next year.

     

    2.) Intel did not make enough DX58SO stock before shutting down production and has now run out.

  • 2. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    hotzelj Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    Newegg, TigerDirect, and ZipZoomFly are all showing active in-stock inventory.

  • 3. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    bofors Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    hotzelj wrote:

     

    Newegg, TigerDirect, and ZipZoomFly are all showing active in-stock inventory.

     

    I see you are correct.  NewEgg has reactivated the part (after telling me personally it was discontinued) and even has "open box' DX58SO's available again (which must be refurbish parts from Intel.).

     

    I guess this was simply a production or delivery problem, but I suppose I should check to see if a new revision of the DX58SO has now been released too.

     

    Thanks for informing me.

  • 4. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    hotzelj Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    I have one BIG complaint against this board - same as everyone else. The board advertises Tripple Channel support, which in truth it does not. The big selling point for the X58 chipset is that it supports 3 channels of DDR3 memory. However, the board itself does not physically support 6 DIMMS - only 4, thus only dual-channel memory configurations are supported.

     

    This has been very misleading to consumers. Intel is advertising features supported by the chipset but not physically by the board. JUst think of it this way, what if Intel's chipset could support 2 PCI Express video cards, but the board only had 1 physical slot - people go out and buy the board and two video cards and find out that they can only use 1 of them.

     

    Whatever happened to the Truth In Advertising Act?

     

    Lastly, while the X58 chipset does support tripple-channel mode, it doesn't work if DDR3-1600 is used, then only 2 modules are supported.

     

    Once again Intel burried very important information in tiny small print technical documents.

  • 5. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    bofors Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    I was pretty annoyed when the DX58SO first came out and it was then described as being limited to 2GB DIMMs.  This meant 6GB maximum to me (triple channel).   I run Mac OS X on "hackintoshes" and Gigabyte boards have become the most popular and were better supported.  At that time, I thought that I would probably switch to Gigabyte boards (which could support 24GB in triple channel).    However, the DX58SO was quickly updated to support 4GB (through a BIOS update I suspect).

     

    But sites like Anandtech.com have shown that triple channel is pretty useless, it add practically zero performance benefit.  If you want to complain about marketing deception, I would focus on that.  This is because today's quad-core chips are already saturated in memory bandwidth with dual channel memory. However, Core i9 (6-core, "Gulftown") may change this in a few months.

     

    I still think the DX58SO should have had 6 DIMM slots, just like the other high end x58 boards.  But that would not stop me from buying one.  I also like the fact the Intel has removed the legacy junk, like PS/2 ports and ATA connectors from the DX58SO too.  I now work with people interested in achieving perfect Mac OS X support for select Intel boards, like the DX58SO.

  • 6. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    hotzelj Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    I'm a firm believer in matched systems. Meaning that the processor, bus, and memory are all matched speed-wise.

     

    So with 1600 MHz memory, the CPU and bus should also be 1.6 GHz (1600 MHz).

     

    There is an argument against that due to DMA access that bypasses the processor and bus. In that case, memory-intensive apps like CAD, graphics, and databases would all get a speed boost from using higher-speed memory on a lower-speed processor/bus.

     

    I just don't understand why they don't up to build a bus interconnect that will outpace or at least match the processor speed. I always like new computers being built with 3 GHz quad-core processors on an 800 MHz bus. The processor is sitting idle (locked up waiting for the bus to clear anyway) for more than 66% of the time.

     

    1600 MHz DDR3 memory only has a bus speed of 800 MHz anyway.

     

    So memory to bus to processor is 800:3200:3200 in Intel's highest platform (DDR3-1600 on a 6.4 QPI with 3.2 GHz processor).

     

    Hum, where's the bottle neck I wonder? Memory duh. That is why they built tripple channel support. They can write to 3 chips at once, since there are 4 openings per clock cycle, we still loose out on the last opening going unused every clock cycle at the highest rate.

     

    I'd say look at DDR4 or DDR5 opening up a vastly new architecture. I think we'll see a ring-bus interconnect between the QPI and memory through the on-CPU controller.

  • 7. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    Ziggy Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    hotzelj, you wrote:

     

    The big selling point for the X58 chipset is that it supports 3 channels of DDR3 memory. However, the board itself does not physically support 6 DIMMS - only 4, thus only dual-channel memory configurations are supported.

     

    Once again Intel burried very important information in tiny small print technical documents.

     

    Care to quote or share the source of this small print? All of the technical documents on the DX58SO make reference to three memory channels. The fourth (black) DIMM slot is on channel A so running four modules would be a single channel configuration but my understanding that three matched modules, one each in channels A, B and C would enable triple channel mode. Why do you think 6 modules are necessary for triple channel? Many other (almost all) X58 boards have 6 DIMM slots as you say but they don't require every slot be occupied for triple channel operation. The lack of extra slots, I agree, is a weak point of this board but then again in my case I didn't need more than 6 GB of RAM. For those that need that bit extra there is the fourth slot but with a (small?) performance hit. The loss of performance when using all four slots is clearly stated in the manual.

  • 8. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    bofors Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    A friend has received a new DX58SO that was manufactured on October 29, 2009.

     

    It is a new revision, number 505.  My friend described it as a major design update.

     

    I am now marking that my question has been answered.

     

    EDIT: It is possible that my friend was comparing his new 505 to a pre-503 (major revision) board.  Hence, the 505 may actually be a minor revision.

  • 9. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    Nico Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    since i got the first revision, what's the difference with 505?

     

    edit:

    ok, thanks.

  • 10. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    DrJimmy Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    Do you have a -505?

    According to the PCN the next revision is 701.

    Does your board have the right angle SATA ports on the board?

     

    http://intel.pcnalert.com/Portal/SearchPCNDataBase.aspx

  • 11. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    bofors Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    DrJimmy wrote:

     

    Do you have a -505?

    According to the PCN the next revision is 701.

    Does your board have the right angle SATA ports on the board?

     

    http://intel.pcnalert.com/Portal/SearchPCNDataBase.aspx

     

    Thanks for the information Jimmy.

     

    I have forwarded that DX58SO Production Change Notification note (109657-00) to my friend and will try to get the 505 versus 701 discrepancy resolved.

     

  • 12. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    DrJimmy Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    Your welcome,

     

    I really like this board and will upgrade to the latest revision next year. I have a -503. I plan on getting a six-core next year also. I have been waiting for the new IDCC for Windows 7-64bit to come out and help me OC my board. Right now I am at 154bclk with my 920.

  • 13. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    Nico Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    the idcc is not really the right tool for oc, only good for monitoring. you can easily set it to 178 in the bios and adjust the memory accordingly              

  • 14. Re: DX58SO Discontinued?  x58 Successor?
    DrJimmy Community Member
    Currently Being Moderated

    What settings do you use for 178bclk? I used IDCC auto-tune and it came up with 154bclk, 1.58v mem voltage 1.275v for QPI, and 1.225v for CPU.

    It seems pretty stable with HT and Turbo still enabled. I have Corsair 3x2GB Dominators CL7.

1 2 Previous Next

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...