Thats just talking about the LGA1156, Now Get this the EXTREME Ver. That will replace the I-core 875X , Will be replaced by a LGA 2011 , insteed of the LGA 1366, More new boards and more new CPUs . And of course More $$$$$ Just a thought how long before these are EOL.... LOL
I knew about the new 1155 socket, but now the 2011?!?!
So anytime you get a new generation CPU, you need a new mother board too, not to mention the aftermarket CPU cooler, and... don't tell me, let me guess... a new power supply for the new seven pin mother board power connector... Ok I just made that up, but mark my words... and don't you dare mention DDR4 or DDR5 memory... not to mention the CPU needing UEFI support, instead of a BIOS... I made that up too, but UEFI is coming... Apple already uses it I believe.
And Gifford, to answer your question, how long before EOL?? Next week.
EFI been in Intel system for the last 3 generation of products. Oh Server and workstations.. Desktop will catch up some day
So you want a new power supply?
This Intel server is single power source. -- 12V (and a 5v standby) so maybe the next board will just take 2 wires?
EOL -- End of Laughs -- Never!
Well, sorry to be cynical, and I'm sure Intel understands the downside of changing the CPU/Socket interface from a user's perspective. Then again, what percentage of the mainstream PC marketplace actually is aware or cares about these changes, as in building their own PCs. I wonder how the enterprise level users feel about this. Given the major changes that Sandy Bridge brings, it's not surprising that a new interface is needed.
It's been in only the last few years that multiple CPU interfaces have even existed, within one manufacture, as seen between the 775 interface and the 1366 and 1156 sockets. I believe AMD has been using the same socket with their CPUs for many years, and Intel's 775 goes back to the Pentium D, circa 2006. So enthusiasts are accustomed to things not changing so quickly, as the 1366 and 1156 seem to be already outmoded.
If socket 775 CPUs will no longer be available in the near future, that will leave us with seemingly four CPU interfaces in Intel's product line, including the two new ones. It will be interesting to see how this all turns out.
Not to mention EFI... we live in interesting times...
Hey Doc, so you need to update your 8086? I've got a Pentium D 945 for ya... actually not to shabby, an early dual core at 3.4 Ghz, still cycling away on the kids virus-ridden, iTunes infested PC.
You Know Guys while we are talking about Sandy Bridge , My question is when are we going to get a look at the new MOMBOs and how many ver. are they going to make , I'd Bet at least 3 Extreme Boards and 6-8 Reg. Boards . I just want get A Look at the configuration IE Crossfire and SLI . With all these new CPUs having intergrated graphics ??? And intergrated Ram controllers???
But will it run CP/M?
It is a very limited group of user who push for the upgrades.
Most folks build a system and run it till it 1) quits 2) gets so slow from virus or software bloat that they want something faster.
By that time, the technology has marched on and the mother board (and most the Peripherals) are obsolete also.
OMG yer killin' me!! Dang it, I can't find my Commodore 64...
But... I can't agree with your statement. True, there are many people out there that do just what you stated. Not long ago when I got back into building PCs, I was surprised to see the extent of the PC enthusiast web sites, on-line retailers of PC parts, and the endless posts in their forums. There is a large population of PC enthusiasts out there, and big business to support it. I have three PCs I built this year, from a Core 2 Duo E8400 machine, to a Core i7-930 PC, all with SSDs for the OS and large HDDs for storage, after market CPU coolers, over clocked RAM, triple output video cards, and you know what, that is nothing compared to what I've seen out there.
How about liquid cooling your CPU, or double, triple, and quad video cards on one mother board, connected together? The GPUs on these $500 each video cards have more transistors than any Intel CPU, over a billion in some cases. The PC gaming world is a world onto itself, with their own keyboards and mouse for game playing, multi-screen displays, three-D monitors... yes all kid stuff (to some of us), but some rather technically sophisticated kids.
And for whom is Intel introducing CPUs with unlocked multipliers to allow easier over clocking for, or providing the Intel Extreme Tuning Utility to mother board manufactures as a bonus with their products? I've used it and it's great, but I've not yet gone so far as using liquid nitrogen to freeze my CPU down to get the highest over clock possible, as happens at one mother board manufactures annual over clocking contest.
So there are many large communities out there, and we each live in our own, but don't overlook the neighbors...
@Gifford: Well, the 1366 CPUs have integrated RAM controllers now. In the 1366/X58 Chipset motherboard arena, there is a curious, ongoing issue to some extent, with "missing memory", as in RAM. It seems that some of the memory installed on the triple channel slots is not recognized, either by Windows 7 or various hardware monitoring programs. As in entire DIMM modules not being recognized. I have never seen a clear answer to what is to "blame" for this, usually the mother board or memory modules receive the wrath of the users experiencing this issue. Recently there has been some discussion that the... ahem... CPU/Integrated Memory Controller might be the culprit. As far as I know, this remains a mystery.
I have two 1366/X58 motherboards, and have not seen this problem... well, not very often, and only under certain circumstances, and then I cannot conclude that there really is a problem. I've seen it happen only when overclocking, and then I see differing data from different programs at the same time. Regardless, I have never had any real problems with my PC when I see this happening, or otherwise, so I'm a happy camper.
The integrated graphics in the Sandybridge CPUs will be an improvement over the ones seen in northbridge chipsets, or some of the current Core i5 CPUs, but I doubt they will be able to surpass any current mid-range video card in performance. Frankly to the game enthusiasts, the integrated video is a turn-off, those CPUs must be targeted at the mainstream users and the HP and Dell's of the world.
As for the high-end Sandybridge models? Who knows...
But I think you proven my point.
If you in the class of users who buy an off the shelf system to surf the net and send some e-mail's, your not likely to be looking to scrap your current CPU for a faster one.
If you are the overclocker who wants fastest badest system with audio and video into the next dimension, you will likly buy the Tic and the Tock CPU and the next gen your happy to start over because these user understand the hardware better and know that a faster CPU is nice, but worthless if your memory is choked or your I/O has the system in wait cycles forever...
There is a group in the middle that thinks that processor are just like a new flash light battery that you can drop in and make everything run faster and They would like all the hardware to last 10 to 20 years.(like my 8086 and my dot matrix printer. Don't laugh I had a guy that was upset because he could not use his old dot matrix on his new server)
With the Westmere generation your up around 1.2 billion transistors, but I have heard of newer GPU out there that are pushing 3 billion transistors.
It is just this type of new technology that drives the need for the next generation of processors and mother boards.
What good is a 3 billion transistor GPU if you can't get the data to it?
any why push all that data down a slow I/O buss when you could park the GPU on the processor die or at least the QPI buss?
I don't worry much about what the next generation of future hardware will change myself (of course I am in a position where I get play will all the newest and badest to worry about paying for it ) Once I get it in my hands, then I get excited about it.
I think your going to be impressed with what is coming down the track with Sandy Bridge and beyond, but what I would really like to hear is what you, the end user, wants in their Servers, Workstations, Desktops Laptops, PDA's, pads and cell phones.
Are smart TV's the end of the desktop? Since my cell does e-mail and surfs the net, do I need anything else? Is cloud computing going to put an end to the small business server?
I would hope that some folks, (heck hundreds of folks) out there would tell Intel what they think the perfect system would be.
I was cussing the software guys today as I went digging through 4 sets of specifications to interpret what was logged in a System Event Log.
What is wrong with an error message that can be clearly understood without having to esculate it or search the forums?
Why not say "a device in PCIe Slot 1 has had a link failure" rather than "PCIe fat error (0x04) data A1 data 00 Data 38"
Intel is processor centric. It seems to me that a lot of times Intel designs a new processor that then needs a new chipset,which will need a new mother board that has to be fit into some box. The result being a system built to support a CPU. I would like to get input on what you would like the System to be so that the system requirements can drive the design all the way back to the processor. Even a list of what you do and don't like what help the designer to get it better on the next go around. Sometimes think the System designers at Intel sit in little boxes all day with very little contact with the real world of users out there.(Wait a minute, All the folks at Intel do sit in little boxes all day called cubes... )
Thanks Doc, the same to you.
I must admit that the mainstream world, the one that you mainly refer to, is the one where most PC users exist. They are blissfully ignorant (meaning lack of knowledge) of the enthusiast world, and simply do not care about it. Their PCs are tools rather than toys (now there's an arguable point) and when I say toys I mean devices that are modified and tweaked for higher performance, like a hotrod car (now there's an antiquated term, hotrod.)
What I'm saying is our world has become so large and populated that some sub-cultures are no longer small, insignificant groups, referring to PC enthusiasts in this case. While the mainstream users are not cruising the PC E-tailer web sites, there are more than enough people out there that make those businesses viable, as well as the OEMs that supply them, including Intel.
So to each their own, but I enjoy the enthusiast world. I've been thinking we are reaching the point of diminishing returns with PC hardware for some time now, but I have yet to abandon the quest for and my enjoyment of high performance PCs.
Oops, I didn't answer your question Doc. I think home servers are the future, with laptop-like displays and screens, wireless of course, that are basically like terminals in an enterprise environment. Perhaps some extra memory in the portable terminals, and ports for zip drives, unless those are wireless as well. These terminals can vary from smaller portable units to large displays parked on desks, etc.
The servers would need to support the needs of various users, from gamers to media use and business people or developers working at home. It might make more sense for the terminals to serve the needs of each user, for example with gaming hardware on them or whatever specialized equipment the users require. How about the user interface (high level OS functions) residing on the terminals to satisfy each user. Mass storage would likely reside on the server, as a seperate storage box adds to the complexity and likely would be unnecessary as 'drives shrink in size and grow in capacity. Of course the servers would interface with all the TVs (if you can call them that anymore) in the home, and the portable terminals would communicate with them as well. The separation of PC monitors and media screens (there ya go) would blur and become one in the same.
And that is only the home environment...
Thanks for the Input Parsec!
The folks in Intel Server land are very much interested in expanding the role of Servers in the computing infrastructure.
They just launch a new INITIATIVE that I think I can VOTE for! http://communities.intel.com/message/105952#105952
The Servers Cloud initiative is getting a lot of focus right now, but I tend to favor the hybrid model (more of a diversified structure) which is better portable to a home user environment and fits in with your suggestions.
The classic Cloud structure excels at bulk storage (like for all those videos I get filling my HDD with) ,Social media sites, Web service providers Newer concepts like Rent a Program (like that cheap piece of expensive software I bought do a 3D model of a landscaping project and will never use again) or a Game servers that let you down load and run your favor games or play on-line if you prefer for less than the cost of buying your own copy.
I find that input from the folks that actually use the hardware can be very insightful when compared to what the marketing and manufacturing folk think you want.
Frankly, I'm in the fog when it comes to the Cloud thing, don't know anything about it.
But I shall check out that link and see what I can find.
Care to point me towards all things Cloudy? Thank you very much (in Elvis P. voice)
BTW, are you connected to Intel in some capacity? Just wonderin'...
Link to the Server weather channal http://communities.intel.com/community/openportit/server
Shhhh, I am here incognito!
(It’s been a slow month and I get some of the best feedback inputs from the folks on these forums.)
Yo Doc, I'll never tell...
I only answered one question of yours...
I'd say the crystal ball of where things are going is cloudy, particularly now.
Of course the market drives what products are available, but do they do that before or after the fact?
What I mean is, various new products appear in the marketplace that were the idea of an entrepreneur, marketing department, design team, and who knows what else. But it's the users, the customers, that make something a hot item, meaning the product is not hot (most of the time) when it appears on the market.
So are we designing in response to a market, or does the market respond to a design? Both happen, but the latter seems to be the most successful, an example being the iPod. Later, the former takes place.
Young people today are into texting and their cell phones. Texting, the modern equivalent of passing notes (I imagine you know what this is, as I assume we are at least somewhat contemporary), was unforeseen as the huge market it is. But I don't see one single device dominating all else and driving most products in one direction, ie portable communicator PC's are great, but we don't sit at home and watch sitcoms on them, or work from home on them (I'll bet some would take exception to that statement.)
I read an article about the Android cell phones recently, it stated the software on them comprises two million lines of code (being a programmer, what a "line of code" is varies tremendously) but then fits in only 200 Megabytes of storage. Given that portable devices have reached that level of sophistication, what should we expect from desktop equipment? On the other hand, if 75% of the usage of these devices is in "passing notes" and picture/video jokes, what have we really achieved? Ahem... selling products.
I also smile at the divergence still occurring in PCs. On one hand we have the Apple Air, the slightest laptop yet, on the other I am typing this on my Core i7 system in a suitcase size PC case (literally.) I love my iPod touch, my portable PC, but I refuse to use a laptop in the home, gotta have my 23" screen, hard wired network, instant response desktop (actually a floor model) PC.
The only true, worthwhile direction the market is going in is making most things smaller, with the same or better functionality. Offer that to business and they'll take it. What will the Internet be like once web site servers are mostly SSD based, and ISPs provide 1Gbs service, wow! Of course we are not even at 100Mbs on public ISPs yet, so there are opportunities.
One thing that Intel may need to keep an eye on is what NVIDIA is doing these days, using their GPU's as calculating engines for computers. I don't mean just in PC video cards, these devices are for program development and CAD/CAM applications. I don't know if they have true potential, conceptually they seem to, and as an Intel shareholder I'd like to see the company remain at the top.
Those are some thoughts just off the top of my head, I hope they might be of some small value to you. Enjoy your slow time... this to shall pass.
From a former cubist.