Printable View
Seems that the original version of LGA1156 will have a very short lifespan:
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...12341&Itemid=1
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?op...12339&Itemid=1
It may actually make more sense to get a Core i7 or AMD Phenom X4 instead!
I thought it was pretty obvious to never buy first or second generation Intel based boards as they change the specs far too often.
Which is why I won't bother with Core i5 or i7 for at least a year, maybe two.
I'll just go Core i7 saves all this drama.
Maybe it really would be better to go with AMD. Well, sacrifice performance for upgradability?
In my experience, when the time truly comes to upgrade the CPU, you'll be wanting to swap the motherboard as well anyway. Therefore, this isn't that dramatic a development.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulti
Not necessarily!! It is nice to be able to just drop in a newer CPU a year or two down the line instead of having to get a new CPU + motherboard which increases the cost considerably.Quote:
Originally Posted by transylvanic
Also the fact of the matter is that the resale value of the components will also plummet if Intel are making major changes to the socket every year.
Considering my upgrade cycle tends to be around every 2-3 years (excluding my recent complete system failure), I doubt that I'll ever keep the same socket and change the CPU again.
This whole Core i5 / i7 thing feels like a big joke to me at the moment.
Absolutely, it is nice! But is it profitable? :DQuote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
If it's not AGP to PCI-E, it's PCI-E 2.0, or it's DDR2 to DDR3.. Mobo makers seem to take that built-in obsolence idea to heart. You can consider yourself lucky if you can just upgrade single components on the fly anymore.
I've tried this before, sticking a Q9450 onto a P965 board, which took a couple of months to get a working BIOS, and less-than-stellar overclocking.Quote:
Originally Posted by CAT-THE-FIFTH
The fact is that the motherboard still worked OK at stock speeds after the BIOS update. The time taken for the BIOS update to come out is the motherboard manufacturer's fault. Overclocking is also never a given. Anything you can get over stock is a bonus in my book.Quote:
Originally Posted by arthurleung
The fact that Intel are considering having three different versions of socket 1156 by early 2010 is a joke. AMD learnt the hard way with having socket 754 and 939.
Look at the Core2 and there were only two major revisions in over 30 months!! Even some of the older 965 and 975X motherboards from late 2006 could support the newer Core2 processors. Of course most of these motherboards(and the newer ones) could support the older Pentium D and Pentium 4 processors too from 2005. This meant that someone could have upgraded to a newer Core2 capable motherboard and could have still used their old processor and RAM until they could afford to get a newer processor.
TBH PCI-E only became the de-facto standard around the middle of 2006. Until then the AGP market was still well catered for.This was at least two years since PCI-E came out. However even through 2007 there were enough AGP cards still available.Quote:
Originally Posted by transylvanic
PCI-E 2.0 for most people does not make a huge difference. My motherboard is only limited to PCI-E 8x and it is not going to a real limitation for me yet in games.
DDR2 came out in 2003 and again it was not considered the de-facto standard until around 2 years later. Again it was only until 2006 when AMD started using DDR2 in their motherboards that DDR started to disappear. It is the same with SATA and IDE too.
Basically the old standards will remain widespread for two to three years after new ones are released.
My old XP2800 system lasted me until the end of 2006 with only one graphics card upgrade and some extra RAM. I was playing many of the newer games too.
I have upgraded from a D805 to a E4500 to a Q6600 in the last few years using my 975X motherboard. I have upgraded my graphics card three times too.
This has cost me less than actually splashing out initially on more expensive components!
I never upgraded my CPU. Every time I have the cash to buy a better CPU - its been the same money to buy a new motherboard as well! If you don't believe me - look at the prices that Socket 939 dual core processors seem to go for - A Athlon X2 4800 for £100!
This being the exact point that CAT is making, I think. With Socket 754 & 939 AMD caused huge issues for people looking for an upgrade path, and they didn't last long at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by cheesemp
For instance, I bought a socket A / AGP PC with a Duron 1200 back in early 2003. In mid 2005, I was still able to buy processor upgrades on the same socket (in fact, I've swapped all sorts of socket A processors here there and everywhere) and reasonable AGP graphics cards (Radeon 9800Pro,for example). AM2 was released in 2006, and you can still drop the latest AMD CPUs into any AM2 board, even though they've released a new socket. Somewhere in the middle of all that sockets 754 and 939 came and went, taking a number of people's budget with them, no doubt: leaving people like me to make a smooth transition from upgraded Socket A to AM2 (I didn't, as it happens, but I would've if I'd had the money ;) ). But the confusion ovber having 2 different sockets probably meant that Socket A hung on for longer than you would expect.
AMD have learned from that lesson, progressing AM2 through several different incarnations and making the new AM3 processors backwardly compatible to AM2, however Intel seem to want to make the same mistake, releasing 2 different sockets: one for enthusiasts and one for mainstream. But if it didn't work for AMD in the height of their pomp, how Intel think they're going to manage in the middle of a recession is beyond me