LGA-775: Do we really need it?
by Anand Lal Shimpion June 21, 2004 12:05 PM EST
- Posted in
- CPUs
39 Comments
|
39 Comments
IndexLGA-775: Do we really need it?Intel’s Pentium 4 560 – The Model Numbers Continue…The Test – Intel’s Pentium 4 560 (3.6GHz) vs. the WorldGeneral Application Usage Performance (Winstone)General Application Usage Performance (SYSMark)DivX Encoding Performance3D Rendering PerformanceVisual Studio Compile TimePCI Express GraphicsPCI Express Graphics CardsThe Test – AGP vs. PCI Express Graphics CardsX2 PCI Express PerformanceHalo PCI Express PerformanceWolfenstein ET PCI Express PerformanceJedi Knight: Jedi Academy PCI Express PerformanceUnreal Tournament 2004 PCI Express PerformanceFar Cry PCI Express PerformanceFinal Fantasy XI PCI Express PerformanceHomeworld 2 PCI Express PerformanceF1 Challenge PCI Express PerformanceNeverwinter Nights PCI Express PerformanceEVE: The Second Genesis PCI Express PerformanceWarcraft III: The Frozen Throne PCI Express PerformanceFinal Words
LGA-775: Do we really need it?
The hot topic at Computex this year was Intel’s new 775-pin LGA socket. Motherboard and memory manufacturers alike were complaining left and right about reliability issues with Intel’s new socket, and with the launch less than a month away, we were obviously concerned as well.
First, why even bother with a new socket/interface? The Pentium 4 was doing just fine on Socket-478, and now with LGA-775, we’re able to get another 200MHz? Seems silly, no?
While it’s true that LGA-775 isn’t necessary today, there are a couple of factors that dictate its necessity for tomorrow. As we’ve talked about before, a CPU’s package can actually be a limiting factor when it comes to core clock speed as well as FSB frequency. Think about it this way; today’s Pentium 4s run at a 800MHz FSB, meaning that the interface between the CPU and the chipset has to be capable of handling 800MHz signaling across a wide 64-bit bus. When we talk about the interface between the CPU and the chipset, physically, what are we talking about? We are talking about the traces on the motherboard going from the chipset to the CPU socket, the CPU socket itself and the pins on the CPU.
Improvements in the pin interface are necessary in order to allow for higher FSB CPUs. While today’s 800MHz FSB isn’t really pushing the limits, remember that Prescott’s replacement will be paired up with a 1.2GHz FSB.
The LGA-775 interface also packs the pins closer together, allowing 775 pins to exist in about the same space that 478 pins did on the old package. More tightly packed pins mean that we’re dealing with shorter routes from the CPU’s core to the external interface itself, also a desirable trait.
With more pins, we also have the ability to deliver more power, more reliably than before — which will also come in handy as Prescott and its successor ramp up to 5GHz. Intel banked quite heavily on clock speed with their NetBurst architecture, and part of the commitment was a commitment to new packaging technologies.
The other change that LGA-775 makes, and clearly the most controversial one, was to move the pins off of the CPU itself and onto the motherboard — meaning that the CPU itself is mostly flat underneath.
The capacitors on the bottom of the CPU keep it from becoming perfectly flat, but the lack of pins definitely make it a flatter chip.
With no pins on the CPU, the first thing that should pop into your head is — «woohoo, no bent pins on your CPU.» Unfortunately, with the pins on the motherboard, now you can have bent pins on your motherboard — and with the LGA-755 interface, they are much easier to bend, and much more difficult to unbend.
The problem with the LGA-775 socket is that you can’t see the pins in the socket very well when you’ve got the CPU suspended in air above it. You have to be very gentle and very precise when placing the CPU on top of the pins because if you drop it on the pins or if you are just one pin off, you risk bending a lot of pins.
Click to enlarge.
Although we haven’t tried it yet, Intel has told us that once you bend a number of the pins on the socket itself, in essence, it’s pretty much impossible to unbend them.
Remember that we’re talking about 775 very fragile pins in that socket — and we thought Socket-478 was bad.
Click to enlarge.
There was another significant change in the socket structure with LGA-775: the locking lever. It used to be that the heatsink, not the socket’s lever, was what provided the majority of force on the CPU itself to ensure secure installation in the socket (to prevent against package pullout and to guard against shearing the mechanical attach between socket and motherboard as well as the chipset and motherboard). Unfortunately, that meant that the heatsink had to supply upwards of 40 lbs of force to the CPU, which caused a lot of issues, the biggest of which was bending motherboards.
Click to enlarge.
While Intel insists that the amount of bending caused by their heatsinks on Socket-478 motherboards was within tolerances, the fact of the matter is that with enough heatsink installations and removals, you could do some serious trace damage to your motherboard, thanks to the bending of the board.
With LGA-775, Intel has addressed the pressure problem and now it’s the socket lever and not the heatsink that supplies the ~40 lbs of force to not only secure the chip but also make adequate contact between the CPU and the pins. The heatsink now has to provide much less force and thus, doesn’t bend the motherboard as much.
The old heatsink used to bend the motherboard quite a bit…
…but the new heatsink doesn’t do so, not as much at least.
The socket’s lever requires more force to engage, but it also puts much more force on the CPU than in the old socket.
Intel’s new heatsink is actually a huge improvement over their old ones, thanks to the removal of heavy-duty downforce as one of its job requirements.
The four pegs of the heatsink basically plug into the holes in the motherboard, and you twist the tops of the pegs to have it locked.
You have to make certain to twist the pegs securely; otherwise, the heatsink has a tendency to pop off. Luckily, Intel’s thermal throttling prevents any serious damage from occurring as a result.
The bottom line is that a new CPU socket was necessary to continue with Intel’s future CPU plans, but the fragility of LGA-775 definitely shows that Intel didn’t take enthusiast users into consideration. Intel has neglected the enthusiast community in the past, and although we do make up a very small portion of the overall computing community, it’s still an important group on which to focus. If you buy an LGA-775 board, just be very careful. We haven’t had any problems yet, but we’ve been extremely careful with our installations.
It looks like LGA-775 will take us to the end of the Pentium 4 line, although we would have liked a more user-friendly socket to keep us company over the next couple of years.
Index
Intel’s Pentium 4 560 – The Model Numbers Continue.
..
IndexLGA-775: Do we really need it?Intel’s Pentium 4 560 – The Model Numbers Continue…The Test – Intel’s Pentium 4 560 (3.6GHz) vs. the WorldGeneral Application Usage Performance (Winstone)General Application Usage Performance (SYSMark)DivX Encoding Performance3D Rendering PerformanceVisual Studio Compile TimePCI Express GraphicsPCI Express Graphics CardsThe Test – AGP vs. PCI Express Graphics CardsX2 PCI Express PerformanceHalo PCI Express PerformanceWolfenstein ET PCI Express PerformanceJedi Knight: Jedi Academy PCI Express PerformanceUnreal Tournament 2004 PCI Express PerformanceFar Cry PCI Express PerformanceFinal Fantasy XI PCI Express PerformanceHomeworld 2 PCI Express PerformanceF1 Challenge PCI Express PerformanceNeverwinter Nights PCI Express PerformanceEVE: The Second Genesis PCI Express PerformanceWarcraft III: The Frozen Throne PCI Express PerformanceFinal Words
Tweet
PRINT THIS ARTICLE
|
Advanced Search 405 users browsing
|
|
..
The block is manufactured to the highest accuracy. The pure copper base features a radial patterned, dense micro-pin design with only 0.3 mm between each pin. The micro-pin pattern is designed to maximize the surface area the liquid coolant is exposed t…Buy a used processor socket 775
Socket T (or LGA 775) — a socket for installing processors on the motherboard, expanded by Intel Corporation, released in 2004.
Danish pink rose is less efficient, AMD lower bus, but not scalable on AMD Athlon bus. Until then, Pentium 4, Celeron, Pentium Dual-Core and Core 2 Duo processors do not have a memory controller in them. This allowed Intel to revoke the old bus with a higher frequency in new processors. However, the efficiency of memory and cache (with other equal minds) is three times lower, lower for AMD processors. nine0002 Buy processor socket 775 in Dnipro. Intel Core2Duo, Pentium
Buy [Group] from Dnipro. Warehouse of computer equipment from Europe reduced in the price of post-button equipment, wholesale and retail. Buy [Group] wholesale and distribution from Europe in Dnipro — online store of discounted prices Used computer and used equipment. You can buy [Group] in our computer and hardware store. We were able to make the delivery of such equipment to the Dnipro directly from Nimechchini! We offer you cheap prices for bu or reductions in prices for any reason for the goods — the cheapest prices for [Group] near Dnipro. All computers are shipped with a type 9 warranty3 days; To complete the purchase, it is necessary to add the goods to the box and complete the reservation, or contact us for the indicated contact numbers for clarification of the goods. Away shopping!
What is the most powerful processor on the 775th socket really to get?
Hello everyone 775 socket is already outdated, because 1156 followed it, then 1155, now 1150, on which I am sitting. But now the 2011-3 platform is first entering the market, I don’t know how long it takes, but sooner or later it will be the main one, so to speak. Just like DDR4 memory. Against the backdrop of all this, the 775 socket is getting further and further into the past . ..
But don’t bury him yet, hey guys, it’s too early to do that! All the same, the 775 platform has a good and high-quality line of processors, I mean those models that start with Q9 **, well, that is, the Q9500 and everything around.
So, now let’s move on to what is the most powerful processor on socket 775. The most productive is, of course, the Q9650, which has a frequency of 3 GHz, 4 cores and a heat dissipation of 95 watts, which is not so much as for a top-end processor. This processor can be easily overclocked, and with a good heatsink, you can take 4 GHz in air, which is very good. nine0003
Actually, I will not go into details, but in the 775th socket, if you have an adapter, you can put a Xeon server processor, there are many models, I personally have not practiced this. But it works, that’s for sure. The only thing is that the motherboard must be near the top level, and you need to install a special BIOS. Much has been written about how to do all this on the Ixbt and Overclockers forums (they are called that, you can search in a search engine).
But in fact there is almost no difference between the processors. That is, each model has its own analogue, for example, Q9500 is the same analogue in the Xeon family. The only thing is, I don’t remember which one, but there is a processor that consumes 95 watts for desktops as usual, but the server analogue is only 80 watts, there is a plus here. The rest of the models are almost identical. Here another thing is the price, Xeon is cheaper.
I’ll add more about the Q9650 model. This means that the model is suitable, during overclocking it shows decent performance today. Although, if I’m not mistaken, then in terms of level it will be almost like a Core i3 on socket 1150, this is a Haswell core. Well, maybe it will fall short a little …
Q9650 is based on the Yorkfield core, the processor is manufactured using the 45 nm process technology. In the Xeon family, the Xeon X3370 is similar to it.
The Yorkfield core is generally the latest and greatest. Therefore, I advise you to take a processor only based on its processors, and by the way, these are the models: Q9300, Q9400, Q9450, Q9500, Q9550, Q9650, QX9650, QX9770.
The QX9770 model can and will be more productive than the Q9650, but this processor is terribly hot in terms of heat dissipation, that is, overclocking there can be problematic. There, the frequency is slightly higher, namely 3.2 GHz, but the truth is that it works on a 1600 MHz bus … but it’s still terribly hot! And by the way, this is the most powerful percentage on the Yorkfield core! This is if you do not take into account Q9650, but I advise just him, because the heat dissipation is 95 watts, while the QX9770 has 136 watts
Here is an example of overclocking Q9550 to almost 4 GHz:
ADVERTISING
Well, not exactly an example, it’s just a screenshot of the CPU-Z program, but real overclocking
As for me, it is better to use Q9550 or Q9450 for overclocking. They differ only in frequency and are easier to find. nine0003
So what conclusion can be drawn?
- processors of the Q9 series** against the backdrop of modern processes, new sockets (what only 2011-3 is worth) will soon take the place of socket 478, which lags far behind in performance compared to 1150; but here is a slightly different question, Windows itself and in order to work in it, with an office, with documents, then the Q9650 will be enough for a very long time;
- whatever the Q9650 is, it supports all modern instructions, that Windows 7, that Windows 10 just fly on it, as well as almost all modern games; it’s just that modern games are already the maximum that Q9 can pull650, further, the next games will be much more demanding on hardware; well, I think you understand that games also need a powerful vidyuha;
- for most modern games, the Q9650 will be enough even without overclocking, the main thing here is that the video card does not let us down;
- motherboards with Q9650 support can install Windows XP, so this processor is an ideal solution for XP fans; although I installed XP on the 1150 socket, but Windows 10 will still be faster on modern hardware; nine0008
- minus Q9650 as it seems to me in its price; even now, used models are, as it were, not quite cheap, at the level of new Stumps under 1150 sockets, that is, about $60 on average;
- is a top-end 775 socket motherboard, which is what I recommend to take, is still expensive and about $70; in general, top-end hardware on socket 775 is still in demand and the price is corresponding;
- a small minus in power consumption, if you play a lot and every day, then in the end the light will burn decently, because Q9650 takes 95 watts in stock, and in overclocking, of course, even more;
- just don’t forget about the RAM, it’s better to have 8 GB, then the Q9650-based computer will still be able to please you in games for some time; well, if you connect an SSD, it will be a bomb in general;
Well, these are my thoughts. In general, I’m a little strange in these matters .. Well, see for yourself, I have a 1150 socket, but I wanted to take 775 … And all because I could afford to take everything top-end, that is, the motherboard and the same Q9650. Top-end hardware on socket 1150 costs much more, but I understand that performance would be much higher. But I just wanted top and stop. In the end, I still took the 1150 socket, and by the way I took the Pentium G3220. So that later in the future sometime to buy a Core i7-4790K …
Yes, it can be said that if the budget is limited and you want top-end hardware, then the 775th socket is just right, but that’s just not much sense …
And do not believe those who say that the Q9650 can be compared with the Core i7 in tests. Because it’s just infa about anything! Yes, it’s true that it falls short of the Core i7 870, but this is primarily socket 1156, which, to put it mildly, is not quite modern, but also better than 775! By the way, i7 870 is made by the same process as Q9650, that is 45 nm!
That’s all, I hope that what I wrote here, that this info was useful to you.