Yea, and once these boards are available everywhere, prices will come down. You are paying a premium now to get them early.
Prices don't look TOO bad...just a bit higher than the current 1156 boards, but not quite as bad as the 1366 offerings.
That's fair, however it's not a completely dead platform seeing as you could upgrade to a 6-core Thuban. I was suggesting a cheap quad core Phenom-II; I recently got mine including the motherboard for $140.Yeah, but there's no AM3+ motherboards so that's effectively a dead end upgrade. At least with S1155 there's a high chance you can upgrade to Ivy Bridge down the line.
If Am3+ mobos were around I would likely go AMD, but they're not for some reason.
Lots of people hang on to their current systems for a long while. That said, I don't think I'd personally want that chip with an integrated GPU? What benefits would a gamer get from having an integrated GPU on their CPU? Wouldn't overclocking be a problem like in the past?
Exactly, Sandy bridge is clearly designed for Business/Laptop/Tablet market.
Is it me or are CPU makers running out of ideas/improvements. Seems like GHZ speeds haven't really changed much.
I simply can't justify upgrading my 2 year old E8400. It seems fine and I hardly ever top it out in gaming etc.
yeah I guess gpus haven't gotten much faster in four or five years since GHZ hasn't really changed much there either.Exactly, Sandy bridge is clearly designed for Business/Laptop/Tablet market.
Is it me or are CPU makers running out of ideas/improvements. Seems like GHZ speeds haven't really changed much.
I simply can't justify upgrading my 2 year old E8400. It seems fine and I hardly ever top it out in gaming etc.
yeah I guess gpus haven't gotten much faster in four or five years since GHZ hasn't really changed much there either.
I very much disagree with this statement.
Nehalem was 15-20% faster per clock than C2D/Q, and now SB is another 15-20% faster per clock. Each series added 2 additional available cores 4-6-8 (SB will have 6/8 soon...). Nehalem added an on-die memory controller and SB is adding a GPU to the package. If anything, more has changed in the last 2 years than in a LONG time. Sure the ghz has not progressed a lot, but i7's have essentially been a 4ghz part for over two years now, and SB is promising closer to 5ghz. Overall power consumption has stayed constant with more cores were added, the cores themselves became more efficient (IPC), and speed increased (ghz).
so now you are going to only be concerned about the last 1.5 years?The truth is, GPUs haven't really changed much either. Both Nvidia and AMD has been using similar GPUs past 1.5+ years and will use it for another year or so.
you are using a fast dual core cpu and still relatively fast 4870. both of those can handle most games just fine at a decent res and settings. that doesn't mean there are not more demanding games out there. you dont even come close to running the settings that some people want to run in games like Metro 2033. there also some really cpu intesive games out there that people play and want the framerates as high as possible. this is especially true for those that have very high end gpus that they want to get the most out of. just because you are content does not excuse being ignorant to what others may want out of their comps.That's true.
But keep in mind I'm just looking at it from Gamers perspective. Nehalem OR SB has not giving gaming crowd much improvement IF any.
#s of core is irrelevant to me.....as
a) I dont mutlitask
b) hardly any games take advantage of quad cores.
Sure #s are great, but it's really all about IF you actually use them and how.
Sort of off topic, but what current AMD chip most closely matches the SB?
That's true.
But keep in mind I'm just looking at it from Gamers perspective. Nehalem OR SB has not giving gaming crowd much improvement IF any.
#s of core is irrelevant to me.....as
a) I dont mutlitask
b) hardly any games take advantage of quad cores.
Sure #s are great, but it's really all about IF you actually use them and how.
That's true.
But keep in mind I'm just looking at it from Gamers perspective. Nehalem OR SB has not giving gaming crowd much improvement IF any.
28nm may not be as magical as you think. going from 65nm to 55nm to 40nm has been a modest increase in performance at the same level of some cards. in other words a 40nm 336sp gtx460 is only about 30-40% faster than even my old 65nm 192sp gtx260. thats pretty freaking poor on my book.
You're kidding right? Might want to check out CPU benchmarks on some newer games...
That may have been true 12 months ago, but most of the latest games can take advantage of 3 cores, if not more.
Read above.
Plenty of games take advantage of current processors.
My workplace just purchased 500 new desktop PC's from Dell and they are all running an E8500 CPU purely for word processing and email. Now when your workplace has the same CPU as you then it's time to upgrade! And i say that because workplaces do not buy gaming machines.
Come on now, new 750/760 or SB with identical GPU will give me MINIMAL difference AT BEST.
Show me FPS difference.
Outside of BC2, it's NONE of the games I play (or handful AT MOST).
Not at all, my need defines "time for upgrade".
Let me put it to you like this. I currently play the following games:
BC2, MW2, F1, SC2, Empire TW, Crysis.
My 4870 (and newly purchased 460) runs all of these games at high settings (+/- AA/AF etc).
The difference in performance new 750/760 or SB would give from CPU upgrade alone is NOT worth $300-500. All the games I play are fine AS IS. Tell me why should I upgrade and how big of a difference it will make. For that kind of money it BETTER be significant.Do I want to upgrade? Sure, but "want" is not warranted in my current situation. I do understand it's a matter of time, preparing for that next year. Now if there were great new games on the market that perhaps set a new standard/benchmark (like Crysis did).....I MIGHT consider it more, just not today. It's not just a matter of CPU, but entire industry. :$
I don't really care if you upgrade or not, that's up to you. But it's pretty annoying how you throw out the caps lock as if you are stating facts. Furthermore, you're doing this in a thread where it's already been shown quite clearly how games like SC2 will be affected.
Minimal?? 2600k will be at least 25% faster in SC2, for example. And no, I'm not linking anything, especially where it's already been done in these threads a lot over the last 2-3 days. FFS, AT showed the gains over a 760 in August. Look it up yourself.
Like P Wolf just said - if you're happy with your system, good for you. An I760 is indeed more than enough for most of todays games, just spare us the indignation.
My current rig E8400 + 4870 maxes out SC2 with no problems. CPU is nowhere near 100% usage (both cores) during game play.
I simply wouldn't see ANY difference with $400+ upgrade to CPU/MB/RAM.
I'm sorry
Vdub... I'm not going to go into a long winded argument with you. Like others have said, if you are happy with the performance of your rig, great, you don't need to upgrade. However, saying that there is NO benefit in games by going from a C2D to SB is totally misleading.
Of the games you play, BC2, SC2, F1 2010 and Empire TW will see a benefit from an upgrade to SB. MW2 is GPU limited and Crysis also, unless you are running high end CF/SLI setups. However your gains may not be as big as the reviews suggest because you are most likely GPU limited with the HD4870. Your system is only as fast as the slowest component.
An E8400 + HD4870 is a good match in terms of CPU vs GPU power. Current GPUs such as the GTX570/580 or HD6950/6970 are about 2 - 3x as fast as a HD4870 and as such would require a much faster CPU than your HD4870 would.
I never said there is NO benefit. There is, just saying it might not be worth the upgrade.