CPU/Mobo Are 1366 users screwed???
- Thread starter kidpikoon
- Start date
- Status
Thats not the point. The point is, that unlike an Intel system I can upgrade more smoothly. I can buy an AM3+ motherboard now and hold onto my X6 for a year and then later buy a Bulldozer processor or something better if I feel like it.pauldmps said:
The same way if my X6 dies. I can buy a cheap X2/X3 and run it on my existing board just because of its compatibility factor.
For a given budget, if AMD CPU+Motherboard combo is faster, isn't AMD the winner? If I have 15K to spare for both CPU+Mobo, doesn't AMD provide a better choice? What's the point in spending so much on the CPU+Mobo when all current games can be played easily without bottle neck even on relatively cheap systems (<12-15K)? I think this situation is because games are being developed for consoles first. If they introduce new consoles in the next 2-3 years, everybody's system will get outdated quickly. Only difference will be that the person who spends insane amount of money on his system in the first place will just feel like a dumbo then, while the person who showed some balance and didn't spend 30 thousand on his CPU+Mobo alone can easily upgrade to a system which is sufficient for that time without feeling stupid.
RD274 said:
There is nothing there to brag about for AMD. AMD has been trying to keep its CPU's socket compatible, but look at what cost? They were reduced to using the same tech with little architectural changes since the original AM2. That is why they are still left in the dust trying to compete with already outdated Intel tech (first gen Core i5 & i7) with their yet to be released tech (Bulldozer) and we are not even sure whether Bulldozer would be able to match Core i5 or i7 clock to clock. Everything has a price.
^^ And is that supposed to be a good thing? From what I can see, its a bad thing both for the business as well as the customers. Don't except every one to be struck on to minor iterations of 5 year old technology because AMD wanted to retain backward compatibility with its sockets. You can say that AMD not changing sockets is the reason I haven't bought a single AMD system since they introduced Socket AM2. Every time I do a comparison, I find Intel to be at the fore font of performance and technology and offering a much better value for the money.
Trying to barely match a generation or two old Intel Quad core CPU's with 2 extra cores and a higher clock is hardly called competing. People often don't even seem to realize that they would be spending more on AMD front for the same performance because of this approach. While they look at the retail cost and think that the cost is comparable, they don't think about converting the power consumption and other factor into costs.
I am perfectly fine with Intel introducing a new socket every year if it helps me to get the best of technology and a worthwhile upgrade very two years. When I upgrade my CPU why would I even want to be stuck on the same old motherboard without any of the technological changes that happened in between. I want the latest features and connectivity options. So I would any way get a new motherboard to go along with a new CPU making backward compatibility with sockets a moot point. If you feel that you need a new CPU, but not a new motherboard to go with it, then believe me, you don't need a CPU upgrade either (at least not one that is from a different iteration).
Trying to barely match a generation or two old Intel Quad core CPU's with 2 extra cores and a higher clock is hardly called competing. People often don't even seem to realize that they would be spending more on AMD front for the same performance because of this approach. While they look at the retail cost and think that the cost is comparable, they don't think about converting the power consumption and other factor into costs.
I am perfectly fine with Intel introducing a new socket every year if it helps me to get the best of technology and a worthwhile upgrade very two years. When I upgrade my CPU why would I even want to be stuck on the same old motherboard without any of the technological changes that happened in between. I want the latest features and connectivity options. So I would any way get a new motherboard to go along with a new CPU making backward compatibility with sockets a moot point. If you feel that you need a new CPU, but not a new motherboard to go with it, then believe me, you don't need a CPU upgrade either (at least not one that is from a different iteration).
u guys are forgetting that intel maintained the 775 socket for close to a decade. even today according to intel 775 occupies a major chunk of the intel users. didnt intel also create a lowly single core for 775 and then develop a solid quad core for it also? u guys fail to understand that not everybody can afford to keep upgrading every two years. and further intel prices its stuff for premium users
^^ And you are forgetting that that socket compatibility is not the same as CPU compatibility. What AMD supports is CPU compatibility, not just socket compatibility. Because AMD has to design the CPU's in a way so as to support all the previously released AM2/AM3 socket boards, they have to heavily sacrifice in terms of design and innovation leaving the performance to suffer.
Even when Intel was using the same LGA 775 socket, they had released several iterations of the CPU's and chip-sets that were not always compatible with one another. For instance, can any one with a first gen LGA 775 motherboard slap in a Q9550 CPU and use it just like that? Would that even make sense running a second gen core 2 CPU on motherboard with chip-set designed for the Pentium 4 era? Even with the Sandy Bridge platform, it would not have been that difficult for Intel to design the CPU to be compatible with 1156 socket, but would that alone ensure compatibility with the 1156 motherboards existing in the market considering the Sandy Bridge is a completely different beast compared to the earlier platform? I think the reason Intel didn't make these CPU's in 1156 package is to prevent users from slapping in a Sandy Bridge CPU in an older motherboard and end up burning the CPU or the motherboard or both.
So why do you even need backward compatible CPU's if you can't afford to upgrade frequently. Just use the platform as long as you want and upgrade when you can afford to do it. Its just a pretty weak argument trying to convince yourself that you don't need to upgrade motherboard, but you want a new CPU. If you don't feel the need to upgrade moterboard, then there is no real need for you to upgrade the CPU past the same generation.
A computer is a balance of all components and trying to run a new CPU on a 5 gen old motherboard is just going to be a waste of money. If given the option of CPU Compatibility, would you really like the idea of slapping in the latest Bulldozer hex core on a 15 year old motherboard that had no USB or PS/2 ports, no PCI-e slots and came with 9 pin serial and 25 pin parallel ports and populated with only PCI and ISA slots?
Even when Intel was using the same LGA 775 socket, they had released several iterations of the CPU's and chip-sets that were not always compatible with one another. For instance, can any one with a first gen LGA 775 motherboard slap in a Q9550 CPU and use it just like that? Would that even make sense running a second gen core 2 CPU on motherboard with chip-set designed for the Pentium 4 era? Even with the Sandy Bridge platform, it would not have been that difficult for Intel to design the CPU to be compatible with 1156 socket, but would that alone ensure compatibility with the 1156 motherboards existing in the market considering the Sandy Bridge is a completely different beast compared to the earlier platform? I think the reason Intel didn't make these CPU's in 1156 package is to prevent users from slapping in a Sandy Bridge CPU in an older motherboard and end up burning the CPU or the motherboard or both.
mrcool63 said:
So why do you even need backward compatible CPU's if you can't afford to upgrade frequently. Just use the platform as long as you want and upgrade when you can afford to do it. Its just a pretty weak argument trying to convince yourself that you don't need to upgrade motherboard, but you want a new CPU. If you don't feel the need to upgrade moterboard, then there is no real need for you to upgrade the CPU past the same generation.
A computer is a balance of all components and trying to run a new CPU on a 5 gen old motherboard is just going to be a waste of money. If given the option of CPU Compatibility, would you really like the idea of slapping in the latest Bulldozer hex core on a 15 year old motherboard that had no USB or PS/2 ports, no PCI-e slots and came with 9 pin serial and 25 pin parallel ports and populated with only PCI and ISA slots?
dude am3 was released in 2009. its only two years old and further bulldozer uses am3+(a different entity) and further in that sense am2 had also its upgrades. am2+ sockets were different from am2. backward compatibilty does not imply there are no upgrades. as in intel dye became smaller, better power consumption and overclocking ability and ddr3 support. if the normal quad-cores am3 socket cpu's are put in an am3+ board various upgrades such as vcore swithing and others will not work. but by using such mobo's phased upgrading is possible. will tax people lesser when compared to a radical upgrade.
These stuff apply for the vast majority of indians and not us priviledged few who frequent techenclave
even today the budget for a new comp build is 20-25k(for many)
These stuff apply for the vast majority of indians and not us priviledged few who frequent techenclave
even today the budget for a new comp build is 20-25k(for many)
- Status