|
mew force shoelace posted:The return of the turbo button  Taking steps backward in order to make leaps forward?
|
#
¿
Sep 14, 2010 22:43
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 17:19 |
|
|
quote:Other Platform Features Call me when the Intel reference boards can do SATA600 on all SATA ports and have native USB 3.0 without the need for a third party. In addition to that, let me know when SSDs that support SATA600 are over 500GB in size and are reasonably priced. Until then I'd rather just lean towards a C2D -> C2Q, more memory or a small, cheap SSD.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2010 21:12
|
|
|
Spime Wrangler posted:ell oh ell Look at us watching old people fall down stairs on YouTube via our Google Android phones.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 22, 2010 19:14
|
|
|
I just assembled a system for someone with the Intel DP67BG board literally two days before reports came out about the problem. loving wonderful. Got the system up and running, Windows installed, etc. and the next day I get the Newegg e-mail. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 3, 2011 00:56
|
|
|
One thing you have to watch out for if you're going to purchase a motherboard with an onboard Intel NIC is if it supports Jumbo Frames. A lot of Intel reference boards I've purchased have the onboard Intel NIC, but research/drivers have often revealed a lack of Jumbo Frame support. I had to purchase a PCI Express Intel NIC that had Jumbo Frame support because the DP45SG's onboard Gigabit NIC couldn't do it.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 21, 2011 00:19
|
|
|
Cuntpunch posted:So I'm poking around the UEFI BIOS on my MSI P67A-GD65, just looking at all the piles of settings and getting myself properly amused by the fact that I think I can play loving Tetris in my BIOS, but 90% of the actual options are completely undocumented with an obscure name. This is one of the primary reasons why I stick with the Intel reference motherboards and not ones from Asus, MSI, etc. In my experience over the years, Intel motherboards by those companies over-clock extremely well and provide a huge amount of features. However, their documentation is poorly written or spotty at best. With every Intel reference board, everything is documented and explained in detail. It might not provide the same level of over-clocking functionality and provide a great set of features, but it's often stable as a rock.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 30, 2011 19:10
|
|
|
Star War Sex Parrot posted:Intel has pushed back Ivy Bridge until Spring of 2012. Sounds like the perfect amount of time to save up more money after tax season for Ivy Bridge.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 2, 2011 01:30
|
|
|
I'm definitely working on waiting for Ivy Bridge. The pushed back release deadline helps because it's a little bit after tax refund season which is good. I'm not exactly hurting at the moment, I'm on an e8400 with a Radeon HD 4890 so I'm thinking I should have no problem waiting until spring of next year to upgrade. The confusing thing I can see is how some of these Sandy Bridge processors/motherboard chipsets have different features. There are a lot of pro's and con's like one processor/motherboard does virtualization well, but another does overclocking fairly well. I hope they don't try to pull that poo poo in Ivy Bridge. PUBLIC TOILET fucked around with this message at 01:09 on Sep 12, 2011 |
|
#
¿
Sep 12, 2011 01:07
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:That's Intel's market segmentation tomfoolery that's messing with you. I decided I'd rather just get a Xeon instead of going down to an AMD machine that'd gulp up a fair bit more power and perform worse for most of my tasks throughout its life. The costs of going Xeon aren't all that terrible if you're looking for virtualization features as any bit of a concern - you should probably be on a Xeon already anyway. Then there's the HCL for VMware ESXi that bugged me and I'd want Intel NICs and server grade (haha, yeah...) SATA controllers which would raise the costs for me to get the system up to a functional level. I put together a fairly badass Xeon system with a GTX 560 and 128GB SSD (about 25% of the cost!) for about $1100 in the end and I'm fine with that cost, especially since I can write it off on my taxes anyway. That's a pretty good thought, too. I was thinking about weighing the option of going with a Xeon but I was always under the impression they were more expensive. I haven't really taken a good look at their cost now compared to the regular desktop line. If the price/features are right, I could always go with Sandy Bridge once Ivy Bridge comes out. Maybe then Sandy Bridge Xeon stuff will be cheaper and have more on-board features.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 13, 2011 03:29
|
|
|
So if Gigabyte has completely dropped the ball on their motherboards when it comes to the Vdroop issue, which manufacturer has worked around this issue the best? I'm probably not going to build a new system until Ivy Bridge arrives, but I've grown accustomed to Intel reference boards (I don't do much overclocking at all and I have a habit of keeping the vital components to one manufacturer). However, I'm willing to jump ship in that regard and consider Asus/Asrock or MSI. I've had ASUS boards before but that was a while back and the only thing I notice about them now is the high price. But I suppose that's where Asrock/MSI come in. I don't even know how Intel handles the Vdroop issue with their own motherboards. Maybe they do a decent job?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2012 18:25
|
|
|
Any idea on the possibility of Z77 Micro-ATX boards? I've been considering building the next machine with Micro-ATX because I barely use the extra peripherals, etc. that come with a full ATX.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 19, 2012 23:03
|
|
|
Erdricks posted:You mean this? I should have been more specific. Whatever the latest Ivy Bridge, Intel manufactured Micro-ATX board is. If it exists.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2012 01:31
|
|
|
Allstone posted:Just curious, but what reasons are there in particular for using an intel manufactured board? I've been purchasing Intel-reference boards for a while now, generally because I feel as though they're a bit more stable for my use. Additionally, it's a "why not just get everything from the manufacturer" kind of thing. I don't really overclock and I don't typically use the massive amount of extras/features that other motherboard manufacturers include (why would I want built-in WiFi on a motherboard?). I also feel like Intel will stick to more standardized specifications when it comes to the design/construction of their motherboards. A lot of Intel applications that integrate with their motherboards also seem to have a better quality than competing products (i.e. ASUS' fan monitoring/voltage manipulation applications). I suppose it's kind of hard to explain but my thought is if I'm going to go with Intel, I'd rather just choose a motherboard from the same company that's building the processor. It's one company making everything work together in a straight-forward fashion (Intel processor, Intel motherboard with an Intel chipset, Intel USB, Intel Gigabit LAN, etc.) Maybe I'm just being geriatric and old timey with technology. I haven't had any bad luck with sticking to Intel for as much as possible, but if they're phasing out their motherboard line then I guess I have no choice. PUBLIC TOILET fucked around with this message at 15:44 on Apr 21, 2012 |
|
#
¿
Apr 21, 2012 15:38
|
|
|
calcio posted:Why Z77 instead of a Z75. Are you going to use Intel SRT? Essentially, yes. I had noticed that was a feature only in the Z77. I'm on an e8400 system now so Ivy Bridge is my next step. I would just like to have all the bells and whistles and I've been leaning towards using Intel SSDs again anyway. If I'm feeling good and want to spend money then perhaps I'll lean towards SRT & RAID-0 SSDs then rely on my WHS 2011 to make daily backups in case there's a big failure.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 24, 2012 23:31
|
|
|
How much is known about Haswell at this point? I'm trying to skip over an Ivy Bridge-build and wait for Haswell.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 27, 2012 02:18
|
|
|
movax posted:What do you have right now? Personally, I'd only be thinking of upgrading if I didn't already have a quad-core. Nehalem quads still are good enough for games, and I think even the Core 2 Quads with a healthy overclock can handle some newer titles. I have a Core 2 Duo e8400 now. I had looked at just swapping in a quad core Core 2 CPU but I think the prices are going up.
|
|
#
¿
Aug 28, 2012 00:31
|
|
|
I don't know about you guys, but I'm hanging on to my Core 2 Duo system until Haswell arrives. PUSH IT TO THE LIMIT 
|
|
#
¿
Oct 24, 2012 04:13
|
|
|
Wouldn't Skylake fall under Intel's "tick" timeframe? Isn't it better to choose Haswell as that would fall under "tock"? Is Intel just talking out of its giant rear end when it uses this tick/tock poo poo?
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2012 04:58
|
|
|
Maybe Intel is betting on motherboard manufacturers to shift their business models elsewhere? Maybe strong arm those companies into purchasing pre-fabricated components directly from Intel to use in the devices they create? If that's the case then holyyyyyyy poo poo is that some anti-competitive, monopolistic maneuvering. That's also a pretty big "bet it all on red" kind of move that I can't see any company making. Then again, look at Microsoft & Windows 8. 
|
|
#
¿
Nov 27, 2012 05:52
|
|
|
movax posted:The -K versions have always lacked Vt-d as well, which sucks and is pure market segmentation as well. At least you still get Vt-x on them, but I think Microsoft would get very annoyed if they started segmenting that away. With regards to Haswell, I've thought about going the route of building the next system with a greater emphasis on virtualization. However, I would like a mix of gaming/virtualization. Does it make sense to stick to the non-K CPUs to get all of the virtualization features? Does VMWare Workstation even utilize all of them?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2012 04:23
|
|
) are looking better and better.
|
Navaash posted:I haven't seen anyone discuss this yet here: drat it. It's not really a surprise, though. Which manufacturer is the closest to making motherboards like Intel's? (with regards to decent on-board components, good layout and configuration of headers/jumpers, informative manual, etc.)
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2013 04:30
|
|
|
WhyteRyce posted:Looks like I'm only buying Asus now since now one else seems to use the onboard Intel GBE controller Ahhh ha! If that's true then I suppose I'm going ASUS. I need Gigabit LAN and I'd rather not have to use a new NIC.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2013 06:06
|
|
|
Factory Factory posted:MSI's GD- series boards also use the Intel NIC, like the Z77A-GD55. Ugh. I'm pretty sure this particular board uses the onboard Intel NIC that caused me to have to purchase an actual NIC. Because of the way my file server works, in order to obtain best possible network file transfer speeds, I have to adjust a specific setting on all NICs. I need the ability to adjust the Jumbo Packet setting to 4088 Bytes. Last time I tried that with an onboard Intel NIC, it didn't give the option to adjust the value.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 25, 2013 23:26
|
|
|
Is there a comparison out yet that shows the differences between the Haswell consumer processors and the Haswell Xeons? I know it's far away but I wasn't sure if they released any information on that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 9, 2013 16:35
|
|
|
Would there be a benefit to building a Haswell Xeon system as a primary desktop machine over a Haswell i7 one? Aside from the obvious virtualization capabilities.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2013 23:53
|
|
|
cstine posted:Actually, that raises a question - something like a Xeon E3-1230 isn't particularly more expensive than the similar Ivy Bridge chip - are the Xeons going to stay socketed, regardless of what Intel does with the 'consumer' line, or is that something that hasn't been discussed at all? Good question, I'd like to know as well. I'm interested in building a Haswell system but I'm leaning towards Xeon and it would be nice if future revisions are socketed.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2013 17:37
|
|
|
necrobobsledder posted:From what I've read, the follow-up to Haswell (Broadwell) will be BGA-only and be directly sent to OEMs and so those building aftermarket like most of us in SH/SC do for our home systems will need to wait until Skylake to whitebox. Because this is all a matter of forcing buyers to go directly from the OEM to pair CPU and motherboards (streamlining for costs and to trim logistics expenses while letting Intel pursue their mobile strategy) I think that they'll mark up Xeons even more with Broadwell that are still socketed or we'll all be forced into buying expensive marked-up Dell, HP, etc. servers instead of whiteboxing our own. There's evidence Intel is trying to squeeze a bit more life out of socketed E3s at least via more market segmentation AKA abusing market position (the Haswell E3 Xeon's LGA1150 is not compatible with Z87 LGA1150 sockets) so we may see something else to ruin our day as prosumers. The E3 is a final place where Intel could really put the screws on those of us with professional needs but on non-Fortune 500 budgets and since I don't think AMD will exactly step up to the task (they got rid of ECC support on newer CPUs unless they're Opterons) there's hardly a choice now without losing ECC on buttloads of RAM. Good information. So then what will be the options available for someone who wants to build a Xeon-based workstation when Haswell arrives? I thought Haswell was using a new socket so then they would need a refresh of the Xeons? I'm way behind on the latest news. It seems as though price/performance limits us to E3's (unless you want to drop a lot more on an E5.)
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2013 19:54
|
|
|
Any word on Haswell Xeons yet?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 2, 2013 03:10
|
|
|
Is there currently still a problem with the first-gen Haswell motherboards coming out that Intel has made manufacturers sign a waiver for? Something to do with USB 3.0, correct?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 4, 2013 01:05
|
|
|
I'm guessing Haswell-E will be when Intel fixes their USB 3.0 issues. So that comes out Q3 of this year? or Q4?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2013 19:21
|
|
|
I know I don't have to let this affect my buying decision. What does affect my buying decision though is a product that the manufacturer has admitted as having a problem on launch that will eventually be corrected in future revisions. Buy a product with a known manufacturer-defect, or wait until a defect-free product arrives.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2013 20:32
|
|
|
The more I read about Haswell-E for 2014, the more I want to wait even further for it.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 17, 2013 05:30
|
|
|
If there was enough research advancement, couldn't you feasibly use graphene to make processor dies even smaller?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 19, 2013 00:16
|
|
|
Is it safe to say that if I were to build a new machine with Xeon, there won't be any new Xeon CPUs until next year? Everything I've heard seems to indicate that new Xeons won't be out until next year and even then they will technically be Ivy Bridge Xeons and not Haswell ones.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 24, 2013 02:01
|
|
|
So it would seem safe to assume that we won't see anything earth-shattering (if that) from Intel until the second half of 2014. Until then, Intel will chug along with a couple refreshes. Sounds like I'd be safe to purchase something in the near future as the next option would be to wait until the second half of 2014 which seems pretty far away. Even then it would be an initial release and that's if Intel remains on schedule. Sounds like my best bet for building a Xeon machine is to wait until after the Ivy Bridge-E refresh in September? I don't think these slides mention anything about Xeon.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
So it sounds like the next series of Xeons will mean the end of a budget-priced Xeon processor?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 22, 2014 23:51
|
|
|
I'm looking at completing a new system build, but I'm hesitant to purchase the Xeon E3-1270v6 I've been eyeing up. Would I be better off waiting to see if a Spectre/Meltdown-corrected refresh CPU comes out?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 21, 2018 04:26
|
|
|
Looks like they're starting to incorporate the Spectre-fixed BIOS' within Windows Update now: https://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2018/03/microsoft-will-soon-start-shipping-the-intel-spectre-microcode-fixes/ https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/help/4090007/intel-microcode-updates That's convenient, even if it is a really slow roll-out.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 2, 2018 04:57
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 25, 2024 17:19 |
|
|
Well, I can confirm that a BIOS update from Intel is available that patches the Xeon E3-1270v6 and it works fine. Confirmed the vulnerabilities are patched via the Microsoft PowerShell script that checks the CPU. I have yet to notice a performance degradation.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 23, 2018 03:30
|
|