Go Back   nV News Forums > Hardware Forums > CPUs, Motherboards And Memory

Newegg Daily Deals

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 01-07-11, 04:02 PM   #25
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by LydianKnight View Post
I was the one to comment about the slot thingy but I was just wrong, as didn't pay attention to what ended being an obvious Wikipedia misbehaviour, editor-wise, so... nah.

I guess we will still use lever-type sockets for a while
Likely.

However, think of this in regards to slot-based processors. A GTX580 or 6970 is a far faster processor in today's computing environment than even the best Intel or AMD has to offer x86 wise.

What interface do our GPU's use? The PCI-e slot. I think that we all get turned off by the notion of slot based CPUs because we instantly think of the large and clunky Slot A and Slot 1 based processors from AMD and Intel way back when. Doesn't mean they cannot be utilised effectively today.

However, I don't think we'll be going bacl to slot-based CPUs for quite some time. Likely, for the duration of the ATX-form factor's life we'll be socket based. Only once ATX is replaced will we likely see something different.
Redeemed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-11, 05:08 PM   #26
XDanger
Whaaat?
 
XDanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,723
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeemed View Post
Likely.

However, think of this in regards to slot-based processors. A GTX580 or 6970 is a far faster processor in today's computing environment than even the best Intel or AMD has to offer x86 wise.

What interface do our GPU's use? The PCI-e slot. I think that we all get turned off by the notion of slot based CPUs because we instantly think of the large and clunky Slot A and Slot 1 based processors from AMD and Intel way back when. Doesn't mean they cannot be utilised effectively today.

However, I don't think we'll be going bacl to slot-based CPUs for quite some time. Likely, for the duration of the ATX-form factor's life we'll be socket based. Only once ATX is replaced will we likely see something different.
As long as everything that matters is on the CPU side of the slot it would be fine...
__________________
2500K 4.4ghz,P8P67Pro,120gb Force3, 12gb Vengeance,R9290,TX850v2,W7HP,LaCie Blue 22" crt COMMODORE 64 Silver Label 1Mhz/128D 4Mhz(Z80)
XDanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-11, 05:15 PM   #27
Roadhog
Resident Alien
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,776
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeemed View Post
Likely.

However, think of this in regards to slot-based processors. A GTX580 or 6970 is a far faster processor in today's computing environment than even the best Intel or AMD has to offer x86 wise.

What interface do our GPU's use? The PCI-e slot. I think that we all get turned off by the notion of slot based CPUs because we instantly think of the large and clunky Slot A and Slot 1 based processors from AMD and Intel way back when. Doesn't mean they cannot be utilised effectively today.

However, I don't think we'll be going bacl to slot-based CPUs for quite some time. Likely, for the duration of the ATX-form factor's life we'll be socket based. Only once ATX is replaced will we likely see something different.
You're missing a big issue here. Pcie bandwidth is NOTHING compared to what a CPU needs. Pcie 2.0, 8GB/s, and 3.0 still only 16GB/s. While the cpu to memory bandwidth is 64GB/s. You would be severely bandwidth starved with slot cpus.
Roadhog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-11, 05:19 PM   #28
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by XDanger View Post
As long as everything that matters is on the CPU side of the slot it would be fine...
I'm not sure I understand this- are you referring to bandwidth? If so, yeah that could be an issue to over come. here the socket approach does seem more effective and efficient.

However, looking at the massive ammounts of computational power easily being fed by PCI-e, I'm confident that a slot could accomodate the CPU.
Redeemed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-11, 05:24 PM   #29
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadhog View Post
You're missing a big issue here. Pcie bandwidth is NOTHING compared to what a CPU needs. Pcie 2.0, 8GB/s, and 3.0 still only 16GB/s. While the cpu to memory bandwidth is 64GB/s. You would be severely bandwidth starved with slot cpus.
Doesn't make it impossible. We're likely still thinking of the CPU itself residing on a PCB that fits into a slot. Why not the CPU itself plug into the slot- no additional PCB? Therefore the CPU itself connects directly to the mobo.

Of course, this would require the CPUs be designed differently, but still doable. Of course, not being an engineer I'll not be the one to overcome the bandwidth issue- I'm just confident it's fully possible.
Redeemed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-11, 05:30 PM   #30
Roadhog
Resident Alien
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 6,776
Default Re: this vs that

thats a lot of pins.. how would you physically fit all of them into a slot?
Roadhog is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-11, 05:36 PM   #31
Redeemed
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 17,982
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roadhog View Post
thats a lot of pins.. how would you physically fit all of them into a slot?
That would be another obstacle. At 1k+ pin count it's hard to accomodate for that.

However, the pins on a CPU are much finer than what you'd find on, for example, a graphics card, I'm sure with such small pins it'd be doable. But again, as a previously stated, would like require a redesign of the mobo layout straying away from the ATX form factor. If ever there was a time to introduce such a interface this would be it.
Redeemed is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-07-11, 08:17 PM   #32
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: this vs that

Argh, Bulldozer will NOT be using a slot and AM3+ CPU's are already confirmed not to work in AM3 mobos unfortunately. It's AM3+ so that you can use AM3 CPU's in the newer mobo... say if your old one dies and you can't upgrade your CPU just yet or something like that. There are certain barriers which prevent bulldozer from working in AM3.

If you want upgradeability with AMD now... buy C32 or G34 I guess.
__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote

Old 01-07-11, 11:33 PM   #33
ViN86
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 15,486
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeemed View Post
If Sandy Bridge is available where he's at. He lives in South Africa, he may not be able to purchase a Sandy Bridge setup- or it may be rediculously expensive over there.

And AM3 motherboards will support AM3+ processor last I heard.
I thought it was AM3+ will support AM3, but not the other way around. Typically that's how backwards compatibility works.
ViN86 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-08-11, 09:21 PM   #34
Viral
Registered User of Women
 
Viral's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 2,523
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by ViN86 View Post
I thought it was AM3+ will support AM3, but not the other way around. Typically that's how backwards compatibility works.
That's how it is this time around. Previously it has been different, like how you can still use AM3 CPU's in AM2+ boards if you have an up to date bios.

Anyhow, AM3+ boards should be available in a few months,

__________________
Q9550 w/ Thermalright Ultra 120 Extreme | 4GB Team Xtreme Dark 800MHz CL4 | Gigabyte X48-DS5
ASUS Radeon 5870 | 240GB OCZ Vertex 2 | 1TB WD Green Power | BenQ V2400W 24" LCD
Corsair HX-1000w | LG GGW-H20L 6x DL Blu-Ray Burner/HD-DVD Reader | Coolermaster Cosmos S

Acer TravelMate 4002WNLCi: Pentium M 725 @ 1.6GHz | Mobility Radeon 9700/64MB | 2GB DDR400 | 15.4" WXGA
Viral is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-09-11, 07:14 AM   #35
XDanger
Whaaat?
 
XDanger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 5,723
Default Re: this vs that

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redeemed View Post
I'm not sure I understand this- are you referring to bandwidth?
I was just talking about minimizing latencies due to placement of components on one side or the other .
__________________
2500K 4.4ghz,P8P67Pro,120gb Force3, 12gb Vengeance,R9290,TX850v2,W7HP,LaCie Blue 22" crt COMMODORE 64 Silver Label 1Mhz/128D 4Mhz(Z80)
XDanger is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright 1998 - 2014, nV News.