New Heatsinks and Motherboards

LGA-1156 processors use a different heatsink than both LGA-1366 and LGA-775 chips.


Lynnfield and its cooler

As the numbers would imply, the LGA-1156 heatsink has a larger footprint than LGA-775 but smaller than LGA-1366.


From Left to Right: Retail LGA-1366 Cooler, Retail LGA-1156 Cooler, Retail 45nm LGA-775 Cooler

The retail LGA-1156 is actually much closer to the 45nm LGA-775 retail cooler than the LGA-1366 retail HSF:

As you'll see later on in the article, the retail cooler isn't very good for heavy overclocking. Power users will want something a little bigger:

The Lynnfield/P55 launch is huge. Virtually every single motherboard manufacturer has a P55 board available. Prices range from ~$110 - $300 depending on the number of bells and whistles.


Gigabyte's ultra high end UD6 (left) and Gigabyte's lower end micro-ATX UD4 (right)


Gigabyte's high end UD6 comes with 6 DIMM slots like its X58 brethren.

Micro-ATX is increasing in popularity and we actually have some good options this time if you're trying to build a smaller Lynnfield system. Combined with Lynnfield's excellent idle power (the lowest of any quad-core we've ever tested), this could make for an unusually potent HTPC.


A closer look at Gigabyte's micro-ATX P55M-UD4

The only thing we're really missing is a good mini-ITX Lynnfield board. But perhaps the manufacturers will wait until we have on-package graphics before going down that route...

One More Time: New H55 Boards Next Year

As I subtley implied at the end of the last section, Intel is bringing on-package graphics to Nehalem starting in Q4 of this year:

The 32nm Nehalem shrink, codenamed Westmere, will be available with a 45nm Intel graphics core on the processor's package. This graphics core is an evolution of what's currently in the G45 chipset and not Larrabee (although eventually that will change). From what I've heard, this is actually going to be Intel's first reasonably good integrated graphics core.

With the graphics on-package, there needs to be an interface from the processor socket to video output located on the motherboard. As you can see from the P55 motherboards that are launching today: none of them have this video out. Granted there aren't any CPUs out to take advantage of it either.


No DVI/HDMI/VGA out...yet

Early next year (or maybe even late this year) we'll see a new breed of LGA-1156 motherboards with video output, designed for use with these Westmere IGP parts. Rumor has it that these motherboards will use Intel's H55 chipset.

Lynnfield early adopters need not worry, 32nm quad-core processors won't be out for at least a year.

The LGA-1156 Socket Homework: How Turbo Mode Works
POST A COMMENT

341 Comments

View All Comments

  • snakeoil - Tuesday, September 08, 2009 - link

    what part of stock speed you don't understand?

    if you are going to compare 2 processors both must have a fixed stock speed, if you increase the frequency of one of them by 1Ghz over the stock speed that is illegal.

    or either both have a stock fixed speed to benchmark or both are overclocked.

    overclocking is the same it doesn't matter if it's auto overclocking or manual overclocking.

    we the people demand justice.
    we the people are not stupid.


    Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    You may find that your desire for fixed speed comparisons will become difficult in the future. Both AMD and Intel are going to be embracing this sort of an approach to clock speeds.

    Overclocking is not the same as what is happening with turbo mode. Overclocking is not officially supported by the manufacturer, it is running a part faster than it was sold at in order to improve performance. If an application crashes because you've overclocked your chip too far that's no fault of the manufacturer.

    Turbo mode runs the chip at a frequency it's guaranteed to work at, it's operating within spec. It simply re-allocates thermal resources; Intel could disable 3 of the cores and sell a Core i7 870 as a 3.6GHz single-core processor, or disable 2 of the cores and sell it as a 3.47GHz processor, or only disable one core and sell it as a 3.2GHz processor. Instead of making the end user choose, instead you get a dynamic processor that can configure itself in real time depending on the workload.

    This is in stark contrast to AMD's Overdrive utility which is actually overclocking. The chips aren't validated at the overdrive speeds and you're thus overclocking. Lynnfield is validated at both its standard clock speed and its turbo speeds, just like Bloomfield. So long as you don't exceed the TDP of the chip, it will work at those turbo frequencies. The things that will prevent it from turboing were outlined in the article.

    Once again, I am not increasing the speed of anything - Lynnfield is simply working as designed. Whether it's in a Dell machine or in a custom build, it will always work this way. It's what the end user will see the moment they turn on a Lynnfield machine. The end user would not see the same from a Core 2 or a Phenom II based machine.

    Take care,
    Anand

    Reply
  • Jamahl - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    The problem with this review is it has a bunch of graphs with intel cpus with speeds rated at a lot lower than what they actually are.

    When you show a graph of an i5 @ 2.66 gigahertz beating a 3.4 gigahertz phenom II, that is false and that is a problem. This cpu was not ever at 2.66 gigahertz for any of these tests was it?

    I suggest there is a problem with your reviewer also, not to mention his attitude about 'having a laugh' because i brought up this point?
    Reply
  • Anand Lal Shimpi - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    Again, that is the default clock of the processor - in many cases (especially the heavily threaded tests) it will be running at that speed. Turbo mode is dynamic, it's impossible to put down exactly what speed the chip was running at as it'll change throughout each test.

    You might see the chip run at 2.66GHz for several seconds, jump up to 3.46GHz then down to 3.2GHz, up to 3.6GHz and then back down to 2.66GHz all in the course of a single benchmark. It's repeatable, but there's no way to display all of that in a bar chart.

    Take care,
    Anand
    Reply
  • snakeoil - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    What you are doing is cheating, and people is not stupid.
    you are saying that lynnfield is faster than phenom 2 because lynnfield is overclocked at least 600 mhz.
    people is not stupid as you think, and what you are doing is outrageous.
    if you are going to benchamark with turbo enabled then you have to overclock phenom 2 at least the same 600 mhz.

    show some respect for your readers. or are you really on intel's payroll?
    Reply
  • Klober - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    I am usually very respectful on the AnandTech and DailyTech forums and comments areas, but you sir are exactly as stupid as you are claiming people "is" not. Please read the article from beginning to end before continuing on your unjustified tirade. The processor is being used as intended by the manufacturer - to not test it in this way would be a disservice to the engineers who designed it and the company that produces it. Reply
  • snakeoil - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    if you dont want to disable turbo the overclock phenom 2 at least 600 mhz.
    just to be fair.
    Reply
  • Gary Key - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    "if you dont want to disable turbo the overclock phenom 2 at least 600 mhz.
    just to be fair. "

    You do realize that it takes near zero or sub-zero cooling to run the 965BE in stable manner at 4GHz with a 64-bit OS. When I say stable, I mean 24/7 multi-tasking, not a CPUZ screenshot or a SuperPi 1M bench. AMD has not solved this problem with the current stepping.

    Once again, and for the last time, Intel's turbo function is a standard feature of the processor. AMD will be offering the exact same technology in their next processor family.
    Reply
  • snakeoil - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    that's not true.
    we demand justice and fair benchmarks.
    you are losing all credibility and these benchmarks are worthless and unreal.
    Reply
  • goinginstyle - Wednesday, September 09, 2009 - link

    How many times do they have to respond to you in a logical manner. You should be banned and in some countries that would mean a beheading for being so damn stupid. Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now