The LGA-1156 Socket: Size and Installation

The first Core i7, Bloomfield, went into a 1366-pin LGA socket:

A year later we have Lynnfield, and it fits in a much tighter space:

The LGA-1156 socket and Lynnfield CPUs are about as big as the old LGA-775 sockets/chips:

From Left to Right: Intel Core i7 "Bloomfield" (LGA-1366), Intel Core i7 "Lynnfield" (LGA-1156), Intel Core 2 Quad "Yorkfield" (LGA-775)

Note the pad densitiy of Lynnfield vs. LGA-775 processors

The installation process is largely the same as any other Intel LGA socket, the difference being that LGA-1156 uses a new one-sided retention mechanism.

After the socket is "open", gently place the CPU on top of the pins. The chip can only fit in one direction so just pay attention:

With the chip in the socket and the lever still pulled back, move the socket cover over the CPU and slide its teeth under the retention screw on the opposite side:

Then, lower the lever, lock it in place and you're good to go:

Index New Heatsinks and Motherboards
Comments Locked


View All Comments

  • Shadowmaster625 - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Intel releases yet another new socket type, offering negligible performance enhancements vs socket 775. Soon they will obsolete another socket type still in use. And this is a good thing? I'm still dealing with the fallout from the socket 478...
  • DJMiggy - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Thanks! Some good info! Now to decide what to do...
  • Rabman - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Full disclusre -- I work for AMD, my comments are my own and do not reflect my employer, etc.

    A clarification on Windows 7's Core Parking feature -- it doesn't actually "[look] at the performance penalty from migrating a thread from one core to another". Rather, Core Parking was designed as a power saving feature for multi-core server machines, and is only enabled on Windows 7 client SKUs where HT is present (I won't get into specifics as to why this decision was made). The side benefit for processors with HT is that the hyperthreads can be parked so the Windows scheduler will spread threads across the "real" cores first, resulting in better performance characteristics.
  • rbbot - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    That implies that it would have a negative effect on the chances of turbo mode engaging. On other OS, pure random chance would sometimes assign a waking thread to the hyper-core of the one already executing at full pelt. However, this means that on Windows 7, core parking prevents this happening and always wakes a 2nd core for the 2nd thread.

  • puffpio - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    If you disable turbo mode, will the individual cores still power down when unused?

    Take the 860 for example. With turbo mode enabled you get these overclocked speeds:
    3C/4C Active: 3.54GHz
    2C Active: 3.85GHz
    1C Active: 4.00GHz

    but with turbo mode disabled you get 3.99GHz at 1/2/3/4 cores active.
    If the cores are still able to be powered down w/ turbo mode disabled, it would seem that would give you the best performance at any core activity level.
  • Comdrpopnfresh - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Specifically; power consumption, efficiency, and productivity/performance. On the consumer scale though- obviously with single-cpu boards benches geared towards commercial use would be droll.
  • AFUMCBill - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Great Review.

    You mentioned the rising popularity of the uATX platform.
    I would guess this is related to the rising popularity of laptops.
    Except you can't find anything close to the performance of a Core i7 or i5 processor in a laptop form factor at anything remotely resembling a reasonable price - as in thousands and thousands of dollars extra. So people are headed to the uATX platform and the small(er) LAN party type boxes to get mobile performace. In my case I would like to be able to load high bitrate (25 Mbps and up) MPEG2 and MPEG4 footage into my video editor and have at it. My Q6600 handles the MPEG2 fine, but not the MPEG4 (AVCHD).

    Found the Core i7 860 available at MicroCenter for $229.99 USD.
    For me to make the buy, the only thing that is missing is USB 3.0.
    Next year is looking good...and prices are likely to be even lower then :-)
  • Peroxyde - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Just checked at Newegg. Is there any error on the price? The newer and more performance i5 750 costs $209. The Q9550 cost $219. That sounds illogical.
  • AFUMCBill - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    I think it's called having old stock that was purchased before the new announcements. Obviously the folks they are going to be selling to are ones who are updating the processor in an older 775 socket motherboard based system - which with the new announcements are now rapidly receding into the past.
  • C'DaleRider - Tuesday, September 8, 2009 - link

    Sucks to have to depend on Newegg for buying, esp. considering what MicroCenter is doing. $199 for the i7 920 while Newegg gouges at $279, or the i5 750 for $179.

    Newegg long ago ceased being the place for the best prices.

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now