How far off is a Intel chipset w/ native Thunderbolt, USB3, SATA6?

[gramboh]

Hi,

After reading the Ivy Bridge updates on AT, I was disappointed to see that the next rollforward of the consumer and enthusiast platforms will not include native Thunderbolt/Lightpeak support, and X79 will not even include native USB3.

Are there any rumours on when Intel is going to release a platform with the following:

- Native Thunderbolt
- Native USB3
- Native SATA6 (I realize this exists now)

I was planning on building a new PC (gaming, with an SSD) this fall or next spring, but want it to include those technologies as I use my PCs for 4+ years with only minor upgrades (still running a Q6700 w/ GTX280 pretty happily right now).

Cheers

 

[magomago]

i don't see how anything native you have listed would benefit you, especially if all your upgrades are minor. worst comes worst you have an add in card.


by next fall i doubt we'll see this stuff by this fall, and next spring is so far out you should simply revisit it all come next sring.

 

[paperwastage]

USB3 + SATA6: the Sandy Bridge H67/P67 mobo manufacturers add these components 3rd-party side...

as for thunderbolt, what do you need? everything so far you have can either be done via USB 2.0 (webcam, mic, printer/camera/phone transfer), or USB 3.0/esata (file transfer to another HDD). you have output video ports from a GPU

thunderbolt and USB 3.0 is still a long way from being mainstream... and as a desktop, you use PCI express to expand, not thunderbolt

 

[Zap]

as a desktop, you use PCI express to expand, not thunderbolt

Right. Thunderbolt is for notebook expansion as you can't easily upgrade/add stuff as there's just no room inside.

Besides, there's ALWAYS something new around the corner, so if you play this kind of waiting game, you may as well resign yourself to never having a new PC.

 

[gramboh]

I hear you guys, in reality I probably wouldn't use any Thunderbolt components, the only possibility is we will get my wife a Macbook next year, but I doubt there would be any shared components.

I know USB3 and SATA6 are available now (SATA6 native, USB3 add-on), I want SATA6 for SSD performance and already have a USB3 external drive (using it in eSATA mode which is faster anyway, no protocol overhead). I've read about some issues with USB3 with some of the current generation motherboards.

Future-proofing is impossible, but I like to have "known" future technologies that are close in my systems and which will be ubiqutious when I build them as I keep my systems for so long. I'll probably make a decision based on how my system handles the games in the fall, and what is on the horizon for Q1-2012

Thanks

 

[Pneumothorax]

I'm with the OP on this one. Seeing Intel has decided shackle the next-gen Sandy Bridge-E/Z68 chipsets with 10 year old USB 2.0 tech, I'm pretty much going to skip this generation and just wait for Ivy Bridge. Never have been a fan of 3rd party interface chipsets and their potential driver problems.

 

[Zap]

I'm pretty much going to skip this generation and just wait for Ivy Bridge.

I'm not going to wait. Indeed I just finished building my new Sandy Bridge rig this past week.

I'll also likely upgrade to Ivy Bridge and Panther Point next year. Unless Bulldozer is a hit, then maybe I'll upgrade to AMD stuff?

I really don't understand this "use same system for many years" thing.

 

[Dark Shroud]

Ivy Bridge is supposed to have them built in. I believe that's the LGA 2011 socket.

 

[Zap]

Ivy Bridge is supposed to have them built in. I believe that's the LGA 2011 socket.

socket 2011
USB 3.0 - no
SATA 6G - yes
Thunderbolt - no

 

[Pneumothorax]

I'm not going to wait. Indeed I just finished building my new Sandy Bridge rig this past week.

I'll also likely upgrade to Ivy Bridge and Panther Point next year. Unless Bulldozer is a hit, then maybe I'll upgrade to AMD stuff?

I really don't understand this "use same system for many years" thing.

Currently running an i7 920 rig at 3.8ghz and was planning on going to SB-E with presumed quicksync along with at least USB 3.0 As Intel decided to cheap out and not put those things in this current gen, I think I'll just shoulder on with my current rig. BTW I do tons of transcoding video so I was pretty much dead set on getting a new hexacore and no I'm not paying Intel's ridiculous prices for the 970/980x cpus on a dead-end socket.

 

[bankster55]

http://www.anandtech.com/show/4291/additional-details-on-sandy-bridgee-processors-x79-and-lga2011
http://www.anandtech.com/show/4318/intel-roadmap-ivy-bridge-panther-point-ssds

 

[Vette73]

The 7 series chipset, 1155, is supposed to have USB 3.0 and SATA 6Gb native.

 

[Vette73]

I'm not going to wait. Indeed I just finished building my new Sandy Bridge rig this past week.

I'll also likely upgrade to Ivy Bridge and Panther Point next year. Unless Bulldozer is a hit, then maybe I'll upgrade to AMD stuff?

I really don't understand this "use same system for many years" thing.

Why not? I am still using my 775 Intel system that started with a 805 dual core. It does everything I want so why should I upgrade?

I may go BD if its cheaper as I am a bang for the buck kinda person. But if ti cost the same or more than I will wait for Ivy and the 7 series chipsets.

 

[Zap]

Currently running an i7 920 rig at 3.8ghz
...
BTW I do tons of transcoding video so I was pretty much dead set on getting a new hexacore and no I'm not paying Intel's ridiculous prices for the 970/980x cpus on a dead-end socket.

Sandy Bridge video encoding

Sandy Bridge beats everything except the Intel hex core, and even beats the hex core some of the time. That's at stock speeds. Sandy Bridge can easily be overclocked higher using cheaper cooling. Oh yeah, it'll do that while consuming less electricity and putting out less heat for your A/C to battle.

Sandy Bridge also costs less than the cheapest Intel hex core, which is currently the Core i7 970 for around $600 and even lower MHz than the 980X which was able to beat the Sandy Bridge chip half the time.

So, ask yourself if your computer time (how long it takes to encode/transcode) is worth not upgrading for another year.

Personally speaking, I always have more stuff to do than time to do it, so anything that saves me time is worth me buying.

Why not? I am still using my 775 Intel system that started with a 805 dual core. It does everything I want so why should I upgrade?

*SHUDDER*

To each their own.

I upgrade because:
1) It is my hobby.
2) I can afford it.

 

[Golgatha]

Currently running an i7 920 rig at 3.8ghz and was planning on going to SB-E with presumed quicksync along with at least USB 3.0 As Intel decided to cheap out and not put those things in this current gen, I think I'll just shoulder on with my current rig. BTW I do tons of transcoding video so I was pretty much dead set on getting a new hexacore and no I'm not paying Intel's ridiculous prices for the 970/980x cpus on a dead-end socket.

I too would love some hexcore CPU lovin'. Alas, I'm not willing to shell out $600-$1000 for one, especially on a dead end platform. Give me one for $350 or less and then we'll talk.

 

[tomoyo]

I'm not going to wait. Indeed I just finished building my new Sandy Bridge rig this past week.

I'll also likely upgrade to Ivy Bridge and Panther Point next year. Unless Bulldozer is a hit, then maybe I'll upgrade to AMD stuff?

I really don't understand this "use same system for many years" thing.

I used to be a once a year type, but honestly needs have definitely slowed down, although I guess on average I'm at least once a year since I'm building two new systems to add to my two current ones plus I will upgrade my main probably late this year. So that's 3 this year and hopefully maybe 1 next year. I'm more like 2-3 years per system, but having 4 systems is a little crazy and ruins the average

Personally I don't see any point in thunderbolt now, when you want thunderbolt for real, you'll probably want a new computer anyways. Now USB3 and Sata-6gb will actually be useful this year and next, so those do make sense to want.

 

[Infrnl]

I too would love some hexcore CPU lovin'. Alas, I'm not willing to shell out $600-$1000 for one, especially on a dead end platform. Give me one for $350 or less and then we'll talk.

Everything is a deadend platform these days, but I agree for the price premium; its not worth it for most.
SB has excellent performance while being easy on the outlet.

As we all know; Its a never ending battle and we all have our own personal needs and opinions

 

[AkumaX]

Sandy Bridge video encoding

Sandy Bridge beats everything except the Intel hex core, and even beats the hex core some of the time. That's at stock speeds. Sandy Bridge can easily be overclocked higher using cheaper cooling. Oh yeah, it'll do that while consuming less electricity and putting out less heat for your A/C to battle.

Sandy Bridge also costs less than the cheapest Intel hex core, which is currently the Core i7 970 for around $600 and even lower MHz than the 980X which was able to beat the Sandy Bridge chip half the time.

So, ask yourself if your computer time (how long it takes to encode/transcode) is worth not upgrading for another year.

Personally speaking, I always have more stuff to do than time to do it, so anything that saves me time is worth me buying.



*SHUDDER*

To each their own.

I upgrade because:
1) It is my hobby.
2) I can afford it.

I am waiting for a confirmed report/acknowledgement that the Z68 will be able to do QuickSync with a discrete gfx card.

 

[chucky2]

It's not like if a mobo uses the NEC USB 3.0 chip it's a POS or something, NEC is good stuff. Now VIA <shudder>...that I'd be leery of...

Chuck