Socket 1366 or 1160?

[Jephph]

Hey hey. A while back, like 5-6 years ago, I purchased my first computer. I made the mistake of buying a Socket A platform with an AGP interface for video cards. You can probably see where I'm going with this. I've pretty much maxed it out since I bought it. I've replaced the 9200se that came with the computer with a 7800GS that I got for Christmas 2 years ago. I've also replaced the power supply with a OCZ GameXStream 600W. And I've added a couple of GB of RAM for a total of 3GB. There's not much I could do with the CPU.

Now, it's time for an upgrade. This time, I want to make sure my computer has pretty decent potential for upgradeability. So I want to get a mobo with a couple of PCIe 2.0 slots so that I can upgrade the vid card down the road, and also add another card if I need to. I also want a mobo that supports DDR3 RAM so that I can upgrade that later on too.

The only question I have is, which will last longer into the future, Socket 1366 or Socket 1160? I know that Socket 1366 is more for the "Enthusiast" users, so I would assume that it has better upgrade potential. However, I've recently read that 1366 will remain an "Enthusiast" platform, and Intel will only be shipping about 5% of it's CPUs for the 1366 platform. That makes me wonder how long the platform will last.

Will the 1160 platform last longer and perhaps have even faster CPUs once 1366 is phased out, or do you think 1366 will last as long as 1160 and I should go with a 1366 platform if I want upgradeability?

I'm not sure exactly when Socket 1160 will be available, but I'm willing to wait it out if it turns out that that's the better option for me.
Thanks.

 

[Cheesetogo]

1336 is going to be heavily used on the server platform, so I don't think there's much need to worry about that 5% number - I would assume that only refers to the home users. 1336 is probably going to last about the same amount of time as 1160, so I would pick based on your price range.

 

[MarcVenice]

No such thing as future proofing. I wonder if and when people will finaly learn that.

Save yourself hundreds of dollars and go with a quadcore s775, like q9450 or q6600, 4gb of ddr2 ram and a decent videocard. It will most likely cost HALF of what a i7 rig costs. That money, the other half, can be kept in your piggybank, and you can spend it in a years or 2 years time. That way you will have fast, up to date rigs for 2-3 years. In essence, spending 3k now won't gaurantee ANYTHING for the future, spending 1k now ( buys you a VERY FAST RIG ) and spending another 1k in 12-18 months WILL gaurantee fast rigs, and upgradibility.

 

[Jephph]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice
No such thing as future proofing. I wonder if and when people will finaly learn that.

Save yourself hundreds of dollars and go with a quadcore s775, like q9450 or q6600, 4gb of ddr2 ram and a decent videocard. It will most likely cost HALF of what a i7 rig costs. That money, the other half, can be kept in your piggybank, and you can spend it in a years or 2 years time. That way you will have fast, up to date rigs for 2-3 years. In essence, spending 3k now won't gaurantee ANYTHING for the future, spending 1k now ( buys you a VERY FAST RIG ) and spending another 1k in 12-18 months WILL gaurantee fast rigs, and upgradibility.

You must live in the suburbs... I don't plan on spending 3k for this build. I already put together a Core i7 build for just over 1k. I plan on spending a little less when I actually build it. Hopefully Mobo prices and DDR3 prices will fall a bit. Also, obviously Intel will be phasing out its LGA775 platform. I don't want to fall into the same situation I was in with Socket A. I want my new rig to last at least 5 years like this one has. I'm not wealthy enough to spend 1k every 1-2 years for new parts. I just want to be able to upgrade my graphics card in a couple years maybe, and then a while down the road, get a newer, faster LGA 1366 or LGA 1160 based CPU. I never said "future proofing." I just want better uggradeability than I had with Socket A.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Originally posted by: Jephph
I don't want to fall into the same situation I was in with Socket A. I want my new rig to last at least 5 years like this one has.

Five years is a long time. Any platform that you choose, will be very obsolete in five years time. You should change your upgrade schedule. Most people do three years, some of us (enthusiasts here on AT) upgrade every two years or less.

What I'm saying more or less, is that by choosing a five-year upgrade schedule, then you can't help but "be in the same situation with Socket A". Your choice, learn to live with it, or try something else.

I view the new release of the 1366 Core i7 CPUs much as I did the original Pentium 60Mhz chips. Big, new, hot... and obsoleted in a short time by the newer, faster, cheaper, and smaller Pentium 75/90/100 chips.

Time will tell if I'm right, but I'm not going to jump on Core i7 anytime soon. It's good for bragging rights, not much else. Penryn quad-core is pretty much equal in games, and a good lot cheaper.

 

[Tempered81]

I voted 1366. Where's the option for 775?

 

[Jephph]

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Jephph
I don't want to fall into the same situation I was in with Socket A. I want my new rig to last at least 5 years like this one has.

Five years is a long time. Any platform that you choose, will be very obsolete in five years time. You should change your upgrade schedule. Most people do three years, some of us (enthusiasts here on AT) upgrade every two years or less.

What I'm saying more or less, is that by choosing a five-year upgrade schedule, then you can't help but "be in the same situation with Socket A". Your choice, learn to live with it, or try something else.

I view the new release of the 1366 Core i7 CPUs much as I did the original Pentium 60Mhz chips. Big, new, hot... and obsoleted in a short time by the newer, faster, cheaper, and smaller Pentium 75/90/100 chips.

Time will tell if I'm right, but I'm not going to jump on Core i7 anytime soon. It's good for bragging rights, not much else. Penryn quad-core is pretty much equal in games, and a good lot cheaper.

Another suburb kid... Maybe I should have stated in the beginning... I am not wealthy. This build will be ~1k. I feel like I do when I'm watching the news. All they talk about is people's stocks and all that junk, and I was just watching this morning and a financial anylyst said that people should have at least enough in their bank account to make sure they could last for 6-12 months in case they lose their job. Hahaha, funny people. It seems like they're only concerned with the upper middle class. Or maybe it's just that the middle class is wealthier than I thought. Here's the deal. I make less than 15k a year as a teacher's aide, and my wife makes close to the same. So this is a huge deal for me. I've been planning to upgrade for years. Maybe I should just say no posts from suburb people from now on.

Ok, check out this scenario. When I bought this computer in late 2003, I could have waited another 6 months or so and purchased an LGA775 platform, then I would have tons of options even now for an upgrade. Now, I feel like I'm in the same situation. I would be buying an LGA775 platform at the end of it's life cycle, then I'll be stuck with very few upgrade options a few years down the road.

 

[MarcVenice]

I'm sorry, but even s775 back then don't support the 45nm chips, hell, I doubt a chipset you bought back then would have supported a quadcore. That's how computertech works.

Btw, I'm a student, I don't make money, I pay people like you money. And you know what I did? I just upgraded from s939 to s775, x48 mobo with a e7300 that I'm overclocking. The thing is, there's not much difference between i7 and core 2 duo. i7 is catered towards the server market, and even though it's decent for consumers, the extra price you pay for the whole package ( x58 mobo/ddr3 memory/920 ) isn't worth the minimal performance gains you will see in day to day usage.

So unless you work a lot with applications that are multithreaded, like video-encoding for example, s775 is still a very viable platform. With pci-e 2.0 slots they will support new videocards for a long long time. They also have not stopped producing s775 cpu's, in fact, new ones are coming very soon. Really, think about it like this. x58 mobo = $300, i920 = $300, 3x1gb of ddr3 = $100. You could buy a similar performing s775 setup for $350 less. That setup, p45 mobo, 4gb ddr2 and e8400 is still lightning fast ( e8400 will beat the 920 in most games ) and will still suffice in a years to 18 months time for pretty much anything.

What I'm trying to say is, you pay a price-premium for new tech, yet it doesn't give you any extra added performance. ESPECIALLY when you are on a budget, you should not pay a price-premium, and try to future proof instead. I suppose if you wait for lga1160 you might not pay as huge a price-premium as you do now for lga1366, but then again, you could be enjoying a new s775 rig right now. In the end, at least wait for lga1160 and do not buy a x58 mobo with a 920 and ddr3 ram.

 

[aatf510]

Originally posted by: Jephph

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Jephph
I don't want to fall into the same situation I was in with Socket A. I want my new rig to last at least 5 years like this one has.

Five years is a long time. Any platform that you choose, will be very obsolete in five years time. You should change your upgrade schedule. Most people do three years, some of us (enthusiasts here on AT) upgrade every two years or less.

What I'm saying more or less, is that by choosing a five-year upgrade schedule, then you can't help but "be in the same situation with Socket A". Your choice, learn to live with it, or try something else.

I view the new release of the 1366 Core i7 CPUs much as I did the original Pentium 60Mhz chips. Big, new, hot... and obsoleted in a short time by the newer, faster, cheaper, and smaller Pentium 75/90/100 chips.

Time will tell if I'm right, but I'm not going to jump on Core i7 anytime soon. It's good for bragging rights, not much else. Penryn quad-core is pretty much equal in games, and a good lot cheaper.

Another suburb kid... Maybe I should have stated in the beginning... I am not wealthy. This build will be ~1k. I feel like I do when I'm watching the news. All they talk about is people's stocks and all that junk, and I was just watching this morning and a financial anylyst said that people should have at least enough in their bank account to make sure they could last for 6-12 months in case they lose their job. Hahaha, funny people. It seems like they're only concerned with the upper middle class. Or maybe it's just that the middle class is wealthier than I thought. Here's the deal. I make less than 15k a year as a teacher's aide, and my wife makes close to the same. So this is a huge deal for me. I've been planning to upgrade for years. Maybe I should just say no posts from suburb people from now on.

Ok, check out this scenario. When I bought this computer in late 2003, I could have waited another 6 months or so and purchased an LGA775 platform, then I would have tons of options even now for an upgrade. Now, I feel like I'm in the same situation. I would be buying an LGA775 platform at the end of it's life cycle, then I'll be stuck with very few upgrade options a few years down the road.

You seem like the "suburb kit" here. You make it sounds like you are the only one in the world that cares about $$. The fact is that most people are looking for the same thing as you do because most people aren't rich, and most would try to spend a little as possible for bang of the buck performance. (come on, who wouldn't like to spend $100 on a motherboard and be done with it for 20 years.)

However, you'd have to realize that the computer industry flys-by so quickly and it's impossible to accurately predict "upgradeability" down the road, and companies have no choice but to re-design the basics to incorporate new technology.

The Intel LGA775 is one of the longest platform supported by a CPU company in recent history. It has lasted forever supporting several revisions of P4s and all Core 2 CPUs. I doubt that we will see another platform like the LGA755 if everything goes back to normal like the past history.
Unfortunately, even on a long lasting platfrom like the 775, it's still impossible to drop in any modern LGA775 processor (Core 2) in an LGA775 mobo (P4 mobo) from 3 or 4 years ago even though they are physically compatible, because the new CPU hasn't been developed when the mobo was designed. (Heck, you can't even drop in a 45nm quad from 2008 into a 680i mobo released for Core 2 Quad support in late 2007.)

Therefore, the above people were actually trying to help you by telling you that what you are looking for - does not exist. Therefore, stop being a suburb kid yourself and look up a little of past history and you'd see that you are actually asking a stupid question.

P.S. To address your post directly, if you have bought a LGA775 motherboard 4 years ago, you wouldn't be able to use ANY of the modern Core 2 processer in it anyway even though they will physcially fit in the old motherboard.

 

[exar333]

Originally posted by: toattett

Originally posted by: Jephph

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Jephph
I don't want to fall into the same situation I was in with Socket A. I want my new rig to last at least 5 years like this one has.

Five years is a long time. Any platform that you choose, will be very obsolete in five years time. You should change your upgrade schedule. Most people do three years, some of us (enthusiasts here on AT) upgrade every two years or less.

What I'm saying more or less, is that by choosing a five-year upgrade schedule, then you can't help but "be in the same situation with Socket A". Your choice, learn to live with it, or try something else.

I view the new release of the 1366 Core i7 CPUs much as I did the original Pentium 60Mhz chips. Big, new, hot... and obsoleted in a short time by the newer, faster, cheaper, and smaller Pentium 75/90/100 chips.

Time will tell if I'm right, but I'm not going to jump on Core i7 anytime soon. It's good for bragging rights, not much else. Penryn quad-core is pretty much equal in games, and a good lot cheaper.

Another suburb kid... Maybe I should have stated in the beginning... I am not wealthy. This build will be ~1k. I feel like I do when I'm watching the news. All they talk about is people's stocks and all that junk, and I was just watching this morning and a financial anylyst said that people should have at least enough in their bank account to make sure they could last for 6-12 months in case they lose their job. Hahaha, funny people. It seems like they're only concerned with the upper middle class. Or maybe it's just that the middle class is wealthier than I thought. Here's the deal. I make less than 15k a year as a teacher's aide, and my wife makes close to the same. So this is a huge deal for me. I've been planning to upgrade for years. Maybe I should just say no posts from suburb people from now on.

Ok, check out this scenario. When I bought this computer in late 2003, I could have waited another 6 months or so and purchased an LGA775 platform, then I would have tons of options even now for an upgrade. Now, I feel like I'm in the same situation. I would be buying an LGA775 platform at the end of it's life cycle, then I'll be stuck with very few upgrade options a few years down the road.

You seem like the "suburb kit" here. You make it sounds like you are the only one in the world that cares about $$. The fact is that most people are looking for the same thing as you do because most people aren't rich, and most would try to spend a little as possible for bang of the buck performance. (come on, who wouldn't like to spend $100 on a motherboard and be done with it for 20 years.)

However, you'd have to realize that the computer industry flys-by so quickly and it's impossible to accurately predict "upgradeability" down the road, and companies have no choice but to re-design the basics to incorporate new technology.

The Intel LGA775 is one of the longest platform supported by a CPU company in recent history. It has lasted forever supporting several revisions of P4s and all Core 2 CPUs. I doubt that we will see another platform like the LGA755 if everything goes back to normal like the past history.
Unfortunately, even on a long lasting platfrom like the 775, it's still impossible to drop in any modern LGA775 processor (Core 2) in an LGA775 mobo (P4 mobo) from 3 or 4 years ago even though they are physically compatible, because the new CPU hasn't been developed when the mobo was designed. (Heck, you can't even drop in a 45nm quad from 2008 into a 680i mobo released for Core 2 Quad support in late 2007.)

Therefore, the above people were actually trying to help you by telling you that what you are looking for - does not exist. Therefore, stop being a suburb kid yourself and look up a little of past history and you'd see that you are actually asking a stupid question.

P.S. To address your post directly, if you have bought a LGA775 motherboard 4 years ago, you wouldn't be able to use ANY of the modern Core 2 processer in it anyway even though they will physcially fit in the old motherboard.

You are wrong.

Many of the motherboards that supported the Pentium-D (a "P4" if you weren't aware)when it was launched later supported the C2D cpus. LGA775 boards have lasted almost three years now, thats pretty impressive.

 

[nyker96]

I see the choices as follows:
775 - if you just want a 3.6-4ghz cheapo qud for now and no future plans
1366 - if you want a 15% more performance than 775 and don't care for money (actual OC I see on newegg is about 3.6-4)
1166 - don't need to OC much running stock, all their chips are low bin, rumor has it they won't OC much at all.

Edit: you seem to be not a OC/enthusiast person so I think your better bet is a 775 platform for now. It's cheap and can be easily built and tons of cpu choices available depending on your needs. Don;t make sense going i7 on either 1366/1166 platforms for you at least. You can save the cash to buy more features instead of fastest parts which will be much more useful for average day user. For instance, you can save some cash and buy a HD TV tuner or Bigger harddrives or a better graphics card for gaming, a nicer sound card etc etc. or get a pair of nice Senheiser headphones to go with the system. You'll get more value and usability with a 755 for your cash.

 

[tim924]

No need to have a crush on each other in this kind of matter,really put it in a more simple way,an affordable price difference between LGA775 and LGA 1336 is around $200-$300(we are not taking the extreme version of both platform's processors of course in this case or else if one can afford that there's no need to talk about option anymore just the fastest and lastest available out there right?),after all it all come downs to whether you want to spent that $200-300 extra for a new platform,but realistically,clock for clock,i7 is about 10% faster than C2Q in today's general computer usuage,but take this as a note if you are doing something related to video encoding or rendering,or even gaming situations where you gonna sli/crossfire with high-end GPUs,that's where i7 pulls away from core 2 up to 30-50% faster,in conclusion just judge whether that extra $200-300 is worth the aforementioned benefits i7 has over core 2 in your personal situations/needs,without arguing back and forth,cause different people will always have different individual needs,just base your purchase on your own financial affordability/needs,there's no right or wrong either way.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: Jephph

Originally posted by: VirtualLarry

Originally posted by: Jephph
I don't want to fall into the same situation I was in with Socket A. I want my new rig to last at least 5 years like this one has.

Five years is a long time. Any platform that you choose, will be very obsolete in five years time. You should change your upgrade schedule. Most people do three years, some of us (enthusiasts here on AT) upgrade every two years or less.

What I'm saying more or less, is that by choosing a five-year upgrade schedule, then you can't help but "be in the same situation with Socket A". Your choice, learn to live with it, or try something else.

I view the new release of the 1366 Core i7 CPUs much as I did the original Pentium 60Mhz chips. Big, new, hot... and obsoleted in a short time by the newer, faster, cheaper, and smaller Pentium 75/90/100 chips.

Time will tell if I'm right, but I'm not going to jump on Core i7 anytime soon. It's good for bragging rights, not much else. Penryn quad-core is pretty much equal in games, and a good lot cheaper.

Another suburb kid... Maybe I should have stated in the beginning... I am not wealthy. This build will be ~1k. I feel like I do when I'm watching the news. All they talk about is people's stocks and all that junk, and I was just watching this morning and a financial anylyst said that people should have at least enough in their bank account to make sure they could last for 6-12 months in case they lose their job. Hahaha, funny people. It seems like they're only concerned with the upper middle class. Or maybe it's just that the middle class is wealthier than I thought. Here's the deal. I make less than 15k a year as a teacher's aide, and my wife makes close to the same. So this is a huge deal for me. I've been planning to upgrade for years. Maybe I should just say no posts from suburb people from now on.

Ok, check out this scenario. When I bought this computer in late 2003, I could have waited another 6 months or so and purchased an LGA775 platform, then I would have tons of options even now for an upgrade. Now, I feel like I'm in the same situation. I would be buying an LGA775 platform at the end of it's life cycle, then I'll be stuck with very few upgrade options a few years down the road.

With comments like "suburb kid" i'm surprised people keep trying to reply and give you advice. You sound just like the liberal politicians these days.

My advice, don't bother with i7. DDR3 is expensive still and there is no telling if it will go down. Get yourself a nice X48 mobo for , a good C2Q or C2D, some decent memory for under $100 per 4GB and overclock.

 

[tim924]

cmdrdredd,like I said,there's no need to tell people whether core 2 or i7 is better base on your own choice,different people have different financial affordability/needs,for example what if one is actually having a encoding/editing related job,those extra bucks might be well worth it in their case,or what if one has enough money to go for something like tri-sli/crossfire for gaming(rare but they exist),my point is you were basing your advice on your own situation which might not fit certain people,instead of that it's better to tell them the realistic differences bewteen the two,and let them decide which is better for themselves.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: tim924
cmdrdredd,like I said,there's no need to tell people whether core 2 or i7 is better base on your own choice,different people have different financial affordability/needs,for example what if one is actually having a encoding/editing related job,those extra bucks might be well worth it in their case,or what if one has enough money to go for something like tri-sli/crossfire for gaming(rare but they exist),my point is you were basing your advice on your own situation which might not fit certain people,instead of that it's better to tell them the realistic differences bewteen the two,and let them decide which is better for themselves.

he's talking about people being from the suburbs as in "you have more money to waste" which is ridiculous to say without even knowing people. He asked for it if you really want my opinion on it.

There are a good deal of people, myself included, that feel i7 is too untested, too new, too expensive, for not enough gain in most apps. period

we reply based on that.

 

[MarcVenice]

Originally posted by: tim924
cmdrdredd,like I said,there's no need to tell people whether core 2 or i7 is better base on your own choice,different people have different financial affordability/needs,for example what if one is actually having a encoding/editing related job,those extra bucks might be well worth it in their case,or what if one has enough money to go for something like tri-sli/crossfire for gaming(rare but they exist),my point is you were basing your advice on your own situation which might not fit certain people,instead of that it's better to tell them the realistic differences bewteen the two,and let them decide which is better for themselves.

Had you read the whole thread you could see we're basing our advice on his statements, like he earns 15k a year and his wife earns roughly the same. He also does not want to upgrade to often because it's expensive. Money is a big concern. If money is a big concern, i7 isn't the way to go. Stop saying we can't say which is better for him. We all know new tech comes at a price premium, and doesn't give good bang for buck. At least I do ...

 

[tim924]

Of course there are alot of people didnt need the i7,as what they usually do is most likely surfing the web,watching movies,listening to music,doing homework assignments from shool,or pure gaming,for those people they may not even need a quad core at all.And there's also people like you and others "feel" i7 is not so much of an improvement over core 2 and is not worth the extra few bucks.Just dont forget that you and the "others" i mentioned do not represent rest of the world,you made the "right" decison on your q9550 purchase but what about others make a living base on encoding or rendering,or quite a few already have or planning to sli/crossfire,or some people just think that that extra few bucks for just plainly having lastest and upgradability in lets say a 2-3 year time frame,they also "feel" i7 is right for them as you "feel" q9550 was for you,so my point is instead of choosing for people,list the facts rather than opinions,and let them be the judge for which is the right one for them.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice

Originally posted by: tim924
cmdrdredd,like I said,there's no need to tell people whether core 2 or i7 is better base on your own choice,different people have different financial affordability/needs,for example what if one is actually having a encoding/editing related job,those extra bucks might be well worth it in their case,or what if one has enough money to go for something like tri-sli/crossfire for gaming(rare but they exist),my point is you were basing your advice on your own situation which might not fit certain people,instead of that it's better to tell them the realistic differences bewteen the two,and let them decide which is better for themselves.

Had you read the whole thread you could see we're basing our advice on his statements, like he earns 15k a year and his wife earns roughly the same. He also does not want to upgrade to often because it's expensive. Money is a big concern. If money is a big concern, i7 isn't the way to go. Stop saying we can't say which is better for him. We all know new tech comes at a price premium, and doesn't give good bang for buck. At least I do ...

+1

The only exception in history is the original C2D. An E6400 could go to 3.2Ghz and still be a very viable platform right now for any number of apps and games without bottleknecking the current video cards too much.

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: tim924
Of course there are alot of people didnt need the i7,as what they usually do is most likely surfing the web,watching movies,listening to music,doing homework assignments from shool,or pure gaming,for those people they may not even need a quad core at all.And there's also people like you and others "feel" i7 is not so much of an improvement over core 2 and is not worth the extra few bucks.Just dont forget that you and the "others" i mentioned do not represent rest of the world,you made the "right" decison on your q9550 purchase but what about others make a living base on encoding or rendering,or quite a few already have or planning to sli/crossfire,or some people just think that that extra few bucks for just plainly having lastest and upgradability in lets say a 2-3 year time frame,they also "feel" i7 is right for them as you "feel" q9550 was for you,so my point is instead of choosing for people,list the facts rather than opinions,and let them be the judge for which is the right one for them.

This guy is NOT one of these people. Read his statements. MONEY IS A CONCERN.

I7 costs more = no go

 

[tim924]

Originally posted by: MarcVenice

Originally posted by: tim924
cmdrdredd,like I said,there's no need to tell people whether core 2 or i7 is better base on your own choice,different people have different financial affordability/needs,for example what if one is actually having a encoding/editing related job,those extra bucks might be well worth it in their case,or what if one has enough money to go for something like tri-sli/crossfire for gaming(rare but they exist),my point is you were basing your advice on your own situation which might not fit certain people,instead of that it's better to tell them the realistic differences bewteen the two,and let them decide which is better for themselves.

Had you read the whole thread you could see we're basing our advice on his statements, like he earns 15k a year and his wife earns roughly the same. He also does not want to upgrade to often because it's expensive. Money is a big concern. If money is a big concern, i7 isn't the way to go. Stop saying we can't say which is better for him. We all know new tech comes at a price premium, and doesn't give good bang for buck. At least I do ...

To your question,even a couple is to make like you say $30,000 a year,the extra $200-300 bucks still might not be the enough deciding factor here,tell me if one can afford a $1000 C2Q system situations in the first place,can they really lose their mind adding the extra $200-300?It's not like they are kids or people who are unemployed,if the extra few bucks are so big a deal in the first place i think I would just recommend something like E7200 which is enough for today's daily usuage even quite some gaming experiences.

 

[tim924]

Btw,I just took a look at the poll,the "We" that you mentioned who voted for Q9550 in the first place only had a 28% of votes,as compared to those 72% who voted for i7,my point is im rather neutral to both as final decison is up to himself,but in this case the "we" based on his statement's we is the minority here as you can see more people are having different opinions,so who's right and wrong here?That's why I stated to list the actual differences to let himself decide rather than "base on his statement,I say go for xxx".

 

[cmdrdredd]

Originally posted by: tim924
Btw,I just took a look at the poll,the "We" that you mentioned who voted for Q9550 in the first place only had a 28% of votes,as compared to those 72% who voted for i7,my point is im rather neutral to both as final decison is up to himself,but in this case the "we" based on his statement's we is the minority here as you can see more people are having different opinions,so who's right and wrong here?That's why I stated to list the actual differences to let himself decide rather than "base on his statement,I say go for xxx".

What the heck poll are you looking at? This poll, in this thread, is about sockets with no LGA775 option.

 

[tim924]

Dont you still get it?Your claimed statement is that money is most deciding factor for him,but that poll clearly reflects that most people vote for the higher end platform(more expensive) regardless it's a 1160 vs 1366,or 775 vs 1366,most importantly my point was not to state that your choice of Q9550 was wrong,but rather there are different factors take into account and that extra $200-300 for 1366 is not as big as a deal as you sounded like they totally didnt have the affordabilty to consider it.Ever thought he just needed some simple facts rather than your assumption about whether he could afford it?

 

[VirtualLarry]

Well, the best "bang for buck", right now, is NOT the Core i7. Usually, to save money or get the most return for your money, you would choose the best "bang for buck" platform at the particular time that you were going to purchase. Right now, that platform is S775. There's no app that I am aware of, that will cause the Q9550 to be unusable, while the Core i7 remains usable. There just isn't enough of a difference between them. (That is, except the price.)

 

[tim924]

If your selling point is the price,I'm pretty sure through out the computer history the new platform will always be higher,so why even bother putting up a dead-end platform's price to compare with a new one,I'm pretty sure at this point if you are to build a system from the ground up,a rather higher percent of people would go for i7.And have you noticed i7 price has dropped quite a bit already since its launch now 6GB of ddr3-1333 can be had for around $190 on newegg,Motherboard-wise yes you will be pay $220-300, but are you seriously comparing a P45 Vs x58 rather than with a x48 or 790i for sli given they actually providing similar functions?Processor-wise,i7 920 $299 while Q9550 is $319.So after all the price comparisons,the price difference will be down to around $150-200 at the moment(even you are to use P45 in this case),I dont know about you,but personally I just wouldnt jump on a platform of the past for $200 less.(for upgradibility or the so little improvements that you claimed)