Future of Socket 775?

All about them.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
plympton
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:40 am

Future of Socket 775?

Post by plympton » Thu Oct 29, 2009 4:59 pm

Anyone know if Intel will continue to release Socket 775 processors, or have they pretty much stopped at what is out there.

Basically, I'm trying to figure out my upgrade options - I've got an e6600, and wouldn't mind something faster for photo editing, now that I'm using 12 MPixel raw files, and Lightroom is a bit of a pig.

I like the e7500/7600, since they overclock well, and high-multipliers will downramp to the (dumb) fixed 6x multiplier when it's idle.

A Core 2 Quad might be better, but they're slower, and most software doesn't use Quad Core at the moment, from what I read.

Just curious...

-Dan

Lawrence Lee
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 1115
Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 9:07 pm
Location: Vancouver

Post by Lawrence Lee » Thu Oct 29, 2009 10:19 pm

They haven't said anything officially, but I don't see why they would make any new 775 processors. They want you to upgrade to 1156 & 1366.

Go with Q9550 or similar. Lightroom is heavily threaded as I understand it.

kater
Posts: 891
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:20 pm
Location: Poland

Post by kater » Fri Oct 30, 2009 2:02 am

Replacing an E6600 with E7xxx is IMHO a DOWNgrade, at least in terms of performance. Yeah, E7xxx will clock up to 3,8-3,9 GHz but you have more cache in E6600 and I'm positive you can push 90% of E6600 CPUs up to 3,6 GHz. E7xxx will draw less power, sure, but performancewise and pricewise they're hard to recommend. And, from what I see on auctions, thhy still fetch high prices, if you want a 2nd hand CPU. New ones are almost as expensive as E8xxx series, making them a poor choice UNLESS you get a 7xxx cheaply.

If you want to stick to 775 (still good idea as there are plenty of powerful CPUs out there) you'd better go with a E8400 - massive cache and easily achievable 4 GHz, and low power still. Need more cores? E9xxx or E9x50. Good OC, low power, prices are dropping. E8xxx might be lagging as they have tiny cache and are hard to OC due to low multipliers.

sNNooPY
Posts: 51
Joined: Sun Nov 05, 2006 11:03 am
Location: Croatia

Post by sNNooPY » Fri Oct 30, 2009 9:51 am

look at my specs in the sig.
My plan is to keep this baby running for a looooong looong time.
I've maxed out on RAM (8GB DD2@800MHz), the next thing will be E6600 -> Q9650 which the max for my board.
I'm just waiting for the price to drop significantly and I'm in no hurry.

electrodacus
-- Vendor --
Posts: 372
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:30 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Future of Socket 775?

Post by electrodacus » Fri Oct 30, 2009 3:46 pm

plympton wrote:Anyone know if Intel will continue to release Socket 775 processors, or have they pretty much stopped at what is out there.

A Core 2 Quad might be better, but they're slower, and most software doesn't use Quad Core at the moment, from what I read.

Just curious...

-Dan
A Quad core is the only upgrade you can make and most photo editing software can use multi thread so a Quad core will make a difference.
I guess they will not release new LGA-775 processors but the Quad cores will still be good for some years.

CA_Steve
Moderator
Posts: 7470
Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am
Location: St. Louis, MO

Post by CA_Steve » Fri Oct 30, 2009 5:46 pm

I'd go quad core for Lightroom. De-mosaicing and other tasks will use the 4 cores/8 threads+. Seems like Lightroom will alternate between being memory starved and running out of cpu power. :D

A blog I just came across on speeding up Lightroom.

FYI, Lightroom 3 open beta is here.

robokopp
Posts: 37
Joined: Thu Apr 12, 2007 7:48 pm
Location: Brisbane Australia

Post by robokopp » Sat Oct 31, 2009 1:52 am

Rumour has it that LGA 775 is extended until 2010, perhaps even 2011.

I will check with source, to see if I can get anything to post.

plympton
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:40 am

Curious opinions!

Post by plympton » Sat Oct 31, 2009 9:19 am

Dual Core options:

Interesting thoughts about the e6600 vs. e7xxx. My e6600 overclocks to 3.33 most of the time, but I've got it at 3.1 for stability. Under Windows it might do better, but Hackintosh is a bit more dodgy, less tweakable.

I was supposing that a e7500 could go do 4.4 (400 fsb * 11 mult), and would save a ton of power on idle (400x6 = 2.4 GHz). My e6600 clocks down to the same, but would be 1 GHz slower. And the cache is only 1 MB less - 1 MB > 1 GHz?

Quad Core Options:

They're getting cheaper, but still not cheap (better value vs. dual-core, though - $50 gets you 2 more cores new). There's conflicting info on whether LR will use multiple cores (or efficiently). I read some blogs that tested it (http://macperformanceguide.com/Optimizi ... troom.html), and it appears that this was a design choice by Adobe - keep CPU cycles free for interface uses.

Either way, it sounds like 4-cores will help, so maybe that's the way to go. It's unfortunate that all the Quads have such pathetic multipliers, or worse yet they're low-locked down to 6x... WTH is up with that?

Also, I'm on a Mac(Hack), so Windows speedups won't help. I also changed from an ATI card (3850) -> nVidia card (9600gso), upgrade from Leopard -> Snow Leopard, and upgrade from a D40 (6 MP) -> GF1 (12 MP) camera all at the same time.

Therefore, who knows what aspect made it feel slower?

Thanks for the optimization tip site - I was mainly feeling the pain from "rendering previews". Ugh. Now I've got that set to do at import, and will just grab a cup of coffee and KVM away while it renders.

Thanks!
-Dan

electrodacus
-- Vendor --
Posts: 372
Joined: Sun Jul 12, 2009 10:30 am
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Curious opinions!

Post by electrodacus » Sat Oct 31, 2009 11:41 am

plympton wrote: Either way, it sounds like 4-cores will help, so maybe that's the way to go. It's unfortunate that all the Quads have such pathetic multipliers, or worse yet they're low-locked down to 6x... WTH is up with that?
Yes the quad core have higher FSB 333 and I have a Q8400s that is 8x333 so 2.66Ghz and will work easy at 400x8 = 3.2GHz but I used at 2Ghz 333x6 for energy efficiency only 0.925V and 24W
Default multiplier is 8 and it will go down to 6 on idle and I guess all dual core and quad core from Intel can not go less than 6x.
My board uses a G31 and the multiplier on this CPU can be set manually from 6 to 8 with 0.5 increment.

plympton
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:40 am

Post by plympton » Mon Nov 02, 2009 9:16 pm

I found a Q9550 under $200 on eBay and pulled the trigger. I don't NEED it, but I'm getting more and more lag editing my photos, which I want gone. I'll just sleep the machine when it's not in use, but from what I read, it might actually use less power than my E6600!

-Dan

Olle P
Posts: 670
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:03 am
Location: Sweden

Post by Olle P » Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:52 am

I wouldn't be surprised if Intel keep pushing out new low end CPUs (Celeron and successors) for socket 775...

/Olle

smilingcrow
*Lifetime Patron*
Posts: 1809
Joined: Sat Apr 24, 2004 1:45 am
Location: At Home

Post by smilingcrow » Wed Nov 04, 2009 8:20 am

plympton wrote:I'll just sleep the machine when it's not in use, but from what I read, it might actually use less power than my E6600!
It may well. :)

jfeldt
Posts: 42
Joined: Sun Dec 04, 2005 12:09 am

Post by jfeldt » Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:06 am

I use Lightroom 1.4 for processing my 5D files (12Mp), and have a Q6600 with 4GB of ram (32-bit windows though). LR uses all the cores very well, and I actually got rid of my overclock to 3.0 back to the stock 2.4 since I was always I/O limited, even with a raptor for O/S, velociraptor for LR cache and windows page file, and 1TB RE3 for photos. Perhaps the 3.0 OC would help a bit with the super transitory UI stuff, but I couldn't see peaks up to 100% with windows task manager graphing set to the fastest refresh.

I'd go quad, and also worry about I/O a lot, perhaps more than the CPU after some point in CPU ability.

plympton
Posts: 229
Joined: Sun Mar 14, 2004 11:40 am

Picked up a 9550

Post by plympton » Thu Nov 05, 2009 9:14 pm

.. popped it in tonight - it DOES use less (or equal) power to the e6600, at their mild-overclocks & stock voltages. Crazy. Easy overclock to 3.5 GHz @ 1.21 volts (stock), cooled with a Mini Ninja & 5v 80mm fan. Not much difference from idle (150 watts) -> prime95 torture (185 watts)

Now I just need to shoot a card full of RAW's to see how much faster it is. :-)

-Dan

~El~Jefe~
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 2887
Joined: Mon Feb 28, 2005 4:21 pm
Location: New York City zzzz
Contact:

Post by ~El~Jefe~ » Thu Nov 05, 2009 10:04 pm

sNNooPY wrote:look at my specs in the sig.
My plan is to keep this baby running for a looooong looong time.
I've maxed out on RAM (8GB DD2@800MHz), the next thing will be E6600 -> Q9650 which the max for my board.
I'm just waiting for the price to drop significantly and I'm in no hurry.
It will not most likely drop at all. Check out all the threads about amd 939 chips, all thought that the 185 chip would drop, still hasnt! Look at p4 sockets, people still waiting for the 3.4 extreme chips to fall! Nothing falls it seems when it is both wanted by the consumer and is end of life, and, intel wants to destroy that socket and your wallet.

kater
Posts: 891
Joined: Thu Sep 07, 2006 11:20 pm
Location: Poland

Post by kater » Thu Nov 05, 2009 11:28 pm

From what I see on auctions of 2nd hand gear for 775 - only E2xxx and E4xxx CPUs drop prices, but I guess they've already hit a bottom and if they go even lower they'd be cheaper than low models of AM2 X2 CPUs (hi models of which still fetch good money). Older E6300 and E6400 CPUs sell, strange as it may seem, for more than E4xxx (same CPU basically). E6550, E6600 and bigger sell for more or less the same as low clocked E7xxx. Q6600 are priced exactly like E8400. Plenty of new E5200 and E3200 chips but ppl looking for cheap 775 rigs still choose older E2xxx and E4xxx, tho price differences are v small here.
What's not dropping? 939 X2 chips, higher AM2 X2 chips, higher P4 chips, all kinds of Extreme Intels.

vincentfox
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:35 pm
Location: CA

Post by vincentfox » Sat Nov 07, 2009 11:24 am

I picked up an E7500 recently. Great CPU. I'm not sure about the claims that E7xxx is markedly inferior to E6xxxx and E8xxxx. I mean how much diff does the bigger cache really make in average desktop apps or gaming?

I believe this is about the "sweet spot" for maxing out this architecture, and then it's time to move on to something newer in a few years.

I picked up the Gigabyte DS3 board in 2007 so by 2011 or 2012 I'll have gotten more years out of a board than most people.

danimal
Posts: 734
Joined: Mon Jun 08, 2009 2:41 pm
Location: the ether

Post by danimal » Sat Nov 07, 2009 1:01 pm

the last time i looked, photoshop was 64-bit capable, but only on the pc platform.

which is a bit of a shame, because there are performance advantages to using the latest ps on a 64-bit o.s... 10-12%(??), from what i read.

nevertheless, that overclocked q9550 will rock your world, even on a hackintosh!

vincentfox
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Oct 09, 2005 8:35 pm
Location: CA

Post by vincentfox » Sat Nov 07, 2009 1:47 pm

Found a madshrimps article comparing E7400 to E8600.

The cache does make a difference, but to me the "bang for buck" to buy the more expensive E8600 just isn't there. YMMV.

http://www.madshrimps.be/?action=getarticle&articID=908

flapane
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Naples, Italy
Contact:

Post by flapane » Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:27 pm

AFAIK e3300 is due to be released in jan2010, and there is an e8700 hangin' around (maybe it's only a rumor).
There aren't any other informations about skt775...
I'd like new 65w and lower price Q9xxx's.

Trav1s
Posts: 259
Joined: Sun Nov 09, 2008 12:33 pm
Location: CR, IA

Post by Trav1s » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:29 pm

flapane wrote:AFAIK e3300 is due to be released in jan2010, and there is an e8700 hangin' around (maybe it's only a rumor).
There aren't any other informations about skt775...
I'd like new 65w and lower price Q9xxx's.
At least in the US the e3300 is currently on sale for $60
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... &Tpk=e3300

flapane
Posts: 257
Joined: Fri Dec 19, 2008 2:55 am
Location: Naples, Italy
Contact:

Post by flapane » Tue Nov 17, 2009 3:48 am

My bad... e3400

Post Reply