1. Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.

Core i7 Head-to-Head: 1156 vs. 1366

Discussion in 'Overclocking & Cooling' started by sno.lcn, Oct 8, 2009.

  1. sno.lcn

    sno.lcn

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    670 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    Here's an interesting performance comparison between 1156 and 1366 systems, overclocked, and at both identical settings, and at the enhanced settings native to the 1366 platform.

    Here's the link.


    Submitted by Ross at OCF, and edited by myself :toast:
     
  2. Paulieg

    Paulieg The Mad Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    11,914 (4.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,979
    Location:
    Wherever I can find the iron.
    I can't open the link :(
     
  3. sno.lcn

    sno.lcn

    Joined:
    Dec 29, 2006
    Messages:
    670 (0.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    152
    Location:
    Atlanta, GA, USA
    That's odd, it's still working for me.
     
  4. DanishDevil

    DanishDevil

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    10,203 (3.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,090
    Location:
    Newport Beach, CA
    Looks like I made the right decision. 1366 is too hot and uses too much power to justify its higher price for me.
     
  5. Paulieg

    Paulieg The Mad Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    11,914 (4.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,979
    Location:
    Wherever I can find the iron.
    Meh, it's probably an issue with my work computer settings. I'm sure it's fine.
     
  6. Asylum

    Asylum

    Joined:
    Jul 18, 2008
    Messages:
    2,808 (1.23/day)
    Thanks Received:
    683
    Location:
    South Carolina
    Yea it says operation aborted when i click on it too.
    Im at work also though.
     
  7. MetalRacer

    MetalRacer

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2007
    Messages:
    867 (0.33/day)
    Thanks Received:
    711
    Location:
    The Lone Star State
    That is a good comparison and reconfirms my belief that the x58 is the better option performance wise and cost wise with the i7 920 still available at Microcenter for $199.99.
     
  8. Grnfinger

    Grnfinger New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 20, 2008
    Messages:
    639 (0.27/day)
    Thanks Received:
    213
    Location:
    Canada
    link wont work for me
     
  9. DRDNA

    DRDNA

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2006
    Messages:
    4,797 (1.51/day)
    Thanks Received:
    570
    Location:
    New York
    hit the back button then hit stop it will stay open.....

    Ya the X58/i7 is an amazing set up....I would say its in the same field if not even more so as the C2D was when it hit the scene!
     
    sno.lcn says thanks.
  10. Binge

    Binge Overclocking Surrealism

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    6,982 (3.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,752
    Location:
    PA, USA
    Hey, are you sure the i5 uses less power? Using kill-A-watt to compare, when overclocked there's no difference between lga 1366 and 1156.
     
    DRDNA says thanks.
  11. lemonadesoda

    lemonadesoda

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2006
    Messages:
    6,260 (2.10/day)
    Thanks Received:
    967
    It's very clear: s1156 for single socket CPUs. s1366 is for DUAL SOCKET Xeons. Using s1366 for single socket is a waste of money, time, and electricity.
     
    audiotranceable says thanks.
  12. Binge

    Binge Overclocking Surrealism

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    6,982 (3.13/day)
    Thanks Received:
    1,752
    Location:
    PA, USA
    Did you not read my post above?
     
  13. Paulieg

    Paulieg The Mad Moderator Staff Member

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2007
    Messages:
    11,914 (4.25/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,979
    Location:
    Wherever I can find the iron.
    Well, I just got my 1156 setup up and running and I have 2 i7 rigs to compare it to. However, I'm still waiting for the Megahalems 1156 mount to get here before I start running benchmarks. I will say that my i7 860 runs BOINC at 3.9ghz on 1.21v. Obviously, the ever crappy stock cooler can't keep it cool enough to run it for any length of time though. This should be interesting.
     
  14. DanishDevil

    DanishDevil

    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2005
    Messages:
    10,203 (3.09/day)
    Thanks Received:
    2,090
    Location:
    Newport Beach, CA
    Yeah I need to find an 1156 bracket for my Xiggy. WTF's up with them and not releasing it?
     
  15. mastrdrver

    mastrdrver

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    3,150 (1.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    583
    So they made a 920/X58 in to a 860/P55 setup and ran Futuremark benches and they expected to find something different? I know I'm sounding mean, but why would they think they would end up significantly different? Why would you try to make it apples to apples when no one with an X58 setup, if they overclock it, are going to limit themselves to dual channel and the multiplier limits of an 860 chip?

    Also, I know he said he ran out of time, but I'm sure a lot, lot more people would have been interested if he would have ran some game benches instead. Though, if there is going to be a difference, I would only expect to see it in a multiple card setup, when the 920/x58 setup was used as it was designed and not limited in a way no one will if they bought the setup.

    I personally think its a no brainer (except for the i5 chip). If your not going to overclock, just stick to the P55 setup since the chips are cheaper at the same speeds compared to their X58 counterparts. Otherwise, get a X58. Nice thing too about the X58 is the support for a wider range of Xeon chips. There is even the E5502 Xeon which is a 1.86ghz, 2c/4t arrangement. If you want to go low wattage, that could be an interesting counterpart to a 750/P55 setup.
     
  16. Wile E

    Wile E Power User

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Messages:
    24,324 (8.26/day)
    Thanks Received:
    3,778
    If you read the whole review, you would see they also tested the non-cripled X58 at the same clocks to see the difference.

    To me this says that 920 is still the way to go if you are looking to spend around that amount for a cpu.
     
  17. mastrdrver

    mastrdrver

    Joined:
    Feb 24, 2009
    Messages:
    3,150 (1.52/day)
    Thanks Received:
    583
    I did read the whole thing Wile.

    I just don't understand the bother of testing a setup no body runs. Do you buy an i7 860 and disable HT for 24/7 use? How about a 920/X58 and get 1 stick of memory? Unless you're on the worlds tightest x58 budget, your going to get 3 sticks and even though who would get 1 stick are probably 1% of anyone who would buy a X58 whether they overclock or not.

    My point being that the test only finds the differences in the architecture of the chip. Since there is none, even more so with one gpu, its a pointless test that finds nothing except a 920/x58 will perform exactly the same in a synthetic benchmark when limited to the same multipliers and memory arrangement.

    If you disable a core on an AMD 955BE and clock it the same multiplier for multiplier as a 720BE, would you expect a difference in performance? Of course not, then why would you do a similar thing to two i7 chips and expect different results especially with a single gpu?

    My complaint is with the decision on what area to spend the allotted time he had for this review. I mean, he did get to some useful data at the end. I just wish the entire review would have been just the last arrangement minus the limited X58. Let me also say that if they were getting requests from their community over there to do this, I can't really complain now can I?
     

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guest)

Share This Page