Gaming system refresh - advice wanted: P55/860 vs X58/920

[JamieG]

I'm planning an update to my gaming system and just wanted to get some thoughts on achieving a quiet high-performing gaming system.

My current P182-based system is linked in my signature, but basically my plan is to swap out my current motherboard/CPU/RAM/graphics card for a newer system, but keep everything else. I have a friend who is willing to buy these parts from my current setup, which is handy.

I'm tossing up between a P55 / i7 860 or the X58 / i7 920 based set up, the first option being a bit cheaper (and can get SATA3/USB3 without spending a lot on a new motherboard) and the second option being a little more future proof CPU-wise, as I understand 6-core Gulftown CPUs will be available for LGA1336 motherboards in the future.

Anyway, the current parts list for the P55 system is something like this (AUD prices from CPL and PCCG):

CPU: Intel i7 860 LGA 1156 - $345
CPU Heatsink: Prolimatech Mega Shadow - $99
Mobo: Gigabyte GA-P55A-UD4P Motherboard - $240
RAM: Corsair 4Gb DDR3 1600 C8 for i5/i7 - $199
Graphics card: Sapphire 5870 Vapor-X - $629
Other: Scythe Kaze Server - $69

Total: $1,581

The alternate X58-based system (with additional cost in brackets) is:

CPU: Intel i7 920 LGA 1336- $409 (+64)
Mobo: Gigabyte EX58-UD5 - $379 (+139)
RAM: Corsair 6Gb DDR3 1600 C8 - $259 (+60)

Basically, the X58 system is about $300 more expensive, but I can probably stretch my budget that far if it is worth it. From what I can tell from the reviews I have read on other sites, the 860 and 920 trade blows in benchmarks. I don't plan on overclocking or running a crossfire system either

I'll be keeping the same cooling from my current P182 setup:
- rear exhaust: Nexus 120mm Real Silent
- top exhaust S-Flex E 1200rpm
- front middle intake: Slipstream 1200rpm

I'd be adding a better fan controller and plan on using 2 x Nexus fans in push/pull on the Mega Shadow.

So, I guess I'd like people's opinions on:
1) which of the P55 / i7 860 or the X58 / i7 920 based systems I should go for, considering performance, quietness potential and future-proofing (poll question)
2) whether there are any other improvements I could make

I'm happy to clarify anything further.

Thanks in advance!

[CA_Steve]

State of games today - most use 2 cores and no more. Some use 4 cores. Typically, a faster dual core cpu will beat a slower quad core for this reason...again it depends on whether the game is designed for many threads/cores.

State of games a year from now - many more will use 4 cores as DX11 makes multicore programming much easier than it was for DX9, DX10.

Frankly, I'd save the money and go with the lowest cost platform that provides turboboost for 2 cores. You get the speed bump from that now, and then have the "futureproofing" for 4 core games. Spend the savings on a decent SSD - that will make the games snappier (game load, scene load times). As for the gpu...5870 seems overkill @ $629AU. You sure the 5850 or even the 5770 won't meet your needs at your screen resolution?

Look for reviews of the games you like to play and see what kind of frame rates they get vs diff h/w solutions. Paying 2x for a graphics card that doesn't provide a discernable difference in game seems a waste of $'s and watts.

[danimal]

I'm tossing up between a P55 / i7 860 or the X58 / i7 920 based set up, the first option being a bit cheaper (and can get SATA3/USB3 without spending a lot on a new motherboard) and the second option being a little more future proof CPU-wise, as I understand 6-core Gulftown CPUs will be available for LGA1136 motherboards in the future.

i believe that six cores requires 3 memory channels(?), which means that the best future-proof solution for high performance is the i7 1366 socket.

it's really all about what games you play, and overclocking... you'll get more performance from overclocking than you will from turboboost, and there are socket burn issues with some of the 1136 motherboards.

[hybrid2d4x4]

The 6 cores will indeed be 1136 exclusive, but if they are at the >$1k price point as some news sites say, I couldn't care less. And it's not like intel has a rep for releasing new CPUs with backwards motherboard compatibility, so even when 6/8 cores are mainstream, it'll probably be tied to a new socket or chipset. In my mind, the only rationalization of the x58 platform for a consumer is if you plan to use the extra PCIe lanes or you absolutely insist on the highest-end parts (ie: the "extreme" CPUs)...

[diver]

I think some of you have your wires crossed on 6 core CPU upgrades. That is for socket 1366, not 1156. The main advantage of socket 1156 is lower power requirements and fewer components on the mobo. There is no Northbridge on 1156, the memory controller is in the CPU package. There are no 2 core processors yet for 1156, but there are probably going to be some in January, along with micro ITX boards. Remember, fewer components allows smaller boards. Most hardware sites say 1156 is the replacement for socket 775 and is likely to become as widespread and long lived as the old BX platform.

A socket 1156 i860 will draw about 60 watts less than an i7-920. However, why not get an i5-750 and save your self some money?

As for socket 1366 and 6 cores, big bucks will be required. I don't expect socket 1366 to be used for anything other than quad core and up.

[JamieG]

Thanks for the thoughts folks. Keep the opinions coming!

FWIW, I'm currently using a 1680x1050 monitor that is slowly flaking out, and is likely to be replaced with a 23" 1920x1080 screen once I get some more cash together after buying this system. I'd like to be able to turn the detail settings up a bit though (which is what I'm missing on my current setup) hence the slight overkill on the graphics card.

My main PC has an SSD for a boot disk, but to fit my games onto one (for level loading time decreases etc) would probably require a 128GB SSD, which would be another $500-600, which is probably too much at the moment. (Yep, Australian pricing sucks compared to US prices, especially given current exchange rate of 1 AUD to approx 0.92 USD. )

I guess I'm leaning a little towards the P55 option at this stage. If LGA-1156 is going to be around for a while, it sounds like a decent choice.

[hybrid2d4x4]

Whoops, I inadvertently copied what I took to be a typo in the OP. I meant to write 1366 instead of 1136.

[JamieG]

Whoops, I inadvertently copied what I took to be a typo in the OP. I meant to write 1366 instead of 1136.

Original typo fixed as well.

[danimal]

The 6 cores will indeed be 1136 exclusive, but if they are at the >$1k price point as some news sites say, I couldn't care less. And it's not like intel has a rep for releasing new CPUs with backwards motherboard compatibility, so even when 6/8 cores are mainstream, it'll probably be tied to a new socket or chipset. In my mind, the only rationalization of the x58 platform for a consumer is if you plan to use the extra PCIe lanes or you absolutely insist on the highest-end parts (ie: the "extreme" CPUs)...

why did you leave overclocking out of your list? believe it or not, overclocking is something that many consumers want, lol

as i already posted, 1366 is currently the only real choice for serious overclocking.

as for the >$1k price point... here is one version of the roadmap, it already lists a $5xx i7, with lower pricing to follow, once the new packages hit the streets:
http://www.engadget.com/2009/11/29/inte ... introduct/

buying into a socket platform means limiting yourself to things like cpu cooler choices and the number of ram modules you are using, so going cheap at this point could hurt you later, if you want to step up the performance.

[JamieG]

Well, I'm not particularly interested in overclocking at this stage, so I am leaving it out of my decision making process at this time.

[hybrid2d4x4]

^You're right about the OC, though I don't think it's fair to say the 1156 ones are that much worse at it (unless you insist on stock volts only). I'm not an OC guru, but Anandtech got an i7 860 up to 4.016GHz @ 1.334V on the POS retail cooler. That's pretty respectable isn't it? By comparison, they got a i7 975 to 4.133GHz @ 1.441V on stock cooling. A 130MHz difference is pretty much negligible in real usage and this is the top-binned "extreme" CPU here. I don't know anything about the socket burn issues with 1156 so I won't bother trying to defend it. In any case, the OP stated that he has no intention of OC'ing.

As for the link you gave, the chart shows the $500 part as being 8 threads, which brings nothing new to the table AFAIK. I was only talking about the upgrade path to 6+ cores, which I read is offered as part of the "extreme" line which are >$1k parts.

[danimal]

the o.p. made this a tough choice, because he wants to compare i7 vs. i7.

best bang for the buck, no overclocking, i'd have to agree that the little socket is slightly better, and if you buy the right mb, with the updated socket, it'll even be overclockable later down the line.

i think that the little i7 will also have lower power consumption? an spcr winner right there

the six-core intel stuff is for the upcoming i9... the same 130w power consumption as the big i7 chip, but maybe up to a 50% speed increase?... it uses the same x58 chipset, from what i've heard it'll plug right into your big i7 socket mb, with maybe a bios update.

12 threads instead of the i7's 8... you want computing power, this is it, and i'm guessing that the high-end i7 chips will drop in price when the i9 arrives... which makes the 1366 socket a better deal for the future.

[JamieG]

Forgot to mention a little extra complication ... USB3/SATA3 motherboards are starting to appear for sale in Australia. So far, I've seen a range of P55 motherboards becoming available in Aus (mainly from Gigabyte, one of which I'd listed in my original post) with USB3/SATA3 but only one X58-based mobo, which is Gigabyte's EX58A-UD7 motherboard at $400+.

The P55 USB3/SATA3 motherboards are pretty comparable in pricing to the existing P55 motherboards, but apparently USB3/SATA3 devices will have to use some of the P55 chipset's limited PCIe bandwidth. I read somewhere that this might push the main PCIe graphics slot down to 8x if a SATA3 or USB3 drive is used , but I don't think previous tests of limited PCIe bandwidth greatly affects fps when gaming.

I won't be building this system until my 5870 Vapor-X arrives (got one on back-order after taking the plunge) so I will be waiting a little longer to pick my final parts.

Any thoughts on whether SATA3/USB3 at a reasonable price tips the balance towards a P55 solution?

[Cistron]

Frankly, I'd save the money and go with the lowest cost platform that provides turboboost for 2 cores. You get the speed bump from that now, and then have the "futureproofing" for 4 core games. Spend the savings on a decent SSD - that will make the games snappier (game load, scene load times). As for the gpu...5870 seems overkill @ $629AU. You sure the 5850 or even the 5770 won't meet your needs at your screen resolution?

Look for reviews of the games you like to play and see what kind of frame rates they get vs diff h/w solutions. Paying 2x for a graphics card that doesn't provide a discernable difference in game seems a waste of $'s and watts.

I wouldn't even go for anything with turboboost. I doubt you'd feel the difference to a bog-standard C2D, but mainboards and RAM are still more expensive on the ix side. Downside of LGA775 boards is of course that you won't be able to easily upgrade to any of the i5 or i7 processors later. Then on the other hand, I haven't met anyone yet, who's upgraded the CPU.

I can only second the SSD advice. If you want to blow money, that's where.

[danimal]

the pci bandwidth issues are a problem with dual video cards, you don't want a p55 in that configuration... interesting to hear that about the new sata/usb implementations w/p55.

sounds like you better do your homework about the video card issue, tho... or else just step up to x58, and not worry about it

it looks like the sata3/usb3 isn't going to be much more expensive on the x58 platform either:
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.a ... 6813131614

[hybrid2d4x4]

The PCI-e in the P55 chipset (as opposed to the lanes exclusively dedicated to video, which are in the CPU) have room for 4 GB(Bytes, not bits)/sec which is independent of USB,LAN,etc. and is better than the X58 @ 3GB. The 1366 platform has more lanes on the CPU for video cards than 1156, but less for other devices such as the USB3/SATA3 controller cards, TV tuners, etc., which are handled by the chipset. In theory, video card PCI-e lanes should have zero impact on other PCI-e devices. If there's a conflict that drops video down to x8, then it's probably a bug or a half-baked BIOS or something. See the block diagrams for the chipsets here: http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh ... spx?i=3634

Like danimal said, the bandwidth is a limiting factor for 2 higher end vid cards on P55 because the CPUs only have 16 lanes allocated to video, but since you said you only use one card, this has no effect on you.

[Tephras]

The P55 USB3/SATA3 motherboards are pretty comparable in pricing to the existing P55 motherboards, but apparently USB3/SATA3 devices will have to use some of the P55 chipset's limited PCIe bandwidth. I read somewhere that this might push the main PCIe graphics slot down to 8x if a SATA3 or USB3 drive is used , but I don't think previous tests of limited PCIe bandwidth greatly affects fps when gaming.

On Gigabyte motherboards the USB3/SATA6Gpbs controllers, that are connected to the PCIe 2.0 lanes in the CPU, will fall back to USB2/SATA3Gbps to circumvent the bandwidth issues when two graphic cards are used.
Asus, on the other hand, have the controllers connected to the P55 chipset through a chip that combines 4 of the chipset PCIe 1.1 lanes in order to boost the bandwidth up to USB3/SATA6Gbps speed. So, Asus implementation will have no influence on the graphic bandwidth, but there will be fewer PCIe 1.1 lanes available.

[hybrid2d4x4]

^??? Where are you guys getting this info from? P55 doesn't use PCI-e 1.x, it uses 2.0, it even displays this in the block diagram I linked above when it says 500MB/s per lane. And P55 has 8 lanes, not 4, regardless of board vendor. Intel makes the chipsets, not the board vendors, so every single P55 chipset is the same.
I doubt that GB's mobo links to the CPU<->GFX PCI-e lanes for it's SATA3/USB3 support, but if true, the person that thought it was a good idea needs to be fired.

[JamieG]

Manual for the GA-P55A-UD4P here.

Turbo SATA3 / USB3.0 (Marvell 9128 /NEC USB 3.0 Controller)

Determines whether to set the PCIe speed of the Marvell 9128 or NEC USB 3.0 controller to PCIe Gen 2. Please note that when only one graphics card is installed on the PCIEX16 slot, it will operate at up to x8 mode if either one of the two controllers is set to PCIe Gen 2. The two controllers will be automatically set to PCIe Gen 1 when two graphics cards are installed on the PCIEX16 and PCIEX8 slots.

Auto - Lets the BIOS automatically configure this setting, depending on the device installed. (Default)

Turbo SATA3 - Sets the PCIe speed of the Marvell 9128 controller to PCIe Gen 2.

Turbo USB3.0 - Sets the PCIe speed of the NEC USB 3.0 controller to PCIe Gen 2.

Disabled - Disabled forces the Marvell 9128 and NEC USB 3.0 controllers to PCIe Gen 1.

As I understand that and based on some other comments I've read around the web, Turbo Mode might be necessary for USB3/SATA3 speeds as well as being a change between PCIe 1.0 and PCIe 2.0 specs, so enabling this Turbo Mode would apparently be necessary to get full SATA3 or USB3 speeds, which means the PCIe x16 main graphics slot gets dropped back to x8 according to that quote if I attach a SATA3 device (say, a SATA3 SSD which is a future purchase I tentatively have in mind later down the track) or a USB3 external storage device.

The Asus P7P55D-E Premium is the only other P55 mobo I have seen announced with USB3/SATA3, and Asus solves this problem by adding a separate 'PLX' chip from NEC I think to properly enable USB3/SATA3 without poaching PCIe bandwidth. Unfortunately this is another $400+ AU motherboard at this stage ...

I might wait and see what other motherboard manufacturers do at this rate.

(edit)

Some testing on the x8 drop effects of Gigabyte's USB3/SATA3 implementation: http://www.xtremesystems.org/forums/sho ... ?p=4128308

(edit2)

Based on these tests, a drop to 8x speed is only about a 2% penalty in fps with a 5870. Admittedly the test was done on an X58 mobo with at i7 920 at 3.8, but the results should be applicable purely on bandwidth limitation issues.

[hybrid2d4x4]

Ay carumba! Thanks for the links. That's a really odd implementation... What I don't understand is why they don't cannibalize the 8 2.0 lanes of PCI-E on the P55 instead of the CPU's PCI-E. Besides, doesn't this board only has 2 USB3 ports? So it's not like they'd run out of bandwidth by using the P55's lanes (even in 1.1 mode) even if you use both devices running at max speed (2x ~400MB/s) plus both SATA3 (2x 600MB/s) for a total of 2GB/s, or 4 2.0 lanes (8 1.1 lanes). I guess it might make sense if someone's already got some more controller cards in the PCI-E x4 slots and the max number of SATA2/USB2 drives connected to the P55 like a server trying to milk the most SATA connections out of the board and take the stress off the DMI... but still, I think it's an odd approach...

What really has me baffled now is why sites like http://www.hardwarezone.com/articles/vi ... cid=6&pg=1 claim that P55 has PCI-E 1.1 onboard and not 2.0, which is contrary to what intel and everyone else states.

[Tephras]

^??? Where are you guys getting this info from? P55 doesn't use PCI-e 1.x, it uses 2.0, it even displays this in the block diagram I linked above when it says 500MB/s per lane. And P55 has 8 lanes, not 4, regardless of board vendor. Intel makes the chipsets, not the board vendors, so every single P55 chipset is the same.
I doubt that GB's mobo links to the CPU<->GFX PCI-e lanes for it's SATA3/USB3 support, but if true, the person that thought it was a good idea needs to be fired.

That's correct, the P55 chipset has only PCIe 2.0, but the PCIe lanes are operating at 2.5GT/s, so they are practically of the preceding PCIe generation.

The PCI Express lanes are version 2.0 but Intel decided to limit their speed to PCIe 1.x specs at 2.5GT/s.

Lynnfield has enough PCI Express lanes for most graphics configs. What about expansion slots and peripherals, though? That's where the P55 Express PCH comes in. It's equipped with eight gen-two PCIe lanes—two more than the old ICH10R south bridge. However, these lanes only offer signaling rates up to 2.5GT/s, which is the same speed as gen-one PCI Express.

[hybrid2d4x4]

How very misleading of them to advertise the lanes as 2.0...
Oh well, thanks for all the info, guys!

[Tephras]

Yes, indeed. However, as I just noticed, it is actually written at the overview page of the P55 chipset and in the datasheet, but I can't remember seeing it mentioned in any of the Lynnfield launch-reviews I've read, I remember that deceptive block diagram though.

[JamieG]

Some comments from Gigabyte's and Asus' engineering teams in this review.

Basically Gigabyte chose to allow users to have a BIOS setting to enable USB3/SATA3 mode by cannabalising PCIe 2.0 x16 graphics lanes from the CPU directly whereas Asus added an extra chip to combine the PCIe 1.1 lanes from the P55 PCH chipset into enough bandwidth to support both SATA3 and USB3 on the one board without stealing graphics card PCIe lanes, but apparently at a slightly reduced speed (500mb vs 600mb).

[Pendan]

I am also contemplating the same questions. P55 / i7 860 or X58 / i7 920 for a new game machine. Do I want to pay extra for a usb 3.0 and sata 6G board?

The Marvell solution that both Gigabyte and Asus are using appears to currently have issues for Sata 6G. Take a look at http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.php?o ... &Itemid=38 The writer believes it is all in the drivers so could be fixed but not sure I want to count on that.

[Writer]

I'm in the same boat, trying to decide between P55 and X58 for a new build.

Two big pluses in P55's favour are the passive cooling and lower power consumption. That means it should be easier to build a quiet system on that platform.

However, according to reviews the P55 consumes a lot more power when the CPU is overclocked. IIRC it puts the power needs right up there in X58 territory.

The implication seems to be that if you're planning to overclock, the P55 might not offer any advantage over X58 in terms of power consumption.

Not needing active chipset cooling, however, remains a big plus if you're concerned about noise. (Are there any quiet full-size X58 boards?)

Is it better to go with a newer platform or one that has had a bit of time to get the bugs worked out?

Does X58 offer any significant advantages in other areas such as IO performance?

X58 also has more room for upgrading RAM (6 slots vs 4).

The question is whether the price/noise premium is worth it.

[Rucker]

I think I've made my decision. I just sold my i920 gaming system, since I want my life back , and I've decided to upgrade my Phenom II x3 720 DAW. It runs fine as a DAW, but I want more processing power for video encoding. A nice gent pointed me towards these comparison of i750, i860 and i920:

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/sh ... i=3641&p=4

For nearly all of the encoding tasks, the little i5 CPU holds its own with the i7s, and since I want to run it quietly for audio recording, the lower power should allow me to keep my fans on low. The i750 is $80 cheaper than the i860 at the local Microcenter which almost pays for the 4GB of DDR3 RAM. The MSI Mobo is only $120 at Newegg, and I paid $300 for my previous x58.

Merry Christmas to me.

[danimal]

newegg just had an msi x58 mb on sale for $139, and it was highly-rated in multiple reviews... the deals are out there for socket 1366, if you shop carefully.

that anandtech comparison was interesting, but it only used a couple of applications for testing... the advantage for i7 920 shows up better with the right apps, and overclocking as well... video encoding without overclocking seems kinda pointless to me.

great thread, thanks to everyone for their input.

[JamieG]

For the P55-based mobo, I am now also considering the Asus P7P55D-E-PRO - $280 AU.

It looks like it will be a while before I'm able to get my hands on a 5870 Vapor-X card, so I plan on reassessing prices and features (mainly USB3/SATA3 availability and performance) on the available X58/P55 mobos and CPUs when my graphics card arrives.