# Intel LGA2011 Socket, X68 Express Chipset Pictured



## btarunr (Jan 10, 2011)

Here are the first pictures of Intel's new high-end CPU socket, the 2011-pin land grid array (LGA2011). A selection of pictures of an unannounced motherboard by MSI made it to the internet. LGA2011, coupled with a new chipset, the Intel X68 Express, will drive the company's new high-end and enthusiast-grade processors that feature 6, 8, or 12 cores, and quad-channel DDR3 memory controllers. At first sight, the LGA2011 is huge! Its retention clip looks to be completely detachable by unhooking the retention bars on either sides. With all LGA sockets till date, you needed to unhook one retention bar, letting you open the retention clip along a hinge. 

Since the processor has four DDR3 memory channels, there's room for only one DIMM per channel on a typically-sized ATX motherboard. On this particular motherboard, we can make out that there are two DIMM slots on either sides of the socket, accommodating two channels each. With this platform, Intel transferred the northbridge component completely to the CPU package, much like LGA1156/LGA1155. Therefore, the 32-lane PCI-Express controller is housed inside the CPU package. What remains of the chipset is a PCH (platform controller hub). Like P55/H55/P67/H67, the X68 is a PCH, a glorified southbridge. It will house a smaller PCI-E hub that handles various connectivity devices, a storage controller, a LPCIO controller, USB and HDA controllers, and the DMI link to the processor. We will get to know more about this platform as the year progresses.



 

 



*View at TechPowerUp Main Site*


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Jan 10, 2011)

So 4 ram slots? Good, was worried I wouldn't be able to get two more matching sets (my ram is EOL) by the time 2011 comes out.


----------



## blu3flannel (Jan 10, 2011)

That's a pretty weird way to do the RAM slots, doing | | o | | instead of o |||| ( o is the socket and | is a RAM slot).


----------



## n-ster (Jan 10, 2011)

quad-channel DDR3? cool


----------



## blu3flannel (Jan 10, 2011)

Oh cool, so if I were ever to upgrade to this I would only need another kit of RAM, to make 8GB. Sweet!


----------



## Hayder_Master (Jan 10, 2011)

ok i just want to know are them wrong or i am wrong, as i know can't quad channel be useful with 64 bit processors????


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Jan 10, 2011)

blu3flannel said:


> That's a pretty weird way to do the RAM slots, doing | | o | | instead of o |||| ( o is the socket and | is a RAM slot).



That actually not true at all.

The only reason we saw o ||||  is because it was actually like this:

o - N - |||| where N is the northbridge (the memory controller).

Now that N is incorporated onto the CPU die, we can do o - |||| or || - o - ||

Now which one of the above has the shortest distance to the CPU and which one has the most consistent trace lengths? Remember that at high speeds you get all kinds of signalling problems if one memory is twice the distance from the CPU as the other.  Inconsistent resistance, capacitance and crosstalk.

The second point is the internal structure of the new multi-core CPU and the internal QPI.  You need to think of the memory layout as || - X - || where X is the multicore CPU, and one bank of memory is "closer" to one core and the other bank memory is closer to the other core.  And the QPI deals with passing memory data from one side of the CPU to the other if necessary.


----------



## mtosev (Jan 10, 2011)

LAN_deRf_HA said:


> So 4 ram slots? Good, was worried I wouldn't be able to get two more matching sets (my ram is EOL) by the time 2011 comes out.



how can you make out that the board has 4 memory slots in thos blurry photos?


----------



## blu3flannel (Jan 10, 2011)

Completely Bonkers said:


> That actually not true at all.
> 
> The only reason we saw o ||||  is because it was actually like this:
> 
> ...



I just meant it's different than what I'm used to, but thanks for the informative post.


----------



## Yukikaze (Jan 10, 2011)

hayder.master said:


> ok i just want to know are them wrong or i am wrong, as i know can't quad channel be useful with 64 bit processors????



If you had one core, reading a single 64-bit value, with no prefetch and no cache, you might have had a very tentative point. With several cores per chip, relatively large cache line sizes and memory prefetch having quad-channel memory can be quite the help. Of course - the gains won't be all that big for run-of-the-mill apps (just like triple-channel didn't make dual-channel seem slow or obsolete), but they will be there for those who need them and can take advantage of them.


----------



## LAN_deRf_HA (Jan 10, 2011)

mtosev said:


> how can you make out that the board has 4 memory slots in thos blurry photos?



Xray vision. I see through your photoshopz


----------



## jellyrole (Jan 10, 2011)

In the last pic if you look at the top RAM module holders, you can see 4 white blurs.


----------



## Octopuss (Jan 10, 2011)

There's good chance these photos are fake. I don't trust any chinese bullshit anyway.


----------



## Hayder_Master (Jan 10, 2011)

Yukikaze said:


> If you had one core, reading a single 64-bit value, with no prefetch and no cache, you might have had a very tentative point. With several cores per chip, relatively large cache line sizes and memory prefetch having quad-channel memory can be quite the help. Of course - the gains won't be all that big for run-of-the-mill apps (just like triple-channel didn't make dual-channel seem slow or obsolete), but they will be there for those who need them and can take advantage of them.



as u say cuz i didn't see the tri channel fully use yet, so the quad channel will be useful with 12 cores maybe??


----------



## Yukikaze (Jan 10, 2011)

hayder.master said:


> as u say cuz i didn't see the tri channel fully use yet, so the quad channel will be useful with 12 cores maybe??



Triple channel is being used beautifully by server applications, which is where it belongs anyway. Same goes for Quad channel memory. They end up in enthusiast systems simply because they share a CPU-design with the server systems and they do make a small impact which the enthusiast crowd is automatically drawn to.


----------



## buggalugs (Jan 10, 2011)

I believe there is 2 retention clips because the socket is big but mainly because of memory detection issues on socket 1366 boards.


----------



## Completely Bonkers (Jan 10, 2011)

Yukikaze said:


> Quad channel...


Just to add a bit more here. This isn't really "quad-channel" but rather it is a dual dual-channel.  There are two independent sets of dual-channel memory feeding different cores.  There is an internal ring-bus for forwarding memory data in the CPU to the relevant core.

Quad-channel would be better (simpler design) in a single core system.

Dual dual-channel is better (faster) in a multi-core situation where multiple cores are working independently.

[The theoretic bandwidth of the memory is the same, but dual dual-channels can be accessing different memory locations and forwarding the data directly to different processor cores simultaneously and independently. _Whereas_ with quad channel, latency increases when the second memory request from the second core waits for the first to be completed then forwarded by the ring bus.] *

* I put that in brackets because I'm not 100% sure of the implementation in Sandy Bridge. It might use a mixed methodology, ie. using both approaches, depending on demand. We need to know more about how those cache controllers are memory controllers have been designed.


----------



## Animalpak (Jan 10, 2011)

Forget the RAM think about the CPU socket, looks huge really.


----------



## TAViX (Jan 10, 2011)

Just curious, how much better is this X68 over P67 chipset. Need a comparison....


----------



## HillBeast (Jan 10, 2011)

I know why they blurred it out (to prevent too much info getting leaked), but why not just crop it down to what needs to be looked at? All they have done is made people speculate about the memory. I don't give a **** about the memory. I am on a Bloomfield Core i7 and I am STILL on dual channel and not once have I been begging for more bandwidth. I know there are people who care, but let's not talk about that. I want to see the CPU for cripes sake! That's the real hero here, not some piece of pre-release PCB.



TAViX said:


> Just curious, how much better is this X68 over P67 chipset. Need a comparison....



My suspicions are not by much. I'd suspect it would maybe have more SATA/USB and a slightly faster PCI-e bus, but I doubt it'll wipe the floor with P67. I am willing to bet they will be interchangeable if someone was nutty enough (not pin for pin, but someone could be crazy enough to make LGA2011 work on P67). Just a guess anyways.


----------



## buggalugs (Jan 10, 2011)

TAViX said:


> Just curious, how much better is this X68 over P67 chipset. Need a comparison....



Theres also Z68, the overclockable 1155 boards coming soon.

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2010/11/22/intel-z60-express-leak/1

 But i would guess they are similar, X68 will have slightly higher memory bandwidth with the quad channel and slightly better pci-e performance with 2, 16x slots.


----------



## theonedub (Jan 10, 2011)

Completely Bonkers said:


> That actually not true at all.
> 
> The only reason we saw o ||||  is because it was actually like this:
> 
> ...



If that's the reasoning I wonder why this arrangement wasn't used on SB motherboards or even Lynnfield boards where the NB is already integrated? Or is it because those are dual channel boards? 

Id like to hear more about these boards, officially anyway.


----------



## Bjorn_Of_Iceland (Jan 10, 2011)

maybe they should make it like this instead
._
|o|


----------



## entropy13 (Jan 10, 2011)

Bjorn_Of_Iceland said:


> maybe they should make it like this instead
> ._
> |o|



LOL So you want the RAM to surround your socket, CPU and therefore the heatsink as well?


----------



## Cuzza (Jan 10, 2011)

Being released in the year 2011.  Does Intel have that much time on there hands that they can engineer a socket to have a desirable number of pins, rather than a number that is convenient and works for the technology? Or is it simple coincidence?


----------



## bear jesus (Jan 10, 2011)

Interesting setup but i assume it will cause even more clearance problems with big coolers when used with tall ram.

I really look forward to seeing how the LGA2011 chips perform.



Cuzza said:


> Being released in the year 2011.  Does Intel have that much time on there hands that they can engineer a socket to have a desirable number of pins, rather than a number that is convenient and works for the technology? Or is it simple coincidence?



I would assume it's just a coincidence kind of like the Nvidia 480 having 480 cuda cores.


----------



## wolf (Jan 10, 2011)

schmeezus christ quad channel ddr3 with 6-8 or 12 core CPU's... talk about beasty.

if the 2600K is anything to go by... an 8 or 12 core will be rape on a stick.


----------



## bear jesus (Jan 10, 2011)

wolf said:


> schmeezus christ quad channel ddr3 with 6-8 or 12 core CPU's... talk about beasty.
> 
> if the 2600K is anything to go by... an 8 or 12 core will be rape on a stick.



More like bank account rape 

A K or extreme edition LGA2011 12 core chip and board with 4 channels worth of 2ghz+ DDR3 i assume will not come cheap.


----------



## wolf (Jan 10, 2011)

bear jesus said:


> More like bank account rape
> 
> A K or extreme edition LGA2011 12 core chip and board with 4 channels worth of 2ghz+ DDR3 i assume will not come cheap.



no doubt about that, but I've got a feeling it will be the fastest combination you can buy. record setters then holders.


----------



## bear jesus (Jan 10, 2011)

wolf said:


> no doubt about that, but I've got a feeling it will be the fastest combination you can buy. record setters then holders.



Definitely, I would assume Intel is not stupid enough to limit the extreme editions when it comes to temperature so a 2011 sandy bridge under a liquid nitrogen pot is probably going to set some impressive records later this year.

Although I'm unsure on the core count, i can't find much on it but on the sandy bridge wiki there is 6 and 8 core CPU's listed (although no reference thus why I'm still unsure) but with HT that would be 12 or 16 cores, either way there will be some insane benchmark world records set later this year with the right cooling.


----------



## chodaboy19 (Jan 10, 2011)

Completely Bonkers said:


> Just to add a bit more here. This isn't really "quad-channel" but rather it is a dual dual-channel.  There are two independent sets of dual-channel memory feeding different cores.  There is an internal ring-bus for forwarding memory data in the CPU to the relevant core.
> 
> Quad-channel would be better (simpler design) in a single core system.
> 
> ...



How sure are you about this? This is the first time I have heard this about LGA2011.


----------



## meran (Jan 10, 2011)

well starting from now i think motherboard makers asked intel to change socket every 2 years
we have 1155 instead of 1166 now 2011 and after 2 years 2013

where is greeen in these products they want us to dump the cool 1166 for 1155?? why is that just money money money


----------



## Yellow&Nerdy? (Jan 10, 2011)

Quad-channel just means that I have to spend extra money on RAM... Most users don't need more than 4GB. But then people with a budget will probably get LGA1155 or Bulldozer.

A 8-core or a 12-core will definitely completely trash everything from AMD, but then will cost 2-5 times more. Just like this generation... This platform is going to be cutting edge, but costs a load, so it'll be a perfect successor for LGA1366. TBH, a 8-core or a 12-core will be an overkill for the vast majority of users: the extra cores are really only useful in servers.


----------



## meran (Jan 10, 2011)

Yellow&Nerdy? said:


> Quad-channel just means that I have to spend extra money on RAM... Most users don't need more than 4GB. But then people with a budget will probably get LGA1155 or Bulldozer.
> 
> A 8-core or a 12-core will definitely completely trash everything from AMD, but then will cost 2-5 times more. Just like this generation... This platform is going to be cutting edge, but costs a load, so it'll be a perfect successor for LGA1366. TBH, a 8-core or a 12-core will be an overkill for the vast majority of users: the extra cores are really only useful in servers.



+1


----------



## avatar_raq (Jan 10, 2011)

TAViX said:


> Just curious, how much better is this X68 over P67 chipset. Need a comparison....



x68 will be convenient for uber quad-SLI/CF machines. There is a good chance that LGA 2011 CPUs will perform better than 1155 ones clock for clock.


----------



## meirb111 (Jan 10, 2011)

another socket for intel this amount of sockets numbers sucks


----------



## ensabrenoir (Jan 10, 2011)

Yellow&Nerdy? said:


> Quad-channel just means that I have to spend extra money on RAM... Most users don't need more than 4GB. But then people with a budget will probably get LGA1155 or Bulldozer.
> 
> A 8-core or a 12-core will definitely completely trash everything from AMD, but then will cost 2-5 times more. Just like this generation... This platform is going to be cutting edge, but costs a load, so it'll be a perfect successor for LGA1366. TBH, a 8-core or a 12-core will be an overkill for the vast majority of users: the extra cores are really only useful in servers.



 Totally true!  Yet ...Already started saving for 1  Just like no one really needs a 200+mph car or a tablet pc(still don't get it).   Something primal within us cry's out for the biggest and baddest of everything.  If we lived like the flinestones  and Intel and Amd were club makers..... well you get the pictures,


----------



## mlee49 (Jan 10, 2011)

Nice to finally start hearing about this.  Will definitely be interested to see if Intel executes well  on processors.


----------



## Wile E (Jan 10, 2011)

Yellow&Nerdy? said:


> Quad-channel just means that I have to spend extra money on RAM... Most users don't need more than 4GB. But then people with a budget will probably get LGA1155 or Bulldozer.
> 
> A 8-core or a 12-core will definitely completely trash everything from AMD, but then will cost 2-5 times more. Just like this generation... This platform is going to be cutting edge, but costs a load, so it'll be a perfect successor for LGA1366. TBH, a 8-core or a 12-core will be an overkill for the vast majority of users: the extra cores are really only useful in servers.



Also useful for encoding.


----------



## sneekypeet (Jan 10, 2011)

wow options for stock or water cooling with 2011, I'm impressed..../sarcasm


----------



## CDdude55 (Jan 11, 2011)

Awesome, can't wait to see some benchmarks and games being ran on a LGA 2011 setup.

Though of course i can tell i won't be able to afford it, and my wallet starts crying just thinking about it how much the platform will be. lol


----------



## [H]@RD5TUFF (Jan 11, 2011)

Sexy I hope it's real, and not a troll.

I am quite glad I skipped out on P55 and X58 mass adoption, as ram prices have come down so much quad channel makes sense, monetary wise anyway.


----------



## sneekypeet (Jan 11, 2011)

On topic, fair warning!


----------



## AddSub (Jan 11, 2011)

Two years ago LINK

I'm glad I jumped onto LGA1366 early on. It was obvious they had a monster platform that would last for a variety of reasons (global economic slowdown, lack of competition in high-end, etc). This looks like what I will upgrade to come December 2011 or January 2012, if there are proper performance gains to be seen. None of this _"many times faster in select applications"_ PR nonsense. 

I mean, I would drop my i7/X58 setup in an instant for a single core rig running at say, 10GHz? Considering most apps (95%+???) are single threaded even today, a platform supporting a 10GHz CPU would pretty much burn and pillage through most benchmarks, apps, and games out there. Well, any game that is CPU dependent. Because, let's remember, multi-core CPU's come into existence only because of the "power wall". /sigh


----------



## Robert-The-Rambler (Jan 11, 2011)

*Hmph.....*

But we don't even NEED triple channel memory. Overkill...... Tax return is coming soon..... Must resist.......


----------



## Neuromancer (Jan 11, 2011)

AddSub said:


> I mean, I would drop my i7/X58 setup in an instant for a single core rig running at say, 10GHz? Considering most apps (95%+???) are single threaded even today, a platform supporting a 10GHz CPU would pretty much burn and pillage through most benchmarks, apps, and games out there. Well, any game that is CPU dependent. Because, let's remember, multi-core CPU's come into existence only because of the "power wall". /sigh



JOOC, how many times to fire up your PC and only have one app running? 

Even when I am gaming I have 8-10 applications running not to mention a serious number of windows background services.

Try running an old P$, single core, run an app that uses 60% CPU power and then try opening something else.. you will see it chug for a while.  That is gone thanks to multicore  Not saying a 10GHz chip would not be nice though


----------



## de Vlieg (Feb 7, 2011)

*socket change*

 Ya'all are thilly. Been out in the woods too long. There is one and only one reason to completely change a socket from an established standard. The message is coming in ... "make no mistake, this technology is in no way compatible with any other". Whatever Intel says the holes are, thats where the pins have to be. Mobo makers know why. They're the ones who have to disperse all that brain. Bet they would like to use a yellow, cyan, & magenta RCA male to male to plug into ...chassis mount, yadda yadda, but it is not what is needed.1156  was not needed. Pins had new jobs. Some were out of a job maybe (lots of these jobs were in ...). So you gotta redesign and make it incompatible anyway... you call the tune. 
Things change. Once upon a time it was an article of faith in electronics engineering that if you needed to provide secondary cooling to components something was seriously wrong with your design.


----------



## Scavitza (Mar 3, 2011)

Hello folks, i'm new here, but i thing i can come with a little idea to the comunity  .  I saw here about 8 core CPU's and the symetry of RAM slots with the CPU cores. Well, i will came here with a foto, where you can see also the orientation of each memory kit around a fictive 8 core CPU LGA 2011. That it's how i would like to look my future Motherboard 





OMG forgot somthing verry important: 20 nm litografy tehnique on the CPU. This combination should eliminate any geometric problem with high freqency's ... i thing ...


----------



## CyberAngel (Mar 19, 2011)

Completely Bonkers said:


> That actually not true at all.
> 
> The only reason we saw o ||||  is because it was actually like this:
> 
> ...



I'd rather have ||| - o - |||  wityh 6+6-core Ivy Bridge and 3011 scoket


----------



## CyberAngel (Mar 19, 2011)

entropy13 said:


> LOL So you want the RAM to surround your socket, CPU and therefore the heatsink as well?



marvellous idea!
Intel CPU+GPU+RAM module!
4-core 4GB 2-channel, or 8GB unlocked
6-core 6GB 3-channel, or 12GB unlocked
4+4-core 8GB 2+2 channel. or 16GB bigger modules unlocked

8+8-core 48GB 3+3 channel Ivy Bridge on 3011 socket (96GB big modules)


----------



## overclocking101 (Mar 19, 2011)

it will be interesting if the do it like this: ||0|| and have the 2 slots closest the cpu on both sides make it dual channel. instead of 2 sticks next to each other for dual channel. it would mean both stick in both channels would be the same distance from the cpu making latency and high speeds better.

or if they could do away with seperate modules and have everything on cpu. its a hell of an idea


----------



## Unidoubt (Apr 3, 2011)

Hey Guys, I was planning and really getting excited to get my hands on a 2600k (3.4Ghz) €270, asus mobo maximus 4 extreme €320, corsair 8gb 2000mhz XMS dual kit (x2 for 16gb) €135x2=€270, MSI Twinfrozr2/OC N580 GTX €450, and an prolimatech CPU cooler Armaggeddon €60 and sum basic things
(All are local retail prices, and it appeals to me)

since I probably couldn't stand to wait till LGA 2011 to be released, this would rock my world  with still lots of OC capabilities if would hit any restrictions  
(I read sum peeps got it over 5ghz on stock cooler, upto 7ghz just on air, amazing)

While I'm saving up to get the whole thing in one buy, LGA 2011 rumors/specs/leaks keeps haunting me, like what if I regret not waiting for it and wasted my money  
just my personal bkg I wanted to share here, any feedback will be welcome

so now on topic, LGA 2011 what I read up so far
Socket 2011 uses QPI to connect the CPU to either additional CPUs in a dual socket system, or to add-in chipsets. The CPU will handle northbridge functions, such as memory control, PCIe control, DMI, FDI, and other functions integrated on chip.

This socket is expected to be released alongside Sandy Bridge-EX in Q3 2011, and will support 4 memory channels as well as 32× PCIe 3.0 lanes from the CPU, the socket will measure 58.5mm × 51mm, and is backwards compatible with LGA 1366 cooling solutions.

and about pricing, a few months back I've read an article on intel stating that the max price they'll ask for a single cpu will be roofed @ $999 upon release, as they've done in the past.
so thats a relief 

and according to a chipset info leaked  on guru3d march 31, it's an intel x79 express chipset featuring 8 pcie 2.0 lanes @5GT/s, 14 Sata connections 10 of which are 6gb/s, 14usb 2.0.
which is a lil strange since it was supposed to cum with pcie 3.0 's, also the mobo max 4 extreme I mentioned above are all usb 3.0, so why the hell would they implement usb2.0 on new boards? it should be standard by Q3 2011 lol, or is it that asus is ahead of its game 

I guess i'll save up and wait a lil longer to see if it really makes all that difference, and if it doesn't I can always buy the rig I mentioned above, which will be considerbly dropped in price by then 

thnx 4 readin, sharing is caring, cheers m8s


----------

