Confused about Intel socket 2011 CPUs

[FizzyFantom]

I have been looking at Intel Extreme CPUs for socket 2011, and I'm a little confused. I noticed that there is an i7 4930K, but this is an IvyBridge CPU? Is the i7 3930K a SandyBridge CPU? If so why are architecture numbers shifted up by one (from the architecture numbering of non-extreme editions)?

Also is X79 the latest extreme edition chipset and will it support SandyBridge CPUs?

Were there any 2000 series extreme edition CPUs? Were any of the 9XXs extreme editions?

Many thanks, FizzyFantom

[Freaky_spider]

every 2011 CPU is compatible with every 2011 mobo but will in most cases need a bios update to work.

 

4930K is indeed ivy bridge and 3930K is indeed sandy bridge.

 

when a new architechture is release they always go 1000 higher, thats just how their naming sheme works

[itsMacyyyy]

Sandybridge-E = 39xx

Ivybridge-E = 49xx

 

Sandybridge-E came out around the same time as Ivybridge and Ivybridge shortly after Haswell which might be the reason for their number schemes. Also there has benn 

Yes x79 is the newest extreme edition chipset with x99 coming soon and yes it will support your Sandybridge-E (if thats what you mean) CPU. There were 9xx extreme editions, not sure about 2xxxx but most probably.

 

EDIT: There were two mobile extreme editions in 2xxx series. The numbering scheme is different for extreme editions as there has been one more generation than consumer grade CPU's.

[Alfred14]

I think what he is saying is that a 4770K for exampe is Haswell, but in the 2011 socket the leading 4 is Ivy?

[Lays]

I think what he is saying is that a 4770K for exampe is Haswell, but in the 2011 socket the leading 4 is Ivy?

 

 

Because the 49xx and 39xx are essentially updated versions of older CPU's with more cores.   Hence why 59xx is haswell-e.

[Freaky_spider]

I think what he is saying is that a 4770K for exampe is Haswell, but in the 2011 socket the leading 4 is Ivy?

ahh, thats what he means,

 

the -E variation is always 1 generation behind because intel doesnt have any competition and thus doesnt need it to be the newest architecture

also they can use old fabs to create the even more expensive -E variations and use the new fabs to make the new generation

[The_Strict_Nein]

It tends to be based on general performance. Ivy-E performs on the level of Haswell, so it's got the 4000 nomenclature.

[FizzyFantom]

Great! Thanks for all the excellent replies, I think I understand it now. It's a strange numbering scheme, but it kind of makes sense. Thanks all

[isteelsolz]

I hate it how intell are always one generation behind on 2011. Doesn't it make sense that their extreme platform should be MORE ADVANCED than the mainstream? X79 doesn't even have native USB 3.0 for crying out loud.

[Denned]

It's just like any other line of CPU's.. The extreme editions just so happens to share the socket they're using

[Lays]

I hate it how intell are always one generation behind on 2011. Doesn't it make sense that their extreme platform should be MORE ADVANCED than the mainstream? X79 doesn't even have native USB 3.0 for crying out loud.

 

 

what do you mean "native" ?

[The_Strict_Nein]

what do you mean "native" ?

 

According the Intel's X79 specs, it has 14 USB 2.0 on the chipset, but no support on the chip set for USB 3.0. I believe USB 3 on X79 boards are all provided by the CPU or a third party chipset

[Lays]

According the Intel's X79 specs, it has 14 USB 2.0 on the chipset, but no support on the chip set for USB 3.0. I believe USB 3 on X79 boards are all provided by the CPU or a third party chipset

 

 

As long as it works what difference does it make >.<

[The_Strict_Nein]

As long as it works what difference does it make >.<

 

Doesn't make the slightest difference to me, but having all the facts straight is important

[Faa]

what do you mean "native" ?

Native would be from Intel controller, not native would be asmedia junk. Just like Intels own sata controller and marvell/asmedia controller.

[Lays]

Native would be from Intel controller, not native would be asmedia junk. Just like Intels own sata controller and marvell/asmedia controller.

 

 

Tbh the 3rd party sata controller on my RIVE tank my read/write speeds on my ssd, one day I was like da hell...? then switched to intel controller and bam lol.

 

I don't think I've ever even used usb3 though.. Not many things have it

[Faa]

Tbh the 3rd party sata controller on my RIVE tank my read/write speeds on my ssd, one day I was like da hell...? then switched to intel controller and bam lol.

 

I don't think I've ever even used usb3 though.. Not many things have it

I have the asmedia controller disabled in the bios, posts much faster and no double post. Even if your speeds or writes are okay, they just cause a lot of instabilities and thats mainly why z87 only has native ports.

We're not much with usb bandwidth really, soon we're at usb 15.0 and we still don't have a clue how to make that bandwidth useful

[Lays]

I have the asmedia controller disabled in the bios, posts much faster and no double post. Even if your speeds or writes are okay, they just cause a lot of instabilities and thats mainly why z87 only has native ports.

We're not much with usb bandwidth really, soon we're at usb 15.0 and we still don't have a clue how to make that bandwidth useful

 

Do you know  how to disable the stupid freaking " CPU fan error" crap because I don't have a cpu fan?  It makes me go into bios everytime I boot because of it, hella annoying

[Faa]

Do you know  how to disable the stupid freaking " CPU fan error" crap because I don't have a cpu fan?  It makes me go into bios everytime I boot because of it, hella annoying

Ofc I do.

Get in your bios and get here http://cdn.overclock.net/c/c5/c5ebfd4d_120617110156.jpeg

Change that 600 rpm to ignore, do it for the chassis headers as well.

[Lays]

Ofc I do.

Get in your bios and get here http://cdn.overclock.net/c/c5/c5ebfd4d_120617110156.jpeg

Change that 600 rpm to ignore, do it for the chassis headers as well.

 

 

thx bbq