Socket type confusion

well first of all in not computer illiterate actually i know alot about software and general troubleshooting.
but i ve been out of the whole computer thing for coupla years and last computer i built was about 2 years ago.

and im askin if any of u guys can break it down barney style for me whats the difference in socket types and which one is more promising as far as future upgrades or speed (lets say we take P4 3.00ghz of different socket type)
and also the the mobo chip difference

i tried to read intel’s page and some other pages but its confusing as faq and got me even more lost.
also should i exactly match the ram,fsb and whatever else frequency?

Not to change the topic, but if you want performance, consider AMD. Intel is WAY behind in performance these days. The AMD single and dual-cores are blowing P4’s away in all areas. Socket 939 is the current AMD standard, but will probably be replaced in a year or so with a new socket.

I don’t even think Intel know exactly where there going! Have a look at their roadmap for example:-

I count 3 current chipsets depending on the processor, and that’s just Intel’s own!

Compition with AMD is so heated at the moment that both of them are becomming more fractured, releasing different sockets and requirements depending on the computer demand (general, gamer/performance hog, office workstation etc). My guess is to jump on the most recent out and hope for the best!

In regards to bus speed / mem frequency, a lot of motherboards out there will let you use memory at slower speeds than the FSB wants, due to flexible chipsets. I always check out the manual before buying so I can see exactly what it can do (I don’t put much faith in the marketing specs!).

Hope this helps.

AMD Sockets are going to change, this year, most likely.

For the moment the AMD performance platform is Socket 939, with dual memory bus (fit RAM as preferably ONE matched pair, currently using DDR400 but the next generation is expected to go DDR2), Current S939 solutions should be able to run dual core X2 processors with only a BIOS update.

Socket 754 is the AMD “budget” solution, though capable of some fearsome cheap power if you get a good overclocker! - only has a single memory bus, and unlikely to see dual core launched on that platform.

The current Intel solution is Socket 775, but older 775 chipsets WILL NOT SUPPORT DUAL CORE!
The old 775 chipsets often support DDR and DDR2, with the board maker providing for one or both types.
This is also a dual memory platform, so the RAM should also be in matched pairs for best performance

FYI, AMD is purportedly moving over to Socket M2 by the end of '06…supporting DDR2…

ok so theres socket 478 which is old but still kickin and it supports memories of 533/800mhz fsb but DDR only supports up to 400(technically DDR533 exists but nobody makes motherboards for it)so u either get a800mhz cpu with 400mhz ddr or 533mhz cpu with 333mhz ddr that suks balz

on the other hand theres llga775 which supports533/800/1066mhz fsb and DDR2 that supports 533/667/800/1000mhz so.
if u get a 533mhz fsb u cant use DDR anymore because only one available is DDR333
so it kinda works out with lga775 and DDR2 but its expensive as hell.

so only choice i had right now is 800mhz fsb and 400mhz DDR :frowning:

Which doesn’t mean that the 939s won’t still be available and in use. DDR2 will be fairly slow to be adopted due to costs. Plan on 939’s being available well into 2007. If the new sockets are married to DDR2, it will slow things down considerably. Far too many people have lots of RAM sitting around and aren’t going to throw it away that fast unless there’s a huge jump in system performance, AND the newer CPU’s are appreciably faster.

but ddr2 has slower latency times compared to ddr

You’ve really bought into the Intel numbers game. 1st, there’s lots of people running DDR RAM at 250, 275, even more on a wide variety of boards. Mine is running at 250(DDR500). 2nd, those speeds you’re quoting (533, 800, 1066) are internal bus speeds. In real world performance, the internal bus speed is almost invisible, because the real bottleneck is in the external bus. Lots of systems are even faster at 800 internal than at 1000, because they are being run with higher external speeds. With an AMD 64, the internal and external speeds are pretty much indepandant and can be run asynch with very little cost in speed.
But if you want “out of the box” performance, (no overclocking) deffinitely go with a DDR400 system. But before you lay out your hard-earned cash, do some research on system tests and comparisons of Intel vs AMD. You can get a cheap Athlon-64 and some PC3200 RAM that’ll kick the pants off most P4’s.

BTW, an intel running at 533 internal is running RAM at 133(266), not 166(333).

oh sounds like amd is gonna win this time
but i was under the impression that intel is ahead as far as multimedia apps and amd is better for gaming

Depends what game you measure them on. Some games are well known to work very well on Intel compared to AMD and vice versa (half life 2 and doom 3 come straight to mind), but generally there is no great advantage that will make people buy one over the other (except P4 EE, cos people like to have processors with the word “Extreme” in it :slight_smile: )

If you do a lot of video encoding, then the P4 does have an edge due to it’s longer instruction pipeline, but AMD is strarting to catch up.

Actually, it’s AMD can’t do that much to catch up. Software producers can. And they are. More and more professional software is being adapted to work better on AMD CPUs. For a long time, many software producers only optimized their softwares for certain Intel CPUs. Now, AMD CPUs are becoming supported better and better.

Socket M2 will perhaps be arriving pretty soon. MSI already showed a sample mainboard with M2 socket and it’s quite probable that a socket M2 based solution will be showed working (and thus be introduced) at the upcoming CeBiT exhibition. I was considering upgrading, but I’m waiting after the CeBit, as I do not want to upgrade now when I can have a M2 board in perhaps a few months :slight_smile:

Yes, that’s what I heard and read too. :iagree:

@rdgrimes, i never said 939 was going away…please don’t assume that i did say such…i’m well aware of the DDR vs DDR2 debate…

AMDs have been shown to give better performance (especially for the buck) in games…and even in multimedia applications, AMD’s CPUs are ahead in the benchmarks in more than half the cases…there’s too much benchmarking evidence for me to link to that supports this…

With the “quad pumped” bus of the Intel, the “natural” options are:

  1. 533 FSB processor using dual DDR266 (push the timings if using DDR400 at 266, as CAS 3 DDR400 should do CAS 2 at 266)
  2. 800 FSB, dual DDR400
  3. 1066 FSB, dual DDR2 533

The memory bandwidths for AMD S939 dual DDR400 and Intel (800 FSB quad pumped - dual DDR400) should be pretty close.