Talk:LGA 2011

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the LGA 2011 article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Computing Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Computer hardware task force (assessed as Low-importance).

Unnamed section

This article claims that LGA 2011 will use QPI but nothing i've found elsewhere backs this up Plugwash (talk) 10:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please, people: Linking to an external article is not the same thing as citing your source. If you don't know how to do it, please read the FAQs and user guides that detail the proper way to cite your sources. Allthenamesarealreadytaken (talk) 05:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Registered users at intel.com (or probably partners) can have already all the spec details

Search results at intel site:

 http://search.intel.com/default.aspx?q=lga2011&c=en_US&method=text&input-submit=Search

and closed article:

 http://edc.intel.com/Link.aspx?id=3757&wapkw=(lga2011)  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.201.226.100 (talk) 15:11, 18 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Error

When talking about X79 - the table mentions USB 3 when in fact x79 chipset comes with USB 2. prooflink http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/chipsets/performance-chipsets/x79-express-chipset.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by Romangs (talk • contribs) 19:21, 19 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: many High-end motherboard manufacturers provide USB 3.0 on their motherboards. It is not clear if it suppored directly by the X79 chipset or a supporting chipset (similar to Asus' and MSI's SATA cache ports being supported "off-chip") — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2803:1500:1400:508:8919:E9F2:EB30:7A8A (talk) 02:18, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Q4 2011?

Is that fourth quarter FY 2011 or CY 2011? 24.214.238.86 (talk) 23:30, 6 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Formatting

I am not good at formatting but that table at the bottom could use a redesign.

Wording

"The Sandy Bridge-E is a huge chip and its highest end edition will sport eight cores with 15 MB of shared L3 cache on a ring bus" "sport" and "huge chip" seem to be too colloquial for Wikipedia. I can't tell if the original author simply copied and pasted this from a blog/tech news site article, or if they wrote this themselves. I would change it to "feature" and "large chip." Or simply remove the sentence in its entirety.68.6.76.31 (talk) 07:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

add-in chipsets

Does anyone have any evidence that the QPI link will be used for add-in chipsets or is that an old rumour that should be removed? Plugwash (talk) 16:50, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Core i7 Extreme 3980X and source

I can't find any decent evidence to suggest that this is actually a processor. The in-line source says that this CPU is a 6 ("hexa") core model that was supposed to launch at the end of last year. Since this didn't happen as far as I can tell and with the way that CPU manufacturers have to work I can only assume this was faked somewhere along its way. What I've done is just change the article so that it supposes the Core i7 Extreme 3980X is a 6 core chip. 90.194.244.38 (talk) 16:10, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

what about C600 Chipset?

It seems that the C600 server chipset has been omitted from this discussion. I would like to see a similar breakdown for C60X variants as was done for the X79. There are a lot of server mobo's out there with C602, C604, etc. I came here looking for feature comparison, and as far as I can tell, there in not much mention of C600 series chips anywhere in Wikipedia. Anyone considering a DP/QP Xeon system based on Sandy or Ivy will need to deal with a C600 chipset. tnx216.234.101.78 (talk) 17:09, 22 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Successor socket

Added LGA 1151 as the successor socket

I think that LGA 1151 is technical the successor socket since it corresponds to the 6000/Skylake series processors and LGA 2011 corresponds to the Haswell and Broadwell(2011-v3) series. Does anyone know for sure? Is LGA 2011 part of a separate family tree? Yagoth (talk) 02:40, 22 January 2016 (UTC)Yagoth[reply]

As far as I know, LGA 1151 was never named as the successor of LGA 2011. Even though what you are saying is logical, I don't think it should be mentioned unless reliable sources can be found, as it's based on your original research. -- Chamith (talk) 04:42, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

And yes, LGA 2011 belongs to Sandy Bridge, Ivy Bridge, Haswell while LGA 1151 belongs to Skylake family. -- Chamith (talk) 04:47, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, LGA 1151 isn't the successor of LGA 2011, these two CPU sockets belong to different market segments. LGA 2011 belongs to Intel's enthusiast segment, and LGA 1151 doesn't. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 05:04, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit curious. Then what actually is its successor? I couldn't find any credible information through Google. -- Chamith (talk) 05:46, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Currently none. Things don't move that fast in the enthusiast and server segments. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 06:16, 22 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On the subject.. may I ask why LGA2011-3 is not branched off as another article entirely? Just curious.. thanks :) Jchap1590 (talk) 05:50, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The LGA 2011-3 socket simply isn't different enough to warrant a separate article, and IMHO it's actually much more readable to have everything covered in the same article. — Dsimic (talk | contribs) 13:48, 16 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No, the LGA 115x series is incompatible in several ways. The LGA 2011 began as a single 2,011 pin socket but has evolved into a multiple version family, all with 2,011 pins but physically and electrically incompatible with prior versions. The latest version "FCLGA2011-3" marketed as "LGA 2011-3", or "LGA 2011-v3" or similar. The LGA 2011#Physical design and socket generations section, second paragraph begins an inadequate differences description. I suggest the differences between LGA 2011 generations are comparable to the differences in the LGA 115x series. I suggest each LGA 2011 version warrants a separate article. The current single article may trap the hurried or unwitting into believing LGA 2011 is a single socket when it's actually a line of mutually incompatible versions just as the LGA 115x series. – Conrad T. Pino (talk) 05:50, 9 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on LGA 2011. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140824010605/http://extremespec.net/processors-intel-haswell-e-lga2011-platform-3-overview-details/ to http://extremespec.net/processors-intel-haswell-e-lga2011-platform-3-overview-details/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 09:04, 14 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockets variations in relation to the CPUs they support

Socket LGA2011 types:

Socket 2011 consists of three distinctly different versions and their the designated processors are not cross compatible across socket types.

2011-0 (Socket R) - Supports CPU configuration of 1 or 2 Xeon "E5 v1 & v2" CPUs - uses DDR3 RAM ECC

2011-1 (Socket R2) - Supports CPU configuration of 1, 2, 4 or 8 Xeon "E7 v2 & v3" CPUs - uses DDR3 RAM ECC (for V2) & DDR4 RAM ECC (for V3)

2011-3 (Socket R3) - Supports CPU configuration of 1, 2, 4 or 8 Xeon "V3" CPUs - uses DDR4 RAM ECC

(Please note, I am not as familiar with the i3/i5/i7 or i9 compatibilities.. hence their omissions) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2803:1500:1400:508:8919:E9F2:EB30:7A8A (talk) 02:05, 9 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The mythical socket R2.

The article says socket R2 AKA 2011-1 is used for Xeon E7 CPUs citing www.intel.com/content/dam/www/public/us/en/documents/datasheets/core-i7-lga2011-3-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

Aforementioned PDF does not say anything about socket R2, though. Since all Intel CPU data I've seen does use 2011-1 and 2011 interchangeably, and I've yet not found any mention on socket R2, I guess it is just urban legend, like info on 2011 and 2011-1 incompatibility (yep, there can be BIOS incompatibility).

Since there is not a single citation of Intel document saying otherwise, I can conclude that it was an error made by some Wiki page author. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.28.168.23 (talk) 00:11, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This was just trolling attempt to force adding working links to Intel docs. E7 could not physically fit in 2011 socket. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.28.168.23 (talk) 00:21, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

(Chipset Table): Socket Lga2011-v3 Haswell-E (X99 Chipset) - Possible Error in Table?

In the chart under pci-e 3.0 it says 40 lanes but i have a 5920K that (perhaps strangely) only supports 28 pci-express lanes. Thus it only supports configurations with at most a single x16 lane (1x16,1x8,1x0,1x4, or something)...if it wasn't already obvious, I'm not really sure what I'm talking about and definitely not confident enough to edit the article proper, so I thought I'd just mention it here on the talk page and hope someone more knowledgeable comes along and notices. There's also a considerably non-zero chance that I'm wrong about this. 100.16.154.244 (talk) 02:36, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]