Intel cut current carrying capacity of the 1156 socket

AtWork · **Joined:** Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:25 pm **Posts:** 200

It seems there is still plenty of capacity for current CPUs if the sockets are within spec, but there is no longer as much headroom or margin for error.

Unless you're an overclocker, does it matter? What are the chances that routine manufacturing variations will result in a higher failure rate for "normal" users if they have marginal power supplies? (business class desktops with moderate wattage PS)

Quote:

a quick glance at Intel’s white papers for socket 1156 CPU’s reveals that there are around 175 pads for VCC compared to over 250 for socket 1366 CPU’s. This means socket 1156 has around 66% of the current capacity of socket 1366, the caveat being that when overclocked, processors from both platforms draw similar levels of current.

http://www.anandtech.com/mb/showdoc.aspx?i=3661

who? · **Joined:** Sat Sep 01, 2007 8:01 am **Posts:** 652

actually, i was able to reproduce, this is not about currents, it is about pressure not apply properly on the top pg the CPU, pushing too hard on one side, while the other side gets half of the pressure, almost lifting the contact pads away from the socket pines.

anybody using regular sysmetrical pressure will never run into this problem.

at the beginning, I saw oxydation, but it is a concequence of the lift. With a good mecanical solution, you can overclock your Core i5/Core 17 lynnfield safely.

Francois

dkanter · **Joined:** Thu Sep 20, 2007 10:47 am **Posts:** 131

Frankly servers need more P/G pins, so it's quite reasonable to cut a few off the desktop boards. It saves quite a bit of $.

David

LiamC · **Joined:** Mon Jul 23, 2007 12:34 am **Posts:** 107

That whole article from Anandtech reeks of poor quality control from Foxconn, rather than inherent design weaknesses from Intel.

Anecdotally, I have run into a number of longevity issues with Foxconn motherboards. Asus and Gigabyte boards using nForce5 able to support Phenom II, where Foxconn can't/won't etc. My overriding impression is cheap and nasty. You get what you pay for. Reviews of their products aimed at the overclocker/enthusiast make me question the integrity of the reviewer. So far, I have not seen the quality demonstrated for any appreciable length of time.

AtWork · **Joined:** Tue Jul 31, 2007 1:25 pm **Posts:** 200

LiamC wrote:

Anecdotally, I have run into a number of longevity issues with Foxconn motherboards.

...You get what you pay for. Reviews of their products aimed at the overclocker/enthusiast make me question the integrity of the reviewer. So far, I have not seen the quality demonstrated for any appreciable length of time.

Here's an interesting note from Charlie (and it links to a digitimes story)

Quote:

By handing over the lion's share of the R&D for Intel's own boards to Foxconn and making the firm its sole ODM, Chipzilla is thought to be saving itself a truck load of R&D cash as well as a fair amount of headache. After all, Intel has never been particularly good at making motherboards, lacking in the engineering resources to do it properly. Foxconn has better knowledge of designing boards, so its boards would be theoretically better.

http://www.theinquirer.net/inquirer/opi ... ipple-asus

But it's certainly not all boards:

Quote:

The move is meant to help Intel save R&D costs for its own-brand motherboards, which currently have annual shipments of around 4-5 million units, the sources noted.

However, based on a comment from Intel, the company will not stop designing motherboards. Intel continues to design and develop motherboards and closely cooperates with industry players in this field, making the best use of the overall resources to meet the respective market needs, Intel said in response to the report, while adding that it does not comment on industry speculation.

http://www.digitimes.com/news/a20090623PD209.html

Aceshardware

Intel cut current carrying capacity of the 1156 socket

Who is online