Yeah, it's a little insane, especially when you consider that the K series unlocked processors, useful for overclocking, are the only desktop SKUs that have the Intel HD 3000 graphics instead of the 2000, but you have to put the chip in an H67 chipset to use it--but, that chipset doesn't support using the unlocked multipliers for overclocking. It's one of the most absurd product decisions I've seen yet.
Good news is that there is a new chipset coming out in Q2--Z68. This is basically P67, with full PCIe split capability and overclocking, with the FDI (Flexible Display Interface) wired up to use the integrated graphics. There's no excuse for not having this ready on launch day. I'm also irritated that those of us running the X58/LGA1366 platform have to wait until probably late Q3/Q4 for that platform's spiritual successor: X68/LGA2011. By that time, we'll just be a few months away from the 22nm Ivy Bridge update. Oh well. Performance is still my primary decision factor, and there's no doubt that SB has it--though I'm still very interested to see if AMD's Bulldozer arch can actually deliver. > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:hardware- > [email protected]] On Behalf Of Brian Weeden > Sent: Saturday, January 08, 2011 8:32 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: [H] Review of 4 Sandy Bridge motherboards > > I was a bit bummed at the statement in the beginning about the differences > between the P67 and H67 versions. The P67 has overclocking and full PCIe > but can't use the video part of the SB chip. The H67 can use the video, but > has limited overclocking and limited PCIe. > > I was planning to put SB in my htpc box and I need both video and as much > PCIe bandwidth as I can get to support 16 drives. So this is a real bummer. > > ----------- > Brian > > Sent from my iPhone > > On 2011-01-08, at 9:22 PM, "Anthony Q. Martin" <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Seems like the ASUS is the overall winner among those reviewers. Any one > disagree? > > > > Thanks for the link, Brian. > > > > On 1/8/2011 9:06 PM, Brian Weeden wrote: > >> http://techreport.com/articles.x/20190 > >> > >> ----------- > >> Brian > >> Follow Me [image: LinkedIn]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/brianweeden> > [image: > >> Twitter]<http://www.twitter.com/brianweeden> > >>
