Hardware

Members favor socket-based processors


In a recent edition of the Member Debate, I asked TechRepublic members which processor/motherboard integration technology they preferred: slot-based or socket-based processors. Many members responded, arguing why their favorite was the best.

Personally, I am a fan of socket-based processors, and many TechRepublic members seem to be socket fans as well. Seventy-two percent of all responses received argued in favor of the socket-based processor, while only 27 percent thought the slot-based design was the way to go. A few individuals who thought that it really didn’t matter which type of processor was used made up the remaining one percent.
This feature presents a balanced discussion among our members on topics of interest, such as hardware, software, and the Internet. If you’d like to suggest a topic for Member Debate, please send us a note.
Members speak out
TechRepublic members offered some interesting reasons why their processor of choice made the grade. Here’s a sampling of several of their responses.

Diego G.
”Socket-based processors are definitely my favorite. The reasoning [behind this] is basic: Once they are locked in place, it is very difficult for them to loosen.”

Phil S.
”Socket processors are better because they cost less and take up less space. Slot processors will not fit in some shells because there is insufficient room for the processor under the power supply.”

Angus M.
”Just as we were getting used to slotted processors, the manufacturers changed back to [socket] processors. I think slotted processors are better because:
  1. They’re easier to handle and less prone to static damage.
  2. For Intel, there is only one type of slot to worry about, regardless of the processor speed.
  3. They are easier to remove and therefore replace, and better for servicing and assembly.”

Roger R.
”I think the slot was a stopgap measure to get the L2 cache closer to the processor. Now that this cache has been moved to the processor die, the slot, thankfully, is dead. I have seen too many machines where the processor interfered with other components, mainly the power supply.”

Jim H.
”The slot was a step to the cache and pipeline path that the manufacturers wanted to take but didn't have the technology at the time to do on the chip. The slot is too big, too hot, and too slow. The socket is the rocket.”

Pat P.
”I pretty much went the same route as Ed and now wish I had waited for the socket A Athlon [processors] to come out.”

TimIT
”I tend to prefer slot-based technology but not because I [believe] it's better than socket-based. I feel that slot-based processors tend to seem less ’fragile‘ in handling. The slot-based processors seem sturdier than their socket brothers.”

Would you choose a processor based on the specs of your motherboard?
While reading through the posted discussions to this debate, I came across the following post from member Mikeyes:

“Slot, socket ... who cares? I want to know which motherboard will give me ATA1K, AGPxY, Raid-XYZ, support all modern memory, and be as stable as the old PS/2 systems. You give me a motherboard that does it all and the CPU will be dictated by that.”

Mikeyes’ comment made me wonder just how many individuals would choose a processor based on the specs of a motherboard. I’ve always purchased a motherboard around my processor, not vice versa. I find it hard to imagine that a die-hard Intel processor user would drop everything in favor of a “perfect” motherboard that required an AMD processor.

What do you think about Mikeyes’ comment? Feel free to post a message below or send us an e-mail with your thoughts.
Did you know it’s easy to find both new and old versions of the Member Debate, including those with member responses? Visit the Member Debate archive to find out more.
In a recent edition of the Member Debate, I asked TechRepublic members which processor/motherboard integration technology they preferred: slot-based or socket-based processors. Many members responded, arguing why their favorite was the best.

Personally, I am a fan of socket-based processors, and many TechRepublic members seem to be socket fans as well. Seventy-two percent of all responses received argued in favor of the socket-based processor, while only 27 percent thought the slot-based design was the way to go. A few individuals who thought that it really didn’t matter which type of processor was used made up the remaining one percent.
This feature presents a balanced discussion among our members on topics of interest, such as hardware, software, and the Internet. If you’d like to suggest a topic for Member Debate, please send us a note.
Members speak out
TechRepublic members offered some interesting reasons why their processor of choice made the grade. Here’s a sampling of several of their responses.

Diego G.
”Socket-based processors are definitely my favorite. The reasoning [behind this] is basic: Once they are locked in place, it is very difficult for them to loosen.”

Phil S.
”Socket processors are better because they cost less and take up less space. Slot processors will not fit in some shells because there is insufficient room for the processor under the power supply.”

Angus M.
”Just as we were getting used to slotted processors, the manufacturers changed back to [socket] processors. I think slotted processors are better because:
  1. They’re easier to handle and less prone to static damage.
  2. For Intel, there is only one type of slot to worry about, regardless of the processor speed.
  3. They are easier to remove and therefore replace, and better for servicing and assembly.”

Roger R.
”I think the slot was a stopgap measure to get the L2 cache closer to the processor. Now that this cache has been moved to the processor die, the slot, thankfully, is dead. I have seen too many machines where the processor interfered with other components, mainly the power supply.”

Jim H.
”The slot was a step to the cache and pipeline path that the manufacturers wanted to take but didn't have the technology at the time to do on the chip. The slot is too big, too hot, and too slow. The socket is the rocket.”

Pat P.
”I pretty much went the same route as Ed and now wish I had waited for the socket A Athlon [processors] to come out.”

TimIT
”I tend to prefer slot-based technology but not because I [believe] it's better than socket-based. I feel that slot-based processors tend to seem less ’fragile‘ in handling. The slot-based processors seem sturdier than their socket brothers.”

Would you choose a processor based on the specs of your motherboard?
While reading through the posted discussions to this debate, I came across the following post from member Mikeyes:

“Slot, socket ... who cares? I want to know which motherboard will give me ATA1K, AGPxY, Raid-XYZ, support all modern memory, and be as stable as the old PS/2 systems. You give me a motherboard that does it all and the CPU will be dictated by that.”

Mikeyes’ comment made me wonder just how many individuals would choose a processor based on the specs of a motherboard. I’ve always purchased a motherboard around my processor, not vice versa. I find it hard to imagine that a die-hard Intel processor user would drop everything in favor of a “perfect” motherboard that required an AMD processor.

What do you think about Mikeyes’ comment? Feel free to post a message below or send us an e-mail with your thoughts.
Did you know it’s easy to find both new and old versions of the Member Debate, including those with member responses? Visit the Member Debate archive to find out more.

Editor's Picks