Did I just get Rick ROlled?:roll:

Lol I can't believe people actually thought they would go completely BGA. It's sad they had to release this. Some people are just to jumpy.

Translation: "there's always the server platform for you guys".

Of course they'll still have LGA CPUs but they didn't deny that their mainstream CPUs weren't going to be BGA only which is what the original report was about:

While mainstream chips will reportedly be only supplied in BGA form-factors soldered to mainboards, which eliminates upgrade possibility, it is likely that high-end desktop (HEDT) platforms will still be supplied in LGA packaging. What remains to be seen is how expensive will such chips be. For example, at present the most affordable LGA2011 HEDT chip costs $294, whereas the most expensive performance-mainstream LGA1155 processor costs $332. In case upgradeable platforms remain on the HEDT’s price levels of today, that will essentially mean the end of upgrades of the mainstream PCs.

I believe they really want the low end pc retail market($300-$800) to push BGA.

It could almost enable them to force manufacturers to purchase the entire guts of the pc(cpu,mobo,ram,gfx) direct from Intel.

"You guys deal with getting power, visuals and wrapping it. We do the rest."

I can't see BGA working for systems where the CPU costs $600-1000 and the board is $200-400. Could you imagine buying a $1400 CPU/Board combo only to have the board suddenly die with a $1000 CPU attached? I'm doubtful that the CPU could be transplanted from a dead board numerous times without having some serious mechanical problems from reflowing the chip several times.

ChiSoxI believe they really want the low end pc retail market($300-$800) to push BGA.

It could almost enable them to force manufacturers to purchase the entire guts of the pc(cpu,mobo,ram,gfx) direct from Intel.

"You guys deal with getting power, visuals and wrapping it. We do the rest."

That's an angle I hadn't thought of: what if Intel intents to supply the whole package? They also make mobos. That would be extremely drastic and likely burn lots of bridges.

It's also possible that they could choose to keep Haswell around along with Broadwell: sell Broad soldered to Intel mobos, keep selling Haswell, Haswell 2, etc. in LGA. Intel is no foreign to running several architectures at the same time.

"MAIN STREAMERS" DONT upgrade.... they just buy total new after several years...how is this bad again for enthusiasts again... Main stream just run down to wal mart and grab whats on sale,... Mainstream goes after the Jones and get whats trending.... Enthusiast diss-asemble re-assemble research hot wire and over clock..... new tech (no matter how crappy) is new tech... lga... bga... as long as im registering on an ekg ...its time to play:D

I see no problem with the low end stuff going bga....the hedt would be .... a loose loose loose situation

There is always more to it. Intel going completely BGA just didn't make total sense. But Intel didn't say anything until AMD came out and stated their commitment. I too think Intel wants to get into the low end and tablet markets. BGA is the way to do that. But I wouldn't leave it past them to take that into other markets. Appliance computers is what companies like Apple want to go to. Others are wanting to push this too. Force users into buying new all the time instead of upgrading is just how they are thinking.

I can see ARM becoming threat in "The Foreseeable Future"

Get ready for the Xeon processors and massive cache e-peen!

Still sucks for anyone wanting to build a home file server or HTPC... or anything that requires a lower-end CPU but a higher-end motherboard. Or for DIY'er who doesn't want to plop down a small fortune for the high-end stuff... but I guess that's where AMD comes in.

^
AMD is already better for that sort of stuff right now.

Good Bulldozer/Piledriver boards with lots of expansion and sata are cheaper than comparable Z77 choices, let alone X79. Also nice that AMD left ECC support in which Intel pretty much reserves for the Xeon line.

When bga systems start spanking overclocked lga's what say u then......
At least I can change my cpu to an even slower model?

Delta6326Lol I can't believe people actually thought they would go completely BGA. It's sad they had to release this. Some people are just to jumpy.

This^^.

Makes good forum banter but little else. If mainstream goes BGA good. Perhaps it could lead to reduced operating costs for Intel and MAYBE savings for the end user.

LGA won't be eliminated anytime soon, if they did that they'd loose quite a bit of $$$. Intel hates losing $$$

It's interesting isn't it how AMD said, sure we will support the enthusiast PC market because we know what they want.. then Intel quickly stumbles to clear up their misunderstanding that they had ignored for a while now.

: D

Smart move for Intel to come out and do some damage control. I'm no fan boy to both brands having multiple processors over the years from both camps. But if Intel ditched the DIY market all together, I would definitely become a AMD fanboy. I'm a fan boy of picking and upgrading my own components how I see fit. If I wanted a All-in-one, one size fits all system, I'd just get a console for gaming and Apple for productivity. Totally boring!

It all depends on their offerings when upgrade time rolls around. If the only upgradable platform is the equivalent of today's LGA2011, I see a lot of people moving to AMD. Though, they did already ruin overclocking, having to buy an expensive K series cpu to overclock. No more turning a cheap CPU into an expensive CPU, you need to buy an unlocked CPU to do it... but at least they're not $1000.

I am glad to hear that neither AMD nor Intel will be going strictly BGA.

I see "consumer" going socketless. Atom has always been socketless. AMD C-x too. The price-point is somewhere around the CPU+chipset+mainboard costing < $200. I can see "celeron" going this route, possibly even "pentium". That means PC < $500 could be socketless. Note that there ARE benefits to this... not just cost ones. It will remove a lot of "consumer error" issues relating to PC build and maintenance, and electronically, shorter paths, better contacts, lower capacitive connections, will mean an ability to run at faster stable FSB... reaping performance benefits at the low end.

For enthusiasts and HPC this will not happen. 1) It makes no economic sense to sacrifice and limit a $500 CPU to one board, 2) HPC demands ability to rapidly fix any "downs". Swapping is CPU is relatively quick compared with swapping a whole mainboard.

I think Intel wants to offer an all-in-one solution. Manufacturing the board, CPU, chipset, GPU (in a couple of years time, their GPU will be quite good enough for 95% of consumers. In fact, for HTPC it is already good enough). GPUs will not be necessary for most people unless they want extreme performance. ATi/nV watch out!

I actually don't believe them. Looking at the roadmap tends to draw conclusions

tacosRcoolI actually don't believe them. Looking at the roadmap tends to draw conclusions

And what roadmap is that? Are you referring to the amateurish one from the original topic on the subject? Because that one doesn't even look like it was made by Intel...

I mentioned this in the original thread. This is just a ploy to force people to buy higher end setups. We will likely see heavily locked out mainstream setups pushed out with lga 2011's replacement being the only option for people who want multiple video cards and overclocking.

Intel has been headed in that route since they replaced lga1366.

cdawallI mentioned this in the original thread. This is just a ploy to force people to buy higher end setups. We will likely see heavily locked out mainstream setups pushed out with lga 2011's replacement being the only option for people who want multiple video cards and overclocking.

Intel has been headed in that route since they replaced lga1366.

Or forcing them to go lower on the scales of e-peen. Overklocking is not what it used to be, very very few people actually benefit from it. (and no, going from 76 to 77 FPS in BF3 does not count). Some power users can use it, but it's becoming more of a hobby for its own sake. The choice will be bigger now, but people inclined to OCing have a tendency to go for higher end stuff anyway. Which ties us back to: Overclocking is not was it used to be. It's actually quite reversed from its beginnings.

FrickOr forcing them to go lower on the scales of e-peen. Overklocking is not what it used to be, very very few people actually benefit from it. (and no, going from 76 to 77 FPS in BF3 does not count). Some power users can use it, but it's becoming more of a hobby for its own sake. The choice will be bigger now, but people inclined to OCing have a tendency to go for higher end stuff anyway. Which ties us back to: Overclocking is not was it used to be. It's actually quite reversed from its beginnings.

Oh I agree completely. Most games don't take advantage of 90% of the CPU's anyway. Back in the day you were saving a fortune buying CPU X and making it run like CPU Y. I did push the framerates a good bit going from a Phenom II@3.2ghz to 4.2ghz...but that CPU is a bottle neck for my multicard setup.