High-end Skylake processors to get yet another socket

[rtwjunkie]

2? What is bewildering about that?

2? Now you're trying to start an argument based on an innocent observation of what the average person is faced with. Contrary to your belief, most are not braniacs like you. Infact your average joe is absolutely average and can work facebook if he is lucky.

@Bill_Bright actually got it right in recognozing what I was saying. And within 2011 we have several variations that he left off IIRC.

 

[newtekie1]

2? Now you're trying to start an argument based on an innocent observation of what the average person is faced with. Contrary to your belief, most are not braniacs like you. Infact your average joe is absolutely average and can work facebook if he is lucky.

Does the average person even know or care what socket their computer uses? No. If you are smart enough to be shopping based on socket, you're smart enough to know discontinued sockets vs current sockets.

The fact is, you're trying to start an argument by making false statements. Intel generally only has 2 active sockets at a time. They only have two active sockets now. Just because there is stock left from the old socket doesn't mean Intel should never switch sockets because it will be "too confusing". I mean, if we are going to count discontinued sockets, why not include 775, and 478, and 473, and 370?

 

[EarthDog]

s2011 has been around late 2011 in X79, then X99 came in ~8/2014. Both X79 and X99 had two generations of CPUs in them, which for Intel, is right on par really.

I have to admit, I never thought otherwise. With as quick as broadwell came and went on Z97/Z170 for skylake, to see BWe have a short lifespan wasn't a surprise either.

So basically, a step or two backward? Wth is the incentive to buy?

Turbo boost 3.0 is good for single threaded things.. but for an enthusiast like most of us that overclock, it really means nothing.

Intel's active sockets are 1151(Z170 - Haswell/Kaby Lake) and 2011-3(X99 - Haswell-E/Broadwell-E). LGA 1155 was for Sandy/Ivybridge (Z68/Z77), I'd call that obsolete honestly (not talking performance just 'in production'. What is left is on shelves/warehouses), while 1150 was for Haswell (Z87/Z97). There's also X79 s2011 as well.

Anyway, in the end, I think its about time for a new socket on the HEDT platform. This isn't surprising or shouldn't cause an uproar, particularly if you know how frequently Intel tends to flip their sockets.

 

[rtwjunkie]

The fact is, you're trying to start an argument by making false statements

Sorry, I made no false statements. I made an observation about the average person, which your reply shows you are completely out of touch with. Get off your throne and go mingle a bit.

And for you to deny the evidence in front of all to see, and try to claim that I am starting an argument, when it is obvious you made a nasty, facetious comment is completely laughable.

 

[yogurt_21]

forgetting mobile and embedded sockets
BGA1168 (likely through 2017)
BGA1356
BGA1440

then you also have the LGA
LGA1150 (nearing eol)
LGA1151
LGA2011
and now LGA2066

They appear to be keeping 6 sockets going at once.

 

[m4gicfour]

BGA isn't a socket.

 

[newtekie1]

Sorry, I made no false statements. I made an observation about the average person, which your reply shows you are completely out of touch with. Get off your throne and go mingle a bit.

And for you to deny the evidence in front of all to see, and try to claim that I am starting an argument, when it is obvious you made a nasty, facetious comment is completely laughable.

I'm out of touch with the average person? You think the average person shops based on what socket their computer has, but are too stupid to use facebook or even know the difference between the sockets...

Give me a break. I'm done with you.

forgetting mobile and embedded sockets
BGA1168 (likely through 2017)
BGA1356
BGA1440

then you also have the LGA
LGA1150 (nearing eol)
LGA1151
LGA2011
and now LGA2066

They appear to be keeping 6 sockets going at once.

We're just working through the old stock of 1150 at this point, and the same will be true of 2011 when 2066 comes out. So they only keep 2 sockets going at once. It is hardly bewildering...

 

[yogurt_21]

I'm out of touch with the average person? You think the average person shops based on what socket their computer has, but are too stupid to use facebook or even know the difference between the sockets...

Give me a break. I'm done with you.



We're just working through the old stock of 1150 at this point, and the same will be true of 2011 when 2066 comes out. So they only keep 2 sockets going at once. It is hardly bewildering...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CPU_socket
lists a PGA 946?


If you narrow it to just desktops then right now there are 3 and by the time you can buy 2066 there will also be 3. 1151 didn't instantly eol 1150 and 2066 won't instantly eol 2011. So they support 3. Granting I'm not sure how many sockets have active support is all that relevant to upgrading. You're either on the right socket or not for the desired cpu. It seems more like you'd want to know the top end cpu available for your socket, not so much whether or not your socket can run the latest and greatest cpu. Because the past 5 years and maybe even before it can't, you must upgrade.

while we're not quite at the doom and gloom bga predictions of having to upgrade everything to get a faster cpu. It does seem that by the time you feel a need to upgrade the cpu, you must also upgrade the motherboard and these days memory.

sockets are still nice for individual component failure and ease of brand choice. But you have to admit intel tends to nail us for both components when we really only wanted a faster/better cpu.

 

[bogmali]

OK let's take a deep breath and/or a break and grab some fresh air before it gets a lot more heated in here

 

[newtekie1]

If you narrow it to just desktops then right now there are 3 and by the time you can buy 2066 there will also be 3. 1151 didn't instantly eol 1150 and 2066 won't instantly eol 2011. So they support 3. Granting I'm not sure how many sockets have active support is all that relevant to upgrading. You're either on the right socket or not for the desired cpu. It seems more like you'd want to know the top end cpu available for your socket, not so much whether or not your socket can run the latest and greatest cpu. Because the past 5 years and maybe even before it can't, you must upgrade.

Yes, there is a crossover in time when a new socket comes out, and the old one isn't fully phased out of the market. But for all intents and purposes, Intel always has only 2 active desktop sockets that it supports and produces new product for. Right now it is 1151 and 2011-V3. Yes, 1150 stuff is still available, Intel is even still taking orders for 1150 processors. But 1150 is being phased out. It wouldn't make sense to completely phase out the old socket before introducing the new. What is being sold is leftover stock. The point is this isn't a bewildering amount of sockets that should be confusing to anyone that even cares what socket their computer has.

But you have to admit intel tends to nail us for both components when we really only wanted a faster/better cpu.

Screw that, do you remember the 775 days? Sure, it was nice to have the same socket for a really long time, but do you remember how complicated it made upgrades? If you had an early 775 motherboard, from the netburst era, it was only a 50/50 it would support Core 2 Duo, and even less of a chance it would support a Core 2 Quad, and even less of a chance than that that it would support a Yorkfield Core 2 Quad. Heck, even a lot of Core 2 Duo ear motherboards didn't properly support Yorkfield. It was confusing as hell for the consumer to try to do a processor upgrade. At least now, if you have socket XYZ, then you know any processor that uses the same XYZ socket will work(unless you get into the muddiness of the Xeon stuff). Sure, it sucks for us enthusiasts if we want to upgrade to a new processor we likely have to replace the entire motherboard to do so, but for the average consumer that isn't a concern. Most average consumers don't upgrade just their processor, they upgrade the entire computer. It really is really only a problem for the enthusiasts like us, which lets face it we aren't a big portion of Intel's business.

 

[yogurt_21]

I think 939 was the same, Going from 130nm (newcastle/clawhammer) to 90nm cpus (venice/san diego) wasn't guaranteed support much less the dual cores that followed. So I guess I'd forgotten how bad compatibility was. Socket 478 was even worse as it was around for so long prescott vs northwood and etc. 462 even had its issues with fsb 400 cpus (barton core).

I guess locking a socket to an architecture does ensure compatibility for consumers. I can deal with the side effects of that.

 

[AsRock]

Doesn't SATA use PCI-e lanes ?, That Kaby lake has 16 total, so if you have 2 video cards running x8 whats used for the SATA connectors ?, or do you think the video cards be pushed to x8 or x4 if there is 2 cards.

Well don't make me want to buy that's for sure/

I hope Intel get a good ol kick in the teeth and get totally surprised lol, but even that did happen i am sure intel would have some thing out soon after.

 

[newtekie1]

Doesn't SATA use PCI-e lanes ?, That Kaby lake has 16 total, so if you have 2 video cards running x8 whats used for the SATA connectors ?, or do you think the video cards be pushed to x8 or x4 if there is 2 cards.

Well don't make me want to buy that's for sure/

I hope Intel get a good ol kick in the teeth and get totally surprised lol, but even that did happen i am sure intel would have some thing out soon after.

No, SATA doesn't use PCI-E lanes. Unless the motherboard manufacturer adds a secondary SATA controller to add extra SATA ports, but in that case the SATA controller would use the PCI-E lanes provided by the chipset(of which the z170 chipset provides 20 extra lanes), not the CPU lanes. So the 1151 platform provides a total of 36 PCI-E 3.0 lanes, 16 from the CPU and 20 from the Z170 chipset.

 

[FR@NK]

The Kaby lake-x chips will have the best single threaded performance, Just like the 6700k does now. Only 4 cores and no IGP so it should clock pretty well.

Also I would be willing to bet that there wont be any unlocked "K" chips on the mainstream platform.

 

[Solaris17]

Honestly I hop this comes to pass. I really wanted to jump on the successor to 2011-v3 to get myself back on HEDT platforms.

 

[eidairaman1]

tired of the socket changes myself, we Need Super7 Back

 

[Frag_Maniac]

And at the expected launch prices I've seen, it won't interest most gamers, not even most with high end rigs.

Skylake X may have way more cores and lanes than Kaby Lake X, but Kaby Lake X actually has more optimized architecture. I also don't think games will need more than 4 cores (or 8 threads with HT) for some time.

http://wccftech.com/intel-skylake-x-kaby-lake-x-platform-launch-2017/