But it's 1151!!?

[Ahhzz]

I don't understand why they didn't call it anything but 1151. They could have called it 1152 and no one would have been the wiser - okay, someone would have eventually counted the pins and pointed it out, but so what.

No doubt.... not looking forward to my A+ refresher with that.....

 

[qubit]

fun straighten that lot out

Right, I'll race ya! What a mess, lol.

Yes, I think having the same number of pins will lead to a lot of confusion which could have been so easily avoided. The best way out if this imo, is to either have them keyed differently, or more likely have the mobo companies add "unofficial" support in their products, always something I think is a bit dicey in the long run. I would buy a mobo that's made specifically for my CPU, not a hack job, end of story.

 

[Ahhzz]

Right, I'll race ya! What a mess, lol.

Yes, I think having the same number of pins will lead to a lot of confusion which could have been so easily avoided. The best way out if this imo, is to either have them keyed differently, or more likely have the mobo companies add "unofficial" support in their products, always something I think is a bit dicey in the long run. I would buy a mobo that's made specifically for my CPU, not a hack job, end of story.

To be fair, not many people look to see how many pins their processor needs when they order it, they just check to see which board/chipset it requires. Mostly, the only ones who go around trying to fit random chips into random boards would simply look up the chip, and match it to a board. Noone's going to count holes and go "Hey, that has as many holes as there are pins in this motherboard!! I'll just cram it in here!"

 

[qubit]

To be fair, not many people look to see how many pins their processor needs when they order it, they just check to see which board/chipset it requires. Mostly, the only ones who go around trying to fit random chips into random boards would simply look up the chip, and match it to a board. Noone's going to count holes and go "Hey, that has as many holes as there are pins in this motherboard!! I'll just cram it in here!"

No, I don't think that there are too many people like that. That would be dumb for sure, lol.

What I'm thinking about is where people are looking at many mobos trying to decide which one to get and then start getting confused. Mobos are often organized by socket name in online stores, so even if they know about the differences, they can forget to check properly when juggling so many variables at once. This will make it even more confusing when a mobo is listing their processor, but it's not made totally clear that this is manufacturer support rather than an official Intel one.

 

[silentbogo]

How many times do you think we're going to see that confused question with Intel's version "A" and "B" of socket 1151?

Not the first and definitely not the last.

But those are not mainstream sockets.

Now, you don't have to look too far to find a mainstream socket examples: the same LGA1151 had a nice flop with chipset restrictions on Xeon E3 CPUs. Same socket, same notches... yet still no bueno.
LGA775 was another one, with several CPU generations and dozens of chipsets from more manufacturers than you can possibly imagine, and with support of almost all generations of DDR memory, and even some weird-ass transitional models with both DDR2 and DDR3 support. Crazy sh%t!

 

[EarthDog]

Like anything, due diligence is extremely helpful.

Frankly, if you are shoving square pegs in ever so slightly different square holes (lololol), not sure one should be building a pc if you cant figure out how to make sure stuff fits together. At stores, there are people that can help. Online sites like pcpartpicker show compatibilty. Mobo sites have cpu compatibility lists. Intel site shows the chipset... etc.

Im sure something could have been made more obvious, but, i just dont think it will be a huge issue. If it is, well, humanity makes me shed another tear.

 

[newtekie1]

This is why marketing by pin count isn't the best practice. AMD's system of naming sockets works better.

But even that wasn't perfect. And that is why CPU support lists are a thing that exists.

 

[dorsetknob]

Now, you don't have to look too far to find a mainstream socket examples: the same LGA1151 had a nice flop with chipset restrictions on Xeon E3 CPUs. Same socket, same notches... yet still no bueno.
LGA775 was another one, with several CPU generations and dozens of chipsets from more manufacturers than you can possibly imagine, and with support of almost all generations of DDR memory, and even some weird-ass transitional models with both DDR2 and DDR3 support. Crazy sh%t!

Now don't ignore Socket 775 and the Fact it could be Modded to take Xeon 771 That was and Still is Bitchen brilliant

 

[Vya Domus]

Now don't ignore Socket 775 and the Fact it could be Modded to take Xeon 771 That was and Still is Bitchen brilliant

Always wanted to do that with my 775 system back in the day but never got around to doing it.

 

[niko084]

Now don't ignore Socket 775 and the Fact it could be Modded to take Xeon 771 That was and Still is Bitchen brilliant

That was a cool trick, used to my advantage a few times for saving money on much faster chips.

Speaking of socket compatibility....
Anyone old enough to remember overdrive cpus? --- If you're not sure, lookup 486SLC2, these were awesome!

 

[dorsetknob]

Anyone old enough to remember overdrive cpus?

yup there are lots of us Sometimes we refer to ourselves ass the TPU Elder Statsmen
we Even have this War Medal

 

[johnspack]

Pentium overdrive, yep. Hey I remember 8088 cpus.... This new socket system though is going to have me pulling what's left of my hair out when trying to build new systems for clients.....

 

[Sasqui]

fun straighten that lot out

Crazy to think that someone probably tried it

 

[Komshija]

It would be a lot better solution if they slightly increased physical dimensions of the CPU (eg. length and width both increased by 1 mm) and added extra two notches.

 

[Flaky]

We already had that with lga1150v1. Ask people who wanted broadwell on their z87, they remember

Funny thing is: there is no good technical reason for dropping backward compatibility.

 

[dorsetknob]

Funny thing is: there is no good technical reason for dropping backward compatibility.

Its a commercial decision by intel to push the Sale of New Chip sets to Motherboard manafacture's ( and therefore motherboards sales by partners).

 

[newtekie1]

Its a commercial decision by intel to push the Sale of New Chip sets to Motherboard manafacture's ( and therefore motherboards sales by partners).

We really don't know that until we see that pinout of the socket. It very likely could be a pinout change to support the extra cores, exactly like they did with socket 775.

 

[Flaky]

Do we even have the pinout for lga 1151? I looked for it, and couldn't find. Pinouts were provided for previous platforms in official datasheets, but I found none in docs for 6th gen and newer.

 

[dorsetknob]

It very likely could be a pinout change to support the extra cores, exactly like they did with socket 775.

And the Several chip Set change's to Support the later CPU's which had more core's and higher FSB

 

[eidairaman1]

Key way will probably change

Id say pin/pad layout too

 

[zbam]

What if we all stop buying intel ? I am assuming most of the people in this forum are after price/performance rather than brand commitment. Maybe we can send a message to intel who knows..

 

[silentbogo]

Do we even have the pinout for lga 1151? I looked for it, and couldn't find. Pinouts were provided for previous platforms in official datasheets, but I found none in docs for 6th gen and newer.

Chapter 9 (pg.126).
https://www.intel.com/content/dam/w...sktop-6th-gen-core-family-datasheet-vol-1.pdf

 

[notb]

What if we all stop buying intel ? I am assuming most of the people in this forum are after price/performance rather than brand commitment. Maybe we can send a message to intel who knows..

Yes, because Intel cares about few hundred active users on this forum...

And I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the "being after price/performance". It's just that quite a lot of brand-committed people here prefer the company that usually wins in "price/performance", not the one that wins in "just works" and - as a result - popularity.
On the contrary, most people buying Intel CPUs (or rather: PC with Intel CPUs) are not committed to a brand - they just don't care.

In other words: it's pretty easy to be a fanboy of the underdog company. I mean: if you want to stand out as a PC user, you will naturally be leaning towards the smaller, more "enthusiast-friendly" company - not the big mammoth that runs the industry. And by all means, we are all "standing out" here - building our PCs and spending hours on this forum.
A normal consumer buys a laptop, checks his e-mail and goes to the cinema.

 

[ppn]

Not happening. I5-8400 is the Zen killer.
There was a photo of socket 1152 not so long ago. but nobody noticed.

 

[zbam]

Yes, because Intel cares about few hundred active users on this forum...

And I'm pretty sure you're wrong about the "being after price/performance". It's just that quite a lot of brand-committed people here prefer the company that usually wins in "price/performance", not the one that wins in "just works" and - as a result - popularity.
On the contrary, most people buying Intel CPUs (or rather: PC with Intel CPUs) are not committed to a brand - they just don't care.

In other words: it's pretty easy to be a fanboy of the underdog company. I mean: if you want to stand out as a PC user, you will naturally be leaning towards the smaller, more "enthusiast-friendly" company - not the big mammoth that runs the industry. And by all means, we are all "standing out" here - building our PCs and spending hours on this forum.
A normal consumer buys a laptop, checks his e-mail and goes to the cinema.

we all, like the whole PC users but you have strong points that I cant disagree.