Intel LGA1851 to Succeed LGA1700, Probably Retain Cooler Compatibility

[btarunr]

Intel's next-generation desktop processor socket will be the LGA1851. Leaked documents point to the next-generation socket being of identical dimensions to the current LGA1700, despite the higher pin-count, which could indicate cooler compatibility between the two sockets, much in the same way as the LGA1200 retained cooler-compatibility with prior Intel sockets tracing all the way back to the LGA1156. The current LGA1700 will service only two generations of Intel Core, the 12th Generation "Alder Lake," and the next-gen "Raptor Lake" due for later this year. "Raptor Lake" will be Intel's last desktop processor built on a monolithic silicon, as the company transitions to multi-chip modules.

Intel Socket LGA1851 will debut with the 14th Gen Core "Meteor Lake" processors due for late-2023 or 2024; and will hold out until the 15th Gen "Arrow Lake." Since "Meteor Lake" is a 3D-stacked MCM with a base tile stacked below logic tiles; the company is making adjustments to the IHS thickness to end up with an identical package thickness to the LGA1700, which would be key to cooler-compatibility, besides the socket's physical dimensions. Intel probably added pin-count to the LGA1851 by eating into the "courtyard" (the central gap in the land-grid), because the company states that the pin-pitch hasn't changed from LGA1700.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[john_]

A! Great. A new socket. So people buying Raptor Lake CPUs wouldn't be able to upgrade to the next gen of Intel CPUs.

 

[Nanochip]

So contrary to certain rumors leaked MLID, MTL-s and ARL-s will use LGA 1851 instead of 2551 ?

 

[ARF]

AMD's socket naming is better. They left in the past s. 939, and then moved to generations - DDR - AM2, AM3, AM4 and now AM5. Simple and nice.

 

[AusWolf]

So much for LGA-1700 having a long life.

 

[birdie]

A! Great. A new socket. So people buying Raptor Lake CPUs wouldn't be able to upgrade to the next gen of Intel CPUs.

God, I'm so f****** tired of hearing this from every orifice on the Internet specially from AMD fans. Now let's talk about reality, shall we?

1. Intel has had two CPUs generations per socket for over a decade now, this is not new, OK, amigo?
2. Intel is not a charity and their chipset business is their good source of income.
3. No one forces you to buy into the Intel platform.
4. Absolute most people out there do not upgrade their CPUs so often, nowadays people tend to stick to their PCs for at least 3-7 years if not longer. We are not at the end of the 90s, the early 00s when CPUs became twice as fast in fewer than 36 months. There's absolutely no need to upgrade your CPU so often. Most new AAA games, we are all CPU enthusiasts here, aren't we?, are heavily GPU bound, not CPU bound. You play competitive 1st person shooters? At 1080p CPUs from 3-5 years ago provide FPSs above 250. Again, no need to upgrade to anything new yet.
5. Almost all the screaming about Intel switching sockets comes from ... AMD fans who for some reasons don't even represent the majority of x86 users (Intel: 68.03% as of May, 2022). Are you OK? Need help?

In no way I vindicate what Intel does - I just do not care. They don't kill people, actively destroy/pollute the environment, don't start wars and don't employ slaves. And they are no longer a monopoly though I'm not a fan of a duopoly (which is not so different in terms of proper competition) in the x86 market but that's what there is. Cut them some slack, OK?

 

[Mussels]

Oh, new sockets every second product release


How quaint.

 

[Nanochip]

God, I'm so f****** tired of hearing this from every orifice on the Internet specially from AMD fans. Now let's talk about reality, shall we?

1. Intel has had two CPUs generations per socket for over a decade now, this is not new, OK, amigo?
2. Intel is not a charity and their chipset business is their good source of income.
3. No one forces you to buy into the Intel platform.
4. Absolute most people out there do not upgrade their CPUs so often, nowadays people tend to stick to their PCs for at least 3-7 years if not longer. We are not at the end of the 90s, the early 00s when CPUs became twice as fast in fewer than 36 months. There's absolutely no need to upgrade your CPU so often. Most new AAA games, we are all CPU enthusiasts here, aren't we?, are heavily GPU bound, not CPU bound. You play competitive 1st person shooters? At 1080p CPUs from 3-5 years ago provide FPSs above 250. Again, no need to upgrade to anything new yet.
5. Almost all the screaming about Intel switching sockets comes from ... AMD fans who for some reasons don't even represent the majority of x86 users (Intel: 68.03% as of May, 2022). Are you OK? Need help?

In no way I vindicate what Intel does - I just do not care. They don't kill people, actively destroy/pollute the environment, don't start wars and don't employ slaves. And they are no longer a monopoly though I'm not a fan of a duopoly (which is not so different in terms of proper competition) in the x86 market but that's what there is. Cut them some slack, OK?

Their strategy contributes to e-waste so if you care about the planet as your snark about wars and slaves suggest, then perhaps you should care about the mountain of e-waste we humans pump out every year. And then perhaps you should care about Intel’s strategy which contributes to e-waste.

Any purchaser of Rocket lake and z590 that wanted to upgrade to alder lake has e-waste as z590 (lga1200) was abandoned in 6 months. The same will be true for z790 buyers. Someone may be interested in z790 because z690 doesn’t have as standard a pcie5.0 m.2 slot. So someone who wants to use an intel platform with a pcie5.0 drive without an adapter card might consider z790. But z790 and lga1700/1800 apparently have no longevity and will be abandoned within 12 months for lga1851.

Arrow lake-s appears to be a compelling upgrade with double the e-core count and a new architecture for both p and e-cores. So someone on z790 wanting to upgrade to arrow lake will have e-waste. Which could have been avoided if intel had longer platform longevity. When intel decided it needed more pins above lga1200 with a new rectangular socket shape compared to the older square one, why not move to lga1851 from the start, why stop at 1700/1800 and then break socket compatibility with 1851? Make it make sense. It’s a money making scheme in my book. Every time socket compatibility is broken, motherboard manufacturers are much more likely to have sales of new motherboards from those who are stuck on an older platform with no upgrade path.

 

[Fishymachine]

God, I'm so f****** tired of hearing this from every orifice on the Internet specially from AMD fans. Now let's talk about reality, shall we?

1. Intel has had two CPUs generations per socket for over a decade now, this is not new, OK, amigo?
2. Intel is not a charity and their chipset business is their good source of income.
3. No one forces you to buy into the Intel platform.
4. Absolute most people out there do not upgrade their CPUs so often, nowadays people tend to stick to their PCs for at least 3-7 years if not longer. We are not at the end of the 90s, the early 00s when CPUs became twice as fast in fewer than 36 months. There's absolutely no need to upgrade your CPU so often. Most new AAA games, we are all CPU enthusiasts here, aren't we?, are heavily GPU bound, not CPU bound. You play competitive 1st person shooters? At 1080p CPUs from 3-5 years ago provide FPSs above 250. Again, no need to upgrade to anything new yet.
5. Almost all the screaming about Intel switching sockets comes from ... AMD fans who for some reasons don't even represent the majority of x86 users (Intel: 68.03% as of May, 2022). Are you OK? Need help?

In no way I vindicate what Intel does - I just do not care. They don't kill people, actively destroy/pollute the environment, don't start wars and don't employ slaves. And they are no longer a monopoly though I'm not a fan of a duopoly (which is not so different in terms of proper competition) in the x86 market but that's what there is. Cut them some slack, OK?

I mostly agree, but the whole short life cycle socket does destroy the environment, since the people who do upgrade after 3-4 years will need a new motherboard. But even AMD with their 128 mb BIOS isn't the most unsullied maiden, just a bit better.

P.S. environmental impact starts when they mine the material, and ends when it's disposed of (and 9% recycled), so for example wind mills are just as bad as gas turbines

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

God, I'm so f****** tired of hearing this from every orifice on the Internet specially from AMD fans. Now let's talk about reality, shall we?

1. Intel has had two CPUs generations per socket for over a decade now, this is not new, OK, amigo?
2. Intel is not a charity and their chipset business is their good source of income.
3. No one forces you to buy into the Intel platform.
4. Absolute most people out there do not upgrade their CPUs so often, nowadays people tend to stick to their PCs for at least 3-7 years if not longer. We are not at the end of the 90s, the early 00s when CPUs became twice as fast in fewer than 36 months. There's absolutely no need to upgrade your CPU so often. Most new AAA games, we are all CPU enthusiasts here, aren't we?, are heavily GPU bound, not CPU bound. You play competitive 1st person shooters? At 1080p CPUs from 3-5 years ago provide FPSs above 250. Again, no need to upgrade to anything new yet.
5. Almost all the screaming about Intel switching sockets comes from ... AMD fans who for some reasons don't even represent the majority of x86 users (Intel: 68.03% as of May, 2022). Are you OK? Need help?

In no way I vindicate what Intel does - I just do not care. They don't kill people, actively destroy/pollute the environment, don't start wars and don't employ slaves. And they are no longer a monopoly though I'm not a fan of a duopoly (which is not so different in terms of proper competition) in the x86 market but that's what there is. Cut them some slack, OK?

More e waste isn't the meh you suggest IMHO

Take a deep breath, now, some think differently to you.

But Really don't care enough to debate a page and a half.

 

[Mussels]

God, I'm so f****** tired of hearing this from every orifice on the Internet specially from AMD fans. Now let's talk about reality, shall we?

1. Intel has had two CPUs generations per socket for over a decade now, this is not new, OK, amigo?
2. Intel is not a charity and their chipset business is their good source of income.
3. No one forces you to buy into the Intel platform.
4. Absolute most people out there do not upgrade their CPUs so often, nowadays people tend to stick to their PCs for at least 3-7 years if not longer. We are not at the end of the 90s, the early 00s when CPUs became twice as fast in fewer than 36 months. There's absolutely no need to upgrade your CPU so often. Most new AAA games, we are all CPU enthusiasts here, aren't we?, are heavily GPU bound, not CPU bound. You play competitive 1st person shooters? At 1080p CPUs from 3-5 years ago provide FPSs above 250. Again, no need to upgrade to anything new yet.
5. Almost all the screaming about Intel switching sockets comes from ... AMD fans who for some reasons don't even represent the majority of x86 users (Intel: 68.03% as of May, 2022). Are you OK? Need help?

In no way I vindicate what Intel does - I just do not care. They don't kill people, actively destroy/pollute the environment, don't start wars and don't employ slaves. And they are no longer a monopoly though I'm not a fan of a duopoly (which is not so different in terms of proper competition) in the x86 market but that's what there is. Cut them some slack, OK?

Ah, i wish to bring up a logical fallacy:

You're used to people not upgrading CPU's regularly because you cant
If you don't HAVE the option, of course you get used to not doing it!

Those of us on the AMD side? I've had 6CPU's go through one motherboard (GA-X370 Gaming 5)
Ryzen 1400, 1700x, 2700x, 3600x, 3700x, 5800x (albeit, the 5800x was for quick testing, but i plan to put a 5500 or 5600g in there permanently)


As for your point 5... those steam stats? They include PC's for all time. That has nothing to do with buyers of hardware in the present
What about when 80% of sales in germany were AMD CPU's? Do you think that suddenly makes advice on platform longevity irrelevant, because more people use old intel hardware that's no longer for sale?
AMD sales hit 80% for mindfactory.de | TechPowerUp Forum

You're getting correct facts, but interpreting them has been skipped in favour of defending what you're used to.

 

[birdie]

Their strategy contributes to e-waste so if you care about the planet as your snark about wars and slaves suggest, then perhaps you should care about the mountain of e-waste we humans pump out every year. And then perhaps you should care about Intel’s strategy which contributes to e-waste.

Any purchaser of Rocket lake and z590 that wanted to upgrade to alder lake has e-waste as z590 (lga1200) was abandoned in 6 months. The same will be true for z790 buyers. Someone may be interested in z790 because z690 doesn’t have as standard a pcie5.0 m.2 slot. So someone who wants to use an intel platform with a pcie5.0 drive without an adapter card might consider z790. But z790 and lga1700/1800 apparently have no longevity and will abandoned within 12 months for lga1851. Arrow lake s appears to be a compelling upgrade with double the e-core count and a new architecture for both p and e-cores. So someone on z790 wanting to upgrade to arrow lake will have e-waste. Which could have been avoided if intel had longer platform longevity.

You assume every person out there upgrades their CPU every bloody release which is blatantly false. I had my Core i5 2500 for 10 years and upgraded to Ryzen 3700X. It's amazing how you reply to my post while completely ignoring what I said. We've had polls here in TPU on the topic and, nope, even PC enthusiasts don't upgrade their CPUs every year, most do it every 3 to 5 years at which point platform longevity means almost nothing. OK, AMD dragged their AM4 socket for five or six years now? People still swap their motherboards because AM4 motherboards from six years ago terribly suck in terms of IO. The number of people who use 5950X with their six year old motherboards is vanishingly small. This "argument" doesn't stand, period.

 

[Nanochip]

You assume every person out there upgrades their CPU every bloody release which is blatantly false. I had my Core i5 2500 for 10 years and upgraded to Ryzen 3700X. It's amazing how you reply to my post while completely ignoring what I said. We've had polls here in TPU on the topic and, nope, even PC enthusiasts don't upgrade their CPUs every year, most do it every 3 to 5 years at which point platform longevity means almost nothing. OK, AMD dragged their AM4 socket for five or six years now? People still swap their motherboards because AM4 motherboards from six years ago terribly suck in terms of IO. The number of people who use 5950X with their six year old motherboards is vanishingly small.

The strategy of holding on to older CPUs for years is not as relevant anymore because Intel is no longer stuck in quad core stagnation with paltry generational IPC uplifts. Ryzen has forced intel to compete, to the point where intel is using external nodes for manufacturing some of their upcoming tiles. Apple left. Which stung. Intel is trying to compete again and is apparently engineering some really cool tech. Therefore, the desire to hold on to a cpu (like say Rocket lake or even alder lake) for 10 years will put you behind the curve of the new lakes that are coming.

Also, perhaps more intel users would upgrade their CPUs more frequently if intel had platform longevity. If Skylake or even comet lake worked in your i5 2500 motherboard, you mean to tell me you wouldn’t have considered upgrading for more IPC or more cores? What would you have done if you had the option to upgrade without needing to throw away or retire your motherboard?

I’m not saying Intel should keep platform compatibility indefinitely but 3 generations would be a good minimum. 2 is far too low in my opinion.

 

[JalleR]

Probably Retain Cooler Compatibility..... LOL​

 

[AusWolf]

The strategy of holding on to older CPUs for years is not as relevant anymore because Intel is no longer stuck in quad core stagnation with paltry generational IPC uplifts. Ryzen has forced intel to compete, to the point where intel is using external nodes for manufacturing some of their upcoming tiles. Apple left. Which stung. Intel is trying to compete again and is apparently engineering some really cool tech. Therefore, the desire to hold on to a cpu (like say Rocket lake or even alder lake) for 10 years will put you behind the curve of the new lakes that are coming.

Also, perhaps more intel users would upgrade their CPUs more frequently if intel had platform longevity. If Skylake or even comet lake worked in your i5 2500 motherboard, you mean to tell me you wouldn’t have considered upgrading for more IPC or more cores? What would you have done if you had the option to upgrade without needing to throw away or retire your motherboard?

I’m not saying Intel should keep platform compatibility indefinitely but 3 generations would be a good minimum. 2 is far too low in my opinion.

We can argue day and night about how much better each generation is than the previous one, or how many should be supported by one socket, but the ultimate question that determines whether you upgrade or not will and should always be: "is your PC good enough for your needs?"

 

[progste]

Let's see how many sockets they can change in the next 2 years

 

[Nanochip]

We can argue day and night about how much better each generation is than the previous one, or how many should be supported by one socket, but the ultimate question that determines whether you upgrade or not will and should always be: "is your PC good enough for your needs?"

Needs change bro. Intel motherboards are much more expensive than they used to be. Intel is rumored to be adding accelerators to its upcoming lakes. Needs that we’re not necessarily thinking about now could emerge as technology change.

As costs of Intel’s motherboards increase why isn’t platform longevity also increasing too? I would spend $500+ on an intel motherboard if I knew it’d last 3-4 generations. But 2 generations per socket (and one generation for the odd-numbered series like z590, z790) makes me a lot more selective. The increase in costs of Intel’s mobos is not commensurate with the short platform longevity. Intel can and should do better.

 

[Sithaer]

I'm also one of those ppl who had a AM 4 mobo/system since 2018 and I never upgraded my first CPU in it which was a 1600X, lasted me almost 4 years actually.

Currently I'm using an Intel Alder lake system and tbh the 2 generation life span of my mobo's socket does not bother me at all, most likely I won't even switch to Raptor lake for years let alone care about further upgrades.
Reason being, my use case does not need/require it that often. 'Casual single player/MMO gaming and thats it'

 

[progste]

I'm also one of those ppl who had a AM 4 mobo since 2018 and I never upgraded my first CPU in it which was a 1600X, lasted me almost 4 years actually.

Currently I'm using an Intel system and tbh the 2 generation life span of my mobo's socket does not bother me at all, most likely I won't even switch to Raptor lake for years let alone care about further upgrades.
Reason being, my use case does not need/require it that often. 'Casual single player/MMO gaming and thats it'

but why did you move to an intel when you could have easily bought a 5950x and keep your old system instead of throwing 200 bucks on a new mobo?
Actually if you only need it for casual games/mmo why even upgrade at all? (I ask that knowing fully well that it's just fun to power up once in a while =P)

 

[Sithaer]

but why did you move to an intel when you could have easily bought a 5950x and keep your old system instead of throwing 200 bucks on a new mobo?
Actually if you only need it for casual games/mmo why even upgrade at all? (I ask that knowing fully well that it's just fun to power up once in a while =P)

I'm a budget user on a tight budget so stuff like the 5950x I don't even look at or consider.
I draw the line around 200 $ max on a CPU alone but I prefer cheaper if possible/available.

When I made the switch the non X 5600 wasn't even offical and the second hand R5 3600/3700X was stupid overpriced and I did not feel like spending that kind of money on a 4 year old mobo with aging feature set.
So I decided to sell the whole thing and switch to Alder lake/12100F and guess what it did not cost me more than upgrading my old B350 so in overall I ended up with a better and more modern system.
At the time of my switch, the second hand 3600 was going for ~170$ alone, so yea I noped out of that. Sure if I only sold my 1600x and drop in a CPU upgrade then yea it would be cheaper but not by much so at that point I was like yeah might as well switch to a new platform.

After selling the B350 mobo+cpu+cooler the overall cost of my Alder lake system was about the same, around 180$.

As for why I even needed the upgrade, well the IPC of my first gen Ryzen was rather lackluster in some of the games I play so the massive IPC improvement of Alder lake was exactly what I needed for my use case and so far its been great, no regrets.

That being said if I still had my B350 system then maybe I would consider a non X 5600 drop in upgrade but at the time it wasn't even confirmed nor the B350 support, don't have a crystal ball either. 'Actually my exact B350 mobo was one of the last to get the Bios udpdate just recently..'

 

[DeathtoGnomes]

1. Intel has had two CPUs generations per socket for over a decade now, this is not new, OK, amigo?

At a time when Intel was teasing AMD about using glue.

 

[Shtb]

4. Absolute most people out there do not upgrade their CPUs so often

But, agree, to buy a motherboard in 2017 and be able to put in the same MB processor from late 2020 (and even 2022 - especially it makes sense, if you often play online games) - very nice, right?

5. Almost all the screaming about Intel switching sockets comes from ... AMD fans

That's a strong statement.
Will there be proofs? (note - if user has an AMD processor, it does not necessarily mean, that he is a fan of this company)

In no way I vindicate what Intel does - I just do not care.

If you really didn't care, you wouldn't make such categorical statements, but you do.

They don't kill people, actively destroy/pollute the environment

As noted several times above - production of motherboards does not happen by magic.
And this is obvious and you could well have guessed it yourself and not make such claims, but for some reason you do.
Strange.

 

[Gzero]

Can the amd fan boys cut it out already?

Socket AM4 - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

3 different chipsets in 3 years. AMD are no better than Intel. eWaste is a complete nonargument. Both sides are bringing products to market, neither provide recycling programs.

AMD even had the audacity to prevent support for 5xxx series on b3/x3/b4/x4 motherboards from day 0 (the evidence is the backpedalling they did to eventually provide AGESA support all the way to b3)!

The better questions to ask is what cost does maintaining compatibility with current mounts bring in terms of layout and cooling? Does the new socket bring new features over the previous generation?

 

[Deleted member 24505]

I don't give a piss. If i have the cash to upgrade at will, like some on TPU obviously do, i would not cry at having to buy a new board to go with the new CPU. Sometimes sticking a new CPU in a old( bodged with AGESA/bios update) to work is not the best way, even if it does work, you may miss out on new motherboard features.

As has been said, most users keep their setups for longer than 1 generation, so the only people it matters to are the whiners on TPU.

 

[TheoneandonlyMrK]

I don't give a piss. If i have the cash to upgrade at will, like some on TPU obviously do, i would not cry at having to buy a new board to go with the new CPU. Sometimes sticking a new CPU in a old( bodged with AGESA/bios update) to work is not the best way, even if it does work, you may miss out on new motherboard features.

As has been said, most users keep their setups for longer than 1 generation, so the only people it matters to are the whiners on TPU.

You don't care, birdie doesn't care, your vocalism says otherwise.

If my opinion is that board swaps are a pain why should I care about what you or birdie thinks.
Or what the majority does.

Doesn't change My opinion.

Regardless of where that opinion now pidgin holes me.