- Joined
- Jan 3, 2021
- Messages
- 3,605 (2.49/day)
- Location
- Slovenia
Processor | i5-6600K |
---|---|
Motherboard | Asus Z170A |
Cooling | some cheap Cooler Master Hyper 103 or similar |
Memory | 16GB DDR4-2400 |
Video Card(s) | IGP |
Storage | Samsung 850 EVO 250GB |
Display(s) | 2x Oldell 24" 1920x1200 |
Case | Bitfenix Nova white windowless non-mesh |
Audio Device(s) | E-mu 1212m PCI |
Power Supply | Seasonic G-360 |
Mouse | Logitech Marble trackball, never had a mouse |
Keyboard | Key Tronic KT2000, no Win key because 1994 |
Software | Oldwin |
It's not rebranding (old chip under a new name) that's the problem here, it's the bait-and-switch behaviour (even older chip under the same name)."It turns out, that some batches of B460 and H410 PCH dies are re-badged from older generations of PCH, and built on the 22 nm silicon fabrication process; whereas the Z490 and H470 are based on a newer generation that's built on 14 nm."
This explanation only make things worst. It just proves that Intel have been rebranding old chipsets to use with "new" Sky Lake based processors, instead of allowing backward compatibility. So all the while, Intel have been recycling same processor and chipset, forcing people to upgrade motherboard if they want to upgrade to a newer CPU. All the more I won't be bothered about Intel as long as there are other alternatives out there.
Had Intel chosen to call these chipsets B455 and H405, and stated right away that we should not expect full compatibility, that would be just fine and fair. The added value for Intel would be to have us all confused with ten different chipsets instead of only eight.