Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...
Flying Sausages

Intel Core i9-10900K 10-core Processor and Z490 Chipset Arrive April 2020

Recommended Posts

52 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

What? I'm... confused as to what your point is. Can't extend high end to HEDT, you get all sorts of issues. If you run different sockets it's all split up still and very confusing, if you run the same socket then not only do you have a tiny pentium inside a bigass HEDT shell (which is expensive, driving costs up), now do they all work on all chipsets? On AMD for sure, a TR CPU cannot physically fit in an AM4 socket package, meaning if you wanted to unify the lineup there'd be a 3200G inside a TRX40 socket sized chip, stupidly expensive and annoying to install with low cooler compatability. How are you deciding what chips run what RAM combo and what PCIe slots are active when? Intel's HEDT has been confusing enough with lower PCIe count HEDT chips, let alone trying to blend chips with different RAM channel configs and PCIe lane support. And what if some CPUs support bifurcation and NVMe raid and others don't? How do you differentiate that while keeping a unified setup? If we give all the CPUs all the PCIe lanes and quad channel RAM, the low end will now increase massively in price, no longer being cost effective for the people who need it.

Do you know nothing about chipsets and CPUs and how they work? There's a reason HEDT is usually compartmentalized to it's own socket and chipset/chipsets (Intel HEDT is often cross-compatible with their server platform, IIRC EPYC and TR are not). 

do you realize x299 and z390 are practically the same?lol

most of the other shit is inside the cpu

 

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/chipsets/desktop-chipsets/x299.html

 

https://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/products/chipsets/desktop-chipsets/z390.html

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pas008 said:

do you realize x299 and z390 are practically the same?lol

most of the other shit is inside the cpu

?


X58-X79-X99-X299 lads: Intel HEDT Xeon/i7 Megathread - Murica (But International) Parrot Gang

 

Big Rig (Done) - (Main Rig) - i7 5960X @ 4.7Ghz/3.7Ghz core/uncore - Custom Loop: 2x 360GTS with EK-ZMT/Stubbies and EK D5 pump/res combo - EVGA X99 Classified - 32GB (4x8GB) HyperX Predator DDR4 @ 3200MHz CL16 XMP - AMD Radeon VII (best TimeSpy so far: here) - 1TB 970 Evo - Corsair RM1000i - Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX TG - 6x iPPC NF-F12 2000 

X79 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 1)- i7 4930K @ 4.5GHz - EVGA CLC 280 w/NF-P14s fans - EVGA X79 Dark - 16GBGB (4x4GB) Corsair Vengeance DDR3 @ 1600Mhz CL9 XMP - EVGA GTX 1660 Ti XC Ultra - MX500 1TB - 2x Seagate Barracuda Compute 2TB - EVGA 1000W G3 w/CableMod PRO Carbon cables - Phanteks P400 (White) - NF-P12

 

X58 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 2) - Xeon X5675 @ 4.4/3.7 core/uncore- NH-D15S - EVGA X58 Classified SLI 4-Way - 24GB (3x8GB) HyperX Savage Red DDR3 @ 1750Mhz CL9-10-10-27 - 2x EVGA Classified 780s - 120GB HyperX SSD - EVGA 1600W T2 - Corsair 750D - 5x iPPC NF-A14 3000 PWM

 

2019 13" rMBP (i5/8GB/256GB) {work} - 2012 13" MBP (i5/16GB/525GB) {mine} - iPhone 11 Pro Max + Apple Watch S3 42mm - iPod Classic 6G 80GB running Rockbox + iPod Classic 5.5G Enhanced 30GB also on Rockbox - iPhone X - iPhone 4S on iOS 6.1.3

 

whip and nae nae

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, pas008 said:

This is extremely far from true though. We are talking vastly different power delivery (FIVR vs board VRM), dramatically different trace layout due to PCIe lane allocation and DIMM locations, not to mention different wiring to the DIMM slots to handle larger capacity DIMM's due to the sheer difference in memory controllers on the CPU's themselves.

 

What you proposed has already been done on X299 and was deemed a failure. The Kaby-X chips had issues where they would have to disable entire DIMM slots, M.2 slots, PCIe slots and more just because the CPU itself lacked the memory controller and PCIe lanes to drive those board components. If you suggest those features are added across the entire stack, the cost for all consumers will go up.

 

Ignoring that glaring issue, you then run into an issue with EEPROM size limitations and trying to support each microcode/stepping change going forward for each processor, which severely limits future SKU's being used on that platform without removing support for older processor models (something the Kaby-X series suffered from yet again, and happened to Ryzen 1000 series on X570). The easiest solution is to simply use a bigger EEPROM to allow for more data, but again, who eats the cost of that?

 

Lastly, maintaining socket compatibility but using different chipsets will open up a nightmare scenario for retail technical support that already have a bad time explaining to customers that it's not a bright idea to use a 9900KS in a budget H310 motherboard. People will complain that their expensive processor isn't working in their cheap board, or worse, complain that their expensive processor killed their budget chipset board, akin to what the FX 9590 did to cheapo AM3 970 boards. 

 

I share your sentiments that a unified product stack would be easier on consumers, but it cannot be done with the current segmentation strategies in mind. Something would have to fundamentally change to make it feasible, which Intel will not do. Besides, enthusiasts will always pay more to differentiate themselves from the rest of the product stack, even if a price premium is involved.


My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, pas008 said:

point?

not seeing difference on chipsets

 

I really don't know how to address this level of just... blinded lunacy? @MageTank Has a good reasoned reply, and if you want a single lineup you need to fix this too:

intel-core-cpu-size-comparison.thumb.jpg.f9ecba75dba1c70bf1ee8275d604703d.jpg

LGA 1151 CPU vs LGA 2066 CPU. The difference between AM4 and sTR4/sTRX4 is way fuckin bigger, but we'll stick to Intel here. 

Dies:

Intel-Core-i9-7920X-Extreme-Core-Count-Core-X-Delidding.jpg.d358fe9b857d2eea6d9b9478a337d1f2.jpg

7980XE

WH6h4F4TUeSQitKt.thumb.jpg.6e001720eac916368e7b0c964b49d10b.jpg
LGA1151 i7s.

You can't physically fit the HEDT Die underneath the LGA1151 IHS, meaning if you want a single lineup, every single CPU needs to be LGA2066, which is a big expensive package. Even Pentiums will need to go under this, driving up their price by a large amount. Will effect mobos too, there's only a single ITX X299 board because the socket is so large, there isn't even an ITX sTR4 board in existence because that package is even bigger. So you can't get mobos as small anymore, half the stuff on your mobos either will or won't work depending on the CPU, and costs for everyone other than HEDT users (it'll stay the same) will go up massively to pay for physically larger and more complicated CPU packages. 

and that's one facet of CPU/socket/chipset differences and why they're split up. Just one, there's a ton more variables. 

Oh, and here's the comparision between sTRX and AM4:
tr_compare.thumb.jpg.51ab681b75380bcd2813d3b3285bd816.jpg

Single TR4 is almost as big as 4 AM4 chips. Oh and no way that die setup fits in the AM4 package:

new-amd-ryzen-threadripper-cpus-unveiled-32-core-chip-is-180_5esr.jpg.7666dd585e95e9a89bc47fa17a76b364.jpg
meaning every single AMD CPU must use the even more expensive, more annoying, less compatible sTR4 package. 


X58-X79-X99-X299 lads: Intel HEDT Xeon/i7 Megathread - Murica (But International) Parrot Gang

 

Big Rig (Done) - (Main Rig) - i7 5960X @ 4.7Ghz/3.7Ghz core/uncore - Custom Loop: 2x 360GTS with EK-ZMT/Stubbies and EK D5 pump/res combo - EVGA X99 Classified - 32GB (4x8GB) HyperX Predator DDR4 @ 3200MHz CL16 XMP - AMD Radeon VII (best TimeSpy so far: here) - 1TB 970 Evo - Corsair RM1000i - Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX TG - 6x iPPC NF-F12 2000 

X79 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 1)- i7 4930K @ 4.5GHz - EVGA CLC 280 w/NF-P14s fans - EVGA X79 Dark - 16GBGB (4x4GB) Corsair Vengeance DDR3 @ 1600Mhz CL9 XMP - EVGA GTX 1660 Ti XC Ultra - MX500 1TB - 2x Seagate Barracuda Compute 2TB - EVGA 1000W G3 w/CableMod PRO Carbon cables - Phanteks P400 (White) - NF-P12

 

X58 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 2) - Xeon X5675 @ 4.4/3.7 core/uncore- NH-D15S - EVGA X58 Classified SLI 4-Way - 24GB (3x8GB) HyperX Savage Red DDR3 @ 1750Mhz CL9-10-10-27 - 2x EVGA Classified 780s - 120GB HyperX SSD - EVGA 1600W T2 - Corsair 750D - 5x iPPC NF-A14 3000 PWM

 

2019 13" rMBP (i5/8GB/256GB) {work} - 2012 13" MBP (i5/16GB/525GB) {mine} - iPhone 11 Pro Max + Apple Watch S3 42mm - iPod Classic 6G 80GB running Rockbox + iPod Classic 5.5G Enhanced 30GB also on Rockbox - iPhone X - iPhone 4S on iOS 6.1.3

 

whip and nae nae

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MageTank said:

This is extremely far from true though. We are talking vastly different power delivery (FIVR vs board VRM), dramatically different trace layout due to PCIe lane allocation and DIMM locations, not to mention different wiring to the DIMM slots to handle larger capacity DIMM's due to the sheer difference in memory controllers on the CPU's themselves.

 

What you proposed has already been done on X299 and was deemed a failure. The Kaby-X chips had issues where they would have to disable entire DIMM slots, M.2 slots, PCIe slots and more just because the CPU itself lacked the memory controller and PCIe lanes to drive those board components. If you suggest those features are added across the entire stack, the cost for all consumers will go up.

 

Ignoring that glaring issue, you then run into an issue with EEPROM size limitations and trying to support each microcode/stepping change going forward for each processor, which severely limits future SKU's being used on that platform without removing support for older processor models (something the Kaby-X series suffered from yet again, and happened to Ryzen 1000 series on X570). The easiest solution is to simply use a bigger EEPROM to allow for more data, but again, who eats the cost of that?

 

Lastly, maintaining socket compatibility but using different chipsets will open up a nightmare scenario for retail technical support that already have a bad time explaining to customers that it's not a bright idea to use a 9900KS in a budget H310 motherboard. People will complain that their expensive processor isn't working in their cheap board, or worse, complain that their expensive processor killed their budget chipset board, akin to what the FX 9590 did to cheapo AM3 970 boards. 

 

I share your sentiments that a unified product stack would be easier on consumers, but it cannot be done with the current segmentation strategies in mind. Something would have to fundamentally change to make it feasible, which Intel will not do. Besides, enthusiasts will always pay more to differentiate themselves from the rest of the product stack, even if a price premium is involved.

 

be easy for intel combine mainstream with their current hedt their damn sockets they pretty damn close in size too

they'd just need to eliminate 115x or lga200 or whatever and go with 2066 or something

then offer different chipsets from there

 

 

its not like amd with am4 and tr sockets

 

fyi you can burn out many boards with 3900x and 9900k

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Zando Bob said:

I really don't know how to address this level of just... blinded lunacy? @MageTank Has a good reasoned reply, and if you want a single lineup you need to fix this too:

intel-core-cpu-size-comparison.thumb.jpg.f9ecba75dba1c70bf1ee8275d604703d.jpg

LGA 1151 CPU vs LGA 2066 CPU. The difference between AM4 and sTR4/sTRX4 is way fuckin bigger, but we'll stick to Intel here. 

Dies:

Intel-Core-i9-7920X-Extreme-Core-Count-Core-X-Delidding.jpg.d358fe9b857d2eea6d9b9478a337d1f2.jpg

7980XE

WH6h4F4TUeSQitKt.thumb.jpg.6e001720eac916368e7b0c964b49d10b.jpg
LGA1151 i7s.

You can't physically fit the HEDT Die underneath the LGA1151 IHS, meaning if you want a single lineup, every single CPU needs to be LGA2066, which is a big expensive package. Even Pentiums will need to go under this, driving up their price by a large amount. Will effect mobos too, there's only a single ITX X299 board because the socket is so large, there isn't even an ITX sTR4 board in existence because that package is even bigger. So you can't get mobos as small anymore, half the stuff on your mobos either will or won't work depending on the CPU, and costs for everyone other than HEDT users (it'll stay the same) will go up massively to pay for physically larger and more complicated CPU packages. 

and that's one facet of CPU/socket/chipset differences and why they're split up. Just one, there's a ton more variables. 

Oh, and here's the comparision between sTRX and AM4:
tr_compare.thumb.jpg.51ab681b75380bcd2813d3b3285bd816.jpg

Single TR4 is almost as big as 4 AM4 chips. Oh and no way that die setup fits in the AM4 package:

new-amd-ryzen-threadripper-cpus-unveiled-32-core-chip-is-180_5esr.jpg.7666dd585e95e9a89bc47fa17a76b364.jpg
meaning every single AMD CPU must use the even more expensive, more annoying, less compatible sTR4 package. 

yes i know size difference but its not much

 

and I'm not talking anything amd right now because they did it right

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, pas008 said:

yes i know size difference but its not much

 

and I'm not talking anything amd right now because they did it right

"its not much"

Sir do you have eyes? 


X58-X79-X99-X299 lads: Intel HEDT Xeon/i7 Megathread - Murica (But International) Parrot Gang

 

Big Rig (Done) - (Main Rig) - i7 5960X @ 4.7Ghz/3.7Ghz core/uncore - Custom Loop: 2x 360GTS with EK-ZMT/Stubbies and EK D5 pump/res combo - EVGA X99 Classified - 32GB (4x8GB) HyperX Predator DDR4 @ 3200MHz CL16 XMP - AMD Radeon VII (best TimeSpy so far: here) - 1TB 970 Evo - Corsair RM1000i - Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX TG - 6x iPPC NF-F12 2000 

X79 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 1)- i7 4930K @ 4.5GHz - EVGA CLC 280 w/NF-P14s fans - EVGA X79 Dark - 16GBGB (4x4GB) Corsair Vengeance DDR3 @ 1600Mhz CL9 XMP - EVGA GTX 1660 Ti XC Ultra - MX500 1TB - 2x Seagate Barracuda Compute 2TB - EVGA 1000W G3 w/CableMod PRO Carbon cables - Phanteks P400 (White) - NF-P12

 

X58 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 2) - Xeon X5675 @ 4.4/3.7 core/uncore- NH-D15S - EVGA X58 Classified SLI 4-Way - 24GB (3x8GB) HyperX Savage Red DDR3 @ 1750Mhz CL9-10-10-27 - 2x EVGA Classified 780s - 120GB HyperX SSD - EVGA 1600W T2 - Corsair 750D - 5x iPPC NF-A14 3000 PWM

 

2019 13" rMBP (i5/8GB/256GB) {work} - 2012 13" MBP (i5/16GB/525GB) {mine} - iPhone 11 Pro Max + Apple Watch S3 42mm - iPod Classic 6G 80GB running Rockbox + iPod Classic 5.5G Enhanced 30GB also on Rockbox - iPhone X - iPhone 4S on iOS 6.1.3

 

whip and nae nae

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

"its not much"

Sir do you have eyes? 

It’s not a huge difference. Basically the same difference between a FourTwo and a Peterbilt.


Come Bloody Angel

Break off your chains

And look what I've found in the dirt.

 

Pale battered body

Seems she was struggling

Something is wrong with this world.

 

Fierce Bloody Angel

The blood is on your hands

Why did you come to this world?

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

The blood is on your hands.

 

The blood is on your hands!

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, pas008 said:

 

be easy for intel combine mainstream with their current hedt their damn sockets they pretty damn close in size too

they'd just need to eliminate 115x or lga200 or whatever and go with 2066 or something

then offer different chipsets from there

 

 

its not like amd with am4 and tr sockets

 

fyi you can burn out many boards with 3900x and 9900k

 

 

You're still ignoring the physical layouts of the boards relative to what the CPU's can supply in regards to their memory controller capabilities and PCIe lane allocation. Consumers do not want to pay money for a motherboard and then have features that cannot be used because their CPU simply can't provide them. Again, if you are suggesting that all processors across the entire product stack support the same number of DIMM's and PCIe lanes, that cost has to go somewhere. If you suggest that Intel eats the cost, they will simply stick to their current strategy of market segmentation to save money. If the cost is to be eaten by consumers, they will simply refuse to buy something they don't need, and look elsewhere.

 

If you are suggesting that they simply make everything physically compatible but separate the features via different chipsets, you are defeating the entire purpose of trying to unify the product stack. You will run into issues where a processor physically fits, but can't be used because the chipset itself is refusing the processor. 

 

I am also very aware that you can burn out boards with the 3900X and 9900K. In my post, I gave an example eluding to that using the 9900KS. My point still stands. You cannot unify a platform but exclude board features based on the specific processor installed. This will only lead to anger from consumers, and it will be a nightmare for technical support companies to have to explain and troubleshoot on behalf of their customers.

 

The current segmentation sucks for consumers that want to upgrade to more cores or additional features, but it's still the best option at this moment in time.


My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

"its not much"

Sir do you have eyes? 

yes i can see 1/3rd bigger ok but theres plenty of room

geez even cpu coolers holes arent much either

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

You're still ignoring the physical layouts of the boards relative to what the CPU's can supply in regards to their memory controller capabilities and PCIe lane allocation. Consumers do not want to pay money for a motherboard and then have features that cannot be used because their CPU simply can't provide them. Again, if you are suggesting that all processors across the entire product stack support the same number of DIMM's and PCIe lanes, that cost has to go somewhere. If you suggest that Intel eats the cost, they will simply stick to their current strategy of market segmentation to save money. If the cost is to be eaten by consumers, they will simply refuse to buy something they don't need, and look elsewhere.

 

If you are suggesting that they simply make everything physically compatible but separate the features via different chipsets, you are defeating the entire purpose of trying to unify the product stack. You will run into issues where a processor physically fits, but can't be used because the chipset itself is refusing the processor. 

 

I am also very aware that you can burn out boards with the 3900X and 9900K. In my post, I gave an example eluding to that using the 9900KS. My point still stands. You cannot unify a platform but exclude board features based on the specific processor installed. This will only lead to anger from consumers, and it will be a nightmare for technical support companies to have to explain and troubleshoot on behalf of their customers.

 

The current segmentation sucks for consumers that want to upgrade to more cores or additional features, but it's still the best option at this moment in time.

do you tell someone that buys 8100 to buy z390?

 

do you see prebuilts even doing that?

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, pas008 said:

yes i can see 1/3rd bigger ok but theres plenty of room

geez even cpu coolers holes arent much either

28829661-9C26-45F6-9D43-C6B60FA7388A.gif.60bf9ce899eaebafb1f87a69a9f8b7be.gif
 

Ya can’t read and your reasoning is... not reasonable, I’m done. 


X58-X79-X99-X299 lads: Intel HEDT Xeon/i7 Megathread - Murica (But International) Parrot Gang

 

Big Rig (Done) - (Main Rig) - i7 5960X @ 4.7Ghz/3.7Ghz core/uncore - Custom Loop: 2x 360GTS with EK-ZMT/Stubbies and EK D5 pump/res combo - EVGA X99 Classified - 32GB (4x8GB) HyperX Predator DDR4 @ 3200MHz CL16 XMP - AMD Radeon VII (best TimeSpy so far: here) - 1TB 970 Evo - Corsair RM1000i - Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX TG - 6x iPPC NF-F12 2000 

X79 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 1)- i7 4930K @ 4.5GHz - EVGA CLC 280 w/NF-P14s fans - EVGA X79 Dark - 16GBGB (4x4GB) Corsair Vengeance DDR3 @ 1600Mhz CL9 XMP - EVGA GTX 1660 Ti XC Ultra - MX500 1TB - 2x Seagate Barracuda Compute 2TB - EVGA 1000W G3 w/CableMod PRO Carbon cables - Phanteks P400 (White) - NF-P12

 

X58 Rig (Done) - (Alt Rig 2) - Xeon X5675 @ 4.4/3.7 core/uncore- NH-D15S - EVGA X58 Classified SLI 4-Way - 24GB (3x8GB) HyperX Savage Red DDR3 @ 1750Mhz CL9-10-10-27 - 2x EVGA Classified 780s - 120GB HyperX SSD - EVGA 1600W T2 - Corsair 750D - 5x iPPC NF-A14 3000 PWM

 

2019 13" rMBP (i5/8GB/256GB) {work} - 2012 13" MBP (i5/16GB/525GB) {mine} - iPhone 11 Pro Max + Apple Watch S3 42mm - iPod Classic 6G 80GB running Rockbox + iPod Classic 5.5G Enhanced 30GB also on Rockbox - iPhone X - iPhone 4S on iOS 6.1.3

 

whip and nae nae

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Zando Bob said:

28829661-9C26-45F6-9D43-C6B60FA7388A.gif.60bf9ce899eaebafb1f87a69a9f8b7be.gif
 

Ya can’t read and your reasoning is... not reasonable, I’m done. 

ok guess you are sold on intels reasoning for separate sockets too

 

when you could have just started with a bigger socket in the first place

if you want smaller use mobile

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, pas008 said:

do you tell someone that buys 8100 to buy z390?

 

do you see prebuilts even doing that?

That is quite the strawman, but I'll answer it nonetheless. If a customer bought an 8100 but wanted to overclock their ram, absolutely. Why? Because overclocking ram is a feature of Z390, and if that feature is desired by a customer, then I'll recommend it. Do I see prebuilts doing that? Yes actually... I have. There was a time where the only chipsets available were Z370 and OEM's were shipping prebuilts with Z370 chipsets paired with plain Core i7 8700 processors that didn't support overclocking. This was also extremely common with mobile laptops that launched for Kaby Lake, as you saw the Clevo P870KM being paired with locked processors due to thermal constraints, despite a board that actually supported overclocking.

 

I still don't see what this has to do with your point, as it actually proves my own. Consumers that need an i3 8100 would not want to spend more money on features they don't need from more expensive chipsets. How can you possibly make every processor across the product stack compatible with each chipset without cannibalizing features? Answer my questions this time Pas, don't just give me a back handed response.


My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MageTank said:

That is quite the strawman, but I'll answer it nonetheless. If a customer bought an 8100 but wanted to overclock their ram, absolutely. Why? Because overclocking ram is a feature of Z390, and if that feature is desired by a customer, then I'll recommend it. Do I see prebuilts doing that? Yes actually... I have. There was a time where the only chipsets available were Z370 and OEM's were shipping prebuilts with Z370 chipsets paired with plain Core i7 8700 processors that didn't support overclocking. This was also extremely common with mobile laptops that launched for Kaby Lake, as you saw the Clevo P870KM being paired with locked processors due to thermal constraints, despite a board that actually supported overclocking.

 

I still don't see what this has to do with your point, as it actually proves my own. Consumers that need an i3 8100 would not want to spend more money on features they don't need from more expensive chipsets. How can you possibly make every processor across the product stack compatible with each chipset without cannibalizing features? Answer my questions this time Pas, don't just give me a back handed response.

hedt should share highend server socket if its going to exist like it use to

mainstream should offer few different chipsets for user configuration of what they want from their system

and then mobile

like I said intels hedt doesnt make sense

didnt linus do a video on this?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Mira Yurizaki said:

I'm trying to see where people are getting the "8 extra pins" from when the new socket has 1200 contacts.

meme is a bit old

the rumor was that the socket would be 1159 but I guess they realised it was too obvious so they added a bunch of extra pins to make it 1200


I tend to reply with memes because I lack social skills and don't know how to express myself correctly.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, pas008 said:

hedt should share highend server socket if its going to exist like it use to

mainstream should offer few different chipsets for user configuration of what they want from their system

and then mobile

like I said intels hedt doesnt make sense

didnt linus do a video on this?

 

 

Once again, you refuse to answer any of my questions. You're simply making statements while refusing to acknowledge anything that is said to you. Explain why HEDT sharing the socket of their server lineup matters at all? Sharing the socket doesn't automatically make them compatible with server boards or vice versa when attempting to use their server processors in consumer boards.

 

Linus ranting about something doesn't automatically make it a fact. Most of his rant was directed to Intel's shady NDA/embargo practices, not their market segmentation as a whole. 

 

If you want to say Intel's HEDT makes no sense from a self-cannibalization stance, then I am sure people will agree with you. However, you can't simply say "Make them all socket compatible and just use different chipsets" as if that is a viable solution. At this point, you are going to need to back your claims up with some evidence, otherwise you will not be taken seriously.

 

EDIT: I went back and watched the video you were likely referring to: 

In this video, his issue is due to Kaby Lake X existing alongside Skylake-X on the same platform. Meaning, the desktop and HEDT CPU's sharing the same board/chipset... That's the very thing you are asking for, is it not? Would this not be evidence against your claim, if you believe what Linus said is the truth? His rant in that video (which I mistook for one of his more recent embargo rants) was directly related to the convergence of the consumer re-branded Kaby Lake chips being used on the exact same motherboard/chipsets. 

 

My point remains. I need to see some evidence to backup your claims in order to understand your point.

 

 


My (incomplete) memory overclocking guide: 

 

Does memory speed impact gaming performance? Click here to find out!

On 1/2/2017 at 9:32 PM, MageTank said:

Sometimes, we all need a little inspiration.

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Soooooo i9-10900K 10c/20t v Ryzen 9 3950X 16c/32t

 

Looks DOA to me, would likely need a 10-15% lead in single core performance to be compelling because it's going to be thrashed in multi.


PC Part Picker Link || CPU: Intel i7 4790K @ 5Ghz; MB: ASUS Z97 Maximus VII Ranger; RAM: 16GB Corsair Vengeance 2400; GFX: Asus Strix 1080ti; CASE: Phanteks Enthoo Evolv ATX Glass; STORAGE: 500GB Samsung 960 Pro, 250GB 850 Evo, 500GB 850 Evo, 3TB WD Red; PSU: Corsair AX1200i; MONITOR: Acer Predator X34; PERIPHERALS: Razer Blackwidow Ultimate Chroma; Razer Deathadder Chroma, Audeze Mobius

 

Devices || Macbook Pro 15" (2016); iPad Pro 9.7"; iPhone Xr

 

Audio Gear || Headphones: Audeze iSine20; Audeze LCD-X; Audeze LCD-3; Mr Speakers Ether 2; Focal Clear; B&O H5; Sony MDR-1000x; AMP/DAC: Chord Qutest; Pathos Aurium; Bryston BHA-1; Matrix Audio Element X; Benchmark AHB2; Speakers: AudioEngine A5+; Focal Aria 936

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, MageTank said:

Once again, you refuse to answer any of my questions. You're simply making statements while refusing to acknowledge anything that is said to you. Explain why HEDT sharing the socket of their server lineup matters at all? Sharing the socket doesn't automatically make them compatible with server boards or vice versa when attempting to use their server processors in consumer boards.

 

Linus ranting about something doesn't automatically make it a fact. Most of his rant was directed to Intel's shady NDA/embargo practices, not their market segmentation as a whole. 

 

If you want to say Intel's HEDT makes no sense from a self-cannibalization stance, then I am sure people will agree with you. However, you can't simply say "Make them all socket compatible and just use different chipsets" as if that is a viable solution. At this point, you are going to need to back your claims up with some evidence, otherwise you will not be taken seriously.

we know from the past and how amd is actually doing it now

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sauron said:

These are 500$+ chips, they aren't mainstream by any stretch.

well for pc master race i would say mainstream... 


Quote me for a reply, React if I was helpful, informative, or funny

 

AMD blackout rig

 

cpu: ryzen 5 3600 @4.4ghz @1.35v

gpu: rx580 @1.45ghz mem=2100mhz

ram: vengeance lpx c15 @3800mhz

mobo: Asus b450f

psu: cooler master mwe 650w

case: masterbox mbx520

fans:Noctua industrial 3000rpm x6

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Belgarathian said:

Looks DOA to me

Not really. The typical consumer doesn't know what benchmarks or IPC is, the only metric they know about is clockspeed.

 

And Intel advertises their product to typical consumers, AMD doesn't. That alone guarantees that Intel's new line of CPUs are going to sell somewhat well.


Come Bloody Angel

Break off your chains

And look what I've found in the dirt.

 

Pale battered body

Seems she was struggling

Something is wrong with this world.

 

Fierce Bloody Angel

The blood is on your hands

Why did you come to this world?

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

Everybody turns to dust.

 

The blood is on your hands.

 

The blood is on your hands!

 

Pyo.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, pas008 said:

yes i can see 1/3rd bigger ok but theres plenty of room

geez even cpu coolers holes arent much either

 

 

 

 

 

He literally showed you that you physically cannot fit the HEDT CPU die on the desktop socket. And the green substrate thingy it's mounted on, (known as a PCB), is not free.Take a big PCB like the TRx40 one and put a cheapo die like an Athlon on it and the PCB could easily end up costing more than the Die mounted on it. When you get down to the scale of CPU dies you start running into some serious issues with capacitance and other little things that require very exacting standards. All that means you can't just use a cheaper PCB for the cheaper processors and guarantee it will all work fine, (also a lot of the cost is tied to the pure physical dimensions).

 

And thats before we get into the issue that if you put a dual channel CPU in a quad channel board there is no physical way to avoid having some of the RAM slots disabled with the dual channel mode as the CPU chipset has nothing to do with the functioning of that. Ditto for many of the PCI-E slots, (EPYC doesn't even have a motherboard chipset from what i understand, the motherboard is just a set of electrical connections and mounting slots for everything).

 

You can have all the different Motherboard chipsets you want. It isn't going to change the fact that some CPU's will have most of their features disabled in some boards. And with the memory controller at least it may well be the case that a quad channel memory controller doesn't function well in a dual channel configuration, (and capacitance issues might create problems for dual channel in quad channel for that matter).

 

And all this is ignoring the VRM differences or the issues for small form factor that a big socket creates.

 

In the end everything would be just as segmented as now because what boards a given CPU would work in would still have to be restricted, just all using the same socket and with everything but the HEDT CPU's costing more.There's no advantage to it if all it does is make things cost more and make small form factors harder or impossible. Why would anyone ever want either of those things?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Is 10900k going to be the first in a while "mainstream" CPU to hit 300w power draw? 

9900k already can reach 250w when overclocked and I doubt binning can help Intel in this case


Ex-EX build: Liquidfy C+... R.I.P.

Ex-build:

Meshify C – sold

Ryzen 5 1600x @4.0 GHz/1.4V – sold

Gigabyte X370 Aorus Gaming K7 – sold

Corsair Vengeance LPX 2x8 GB @3200 Mhz – sold

Alpenfoehn Brocken 3 Black Edition – it's somewhere

Sapphire Vega 56 Pulse – ded

Intel SSD 660p 1TB – sold

be Quiet! Straight Power 11 750w – sold

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×