Upgrading around a new socket launch

[Sinnlos]

I built my first PC in 2012, and ended up replacing the motherboard and CPU around 2019. At the time, I didn't know much about the product release timelines, and I went with an 8700k. I didn't know at the time that the socket would only be used for only one more generation. I'm looking at upgrading my CPU again, and I definitely want to get a new motherboard as well because otherwise i'd be stuck with at best a 9900K. My question, then, is since it looks like Intel is supposed to release the 1851 socket this year, is it better to get a 1700 motherboard and a 14th gen CPU after the 1851 socket launches (expecting that there will be some price drop), and know that in 5-7 years I will be probably looking to replace everything again, or should I get into the 1851 early and have space to do a probably out of date but still impactful CPU-only upgrade (from a 15th gen to possibly 18-19th depending on how long they keep the socket)? It seems like Intel is changing sockets at a faster pace these days, so to me it seems like a better idea to just get a 1700 now, but I don't know if that logic holds up.

[Agall]

2 minutes ago, Sinnlos said:

I built my first PC in 2012, and ended up replacing the motherboard and CPU around 2019. At the time, I didn't know much about the product release timelines, and I went with an 8700k. I didn't know at the time that the socket would only be used for only one more generation. I'm looking at upgrading my CPU again, and I definitely want to get a new motherboard as well because otherwise i'd be stuck with at best a 9900K. My question, then, is since it looks like Intel is supposed to release the 1851 socket this year, is it better to get a 1700 motherboard and a 14th gen CPU after the 1851 socket launches (expecting that there will be some price drop), and know that in 5-7 years I will be probably looking to replace everything again, or should I get into the 1851 early and have space to do a probably out of date but still impactful CPU-only upgrade (from a 15th gen to possibly 18-19th depending on how long they keep the socket)? It seems like Intel is changing sockets at a faster pace these days, so to me it seems like a better idea to just get a 1700 now, but I don't know if that logic holds up.

If your goal is to have drop-in CPU upgradeability on future generations, I wouldn't be looking at Intel. AMD is still releasing AM4 CPUs which supported ~4 generations (5 with 3D v-cache's launch), and AM5 is projected to support at least 3 generations.

 

For gaming, 3D v-cache right now hold such an advantage, its the defacto choice for any gaming PC. Even if that involves buying AM4 in August 2024 with a 5700x3D. If the 5500x3D actually comes out at a good price, low $100's or so, then AMD will have a stranglehold on the entirety of the PC gaming market.

 

If you had enough, like $600 or so for a new platform, AM5, 7800x3D, and a 2x16GB of 6000MT/sec RAM is just too good to pass up on for a gaming PC. The 9800x3D likely won't be worth the extra $100 or so given how poor Ryzen 9000's launch has been. 

 

Hopefully Intel's '15th gen' is good and they don't go back to replacing sockets every other generation. Even LGA 1700 only saw 2-ish generations, since the difference between 12th and 13th wasn't that great and 13th to 14th was even less. It was no where close to how AM4 was in progress, the difference between even Ryzen 3000 and 5000 being substantial, let alone the previous generations.

[Sinnlos]

20 minutes ago, Agall said:

If your goal is to have drop-in CPU upgradeability on future generations, I wouldn't be looking at Intel. AMD is still releasing AM4 CPUs which supported ~4 generations (5 with 3D v-cache's launch), and AM5 is projected to support at least 3 generations.

 

For gaming, 3D v-cache right now hold such an advantage, its the defacto choice for any gaming PC. Even if that involves buying AM4 in August 2024 with a 5700x3D. If the 5500x3D actually comes out at a good price, low $100's or so, then AMD will have a stranglehold on the entirety of the PC gaming market.

 

If you had enough, like $600 or so for a new platform, AM5, 7800x3D, and a 2x16GB of 6000MT/sec RAM is just too good to pass up on for a gaming PC. The 9800x3D likely won't be worth the extra $100 or so given how poor Ryzen 9000's launch has been. 

 

Hopefully Intel's '15th gen' is good and they don't go back to replacing sockets every other generation. Even LGA 1700 only saw 2-ish generations, since the difference between 12th and 13th wasn't that great and 13th to 14th was even less. It was no where close to how AM4 was in progress, the difference between even Ryzen 3000 and 5000 being substantial, let alone the previous generations.

I'm not interested in switching to AMD at this point, but thanks for the tips. I will keep your advice in mind if I do decide to change.

[Agall]

58 minutes ago, Sinnlos said:

I'm not interested in switching to AMD at this point, but thanks for the tips. I will keep your advice in mind if I do decide to change.

If you're arbitrarily choosing Intel, then I would wait till their next socket than jumping on LGA1700 at this point, especially towards the high end. The higher end 13th and 14th generation CPUs have some severe issues that Intel has known about for years but seemingly hoped it would just go away. Seemingly manufacturing issues as well as firmware based ones that are causing instability and/or premature failure of the CPUs.

 

 

There's been tons of videos out about it in the last few weeks, here's at least one:

 

[starsmine]

1 hour ago, Sinnlos said:

I'm not interested in switching to AMD at this point, but thanks for the tips. I will keep your advice in mind if I do decide to change.

Its not like apple vs android. You the user will notice no difference in terms of software compatibility. its just a platform thing. 
you are changing platform already, it doesn't mater if you get am5 or whatever arrow lake comes out on, its a new platform to you. Only difference is the sticker being red or blue. 

Arrow lake you will have to wait. Intel 13th and 14th gen are unrecommendable until it is known that they are not committing seppuku. 
 

[Sinnlos]

11 minutes ago, Agall said:

If you're arbitrarily choosing Intel, then I would wait till their next socket than jumping on LGA1700 at this point, especially towards the high end. The higher end 13th and 14th generation CPUs have some severe issues that Intel has known about for years but seemingly hoped it would just go away. Seemingly manufacturing issues as well as firmware based ones that are causing instability and/or premature failure of the CPUs.

 

 

There's been tons of videos out about it in the last few weeks, here's at least one:

 

I'm not arbitrarily choosing anything, and I am aware of these issues. Its still outside of the scope of the question that I asked.

[leclod]

2 hours ago, Agall said:

If your goal is to have drop-in CPU upgradeability on future generations, I wouldn't be looking at Intel.

I do agree with you,

But somebody here wrote Intel might still drop some interesting cpus on the socket 1700...

[starsmine]

On 8/20/2024 at 1:27 PM, Sinnlos said:

I'm not arbitrarily choosing anything, and I am aware of these issues. Its still outside of the scope of the question that I asked.

Your question is if you want a platform that you can do drop in replacements for
Am5 is a better approach. you can get cheap zen 4 today, and you can drop in zen5x3d or zen 6/zen6x3d in 4 years for cheap and run that for another 4 years.

or you wait for Arrow lake and do a new build, wait 6 years and replace it all again. We know next to nothing about nova lake, and if that will even be on the same platform. 

Again, not a single person is going to recommend raptorlake untill it is known that it is safe to, which we wont know until after arrow lake in terms of long term viability. Which means it wont be any time soon

it really is 6 of one, half a dozen of the other.

 

  

On 8/20/2024 at 1:52 PM, leclod said:

I do agree with you,

But somebody here wrote Intel might still drop some interesting cpus on the socket 1700...

Bartlett lake rumors have me lost tbh. Im not sure what interest they have to home users given that you lost the E cores.

[Agall]

58 minutes ago, Sinnlos said:

I'm not arbitrarily choosing anything, and I am aware of these issues. Its still outside of the scope of the question that I asked.

Asking a question about drop in CPU upgrades and not expecting a response talking about AMD is like asking a question about electric cars and expecting no one to bring up Tesla.

 

On Intel, expect no drop in upgrades. That's how its been historically, maybe 1 'tock' generation of marginal benefit, but nothing substantial. Drop in CPU upgrades are almost exclusive to AMD in today's world, and its unlikely that it'll change.

 

AMD is unlikely to replicate AM4's longevity with AM5, but they've at least promised a couple more generations for AM5. Intel seemingly find any excuse possible to change the socket, AMD seems to do the opposite and find every way possible to NOT change the socket. That event stretched to making AM5 cooler compatible with most AM4 designs by increasing the IHS thickness to compensate for the reduced Z height of LGA type sockets compared to PGA.

 

I'm no fan boy either way, I've bought several LGA 1700, AM4, and AM5 systems. Just the reality of it.

[Agall]

33 minutes ago, leclod said:

I do agree with you,

But somebody here wrote Intel might still drop some interesting cpus on the socket 1700...

Only reason they'd do that at this point is to provide something their i7/i9 customers can replace their unstable CPUs with, and it'll probably be fabbed by TSMC.

[Sinnlos]

On 8/20/2024 at 2:24 PM, Agall said:

Asking a question about drop in CPU upgrades and not expecting a response talking about AMD is like asking a question about electric cars and expecting no one to bring up Tesla.

 

On Intel, expect no drop in upgrades. That's how its been historically, maybe 1 'tock' generation of marginal benefit, but nothing substantial. Drop in CPU upgrades are almost exclusive to AMD in today's world, and its unlikely that it'll change.

 

AMD is unlikely to replicate AM4's longevity with AM5, but they've at least promised a couple more generations for AM5. Intel seemingly find any excuse possible to change the socket, AMD seems to do the opposite and find every way possible to NOT change the socket. That event stretched to making AM5 cooler compatible with most AM4 designs by increasing the IHS thickness to compensate for the reduced Z height of LGA type sockets compared to PGA.

 

I'm no fan boy either way, I've bought several LGA 1700, AM4, and AM5 systems. Just the reality of it.

Thanks, this is the direct answer that I was looking for. I honestly just walked away for a few days because I basically asked if it was a better idea to buy a chicken or wait for egg prices to drop, and the responses told me that duck eggs are a better investment and I shouldn't even think about chickens. 

I'm not familiar with the difference between the beginning and the end of a socket generation, so thats the biggest point. If i'm basically not going to get much value out of reusing a motherboard on two different CPUs relative to just going to the newer socket, I might as well get in early (accounting for stability issues).

[Agall]

13 hours ago, Sinnlos said:

I'm not familiar with the difference between the beginning and the end of a socket generation, so thats the biggest point. If i'm basically not going to get much value out of reusing a motherboard on two different CPUs relative to just going to the newer socket, I might as well get in early (accounting for stability issues).

There's your problem, you're asking a question no one knows the answer to, likely including Intel themselves. That's where looking at the history of it is important.

 

LGA1700 had a relatively insignificant difference between 12th and 14th generation, was more of a tick tock tock. I wouldn't buy into Intel's newest socket expecting drop in CPU upgrades, I'd say the same for AM5 past the next generation.

 

Another whole problem to consider is CAMM2. I'd expect that to become the standard (or something like it other than DIMMs) to be able to reach maximum performance. It dramatically reduces the trace length to the RAM and having a significant impact on the maximum speed and latency.