Intel's 12th-gen Alder Lake CPUs rumored to use LGA 1700 socket, replacing LGA 1200 after...

[midian182]

Rumor mill: Are you considering buying one of Intel’s newly revealed 10th-gen Comet Lake desktop processors? If so, you’ll need a new Z490 motherboard that comes with the LGA 1200 socket, but if rumors are to be believed, these will only support a couple of generations of processor families, with 12th-gen Alder Lake CPUs switching to the LGA 1700 socket.

Soon after the new Core i9-10900K CPU was officially revealed last week, we heard that the 400-series motherboards it requires would also support 11th-gen Rocket Lake processors, which is when Intel will finally catch up with AMD by offering PCIe 4.0 support.

According to recent reports, lit-tech, a Taiwanese company that provides voltage regulation test tools to Intel in the Asia-Pacific market, has confirmed the LGA 1200 socket will only be used for two generations of processors. The site has listed a number of future Intel CPUs, including the codename for Alder Lake-S with a description revealing it supports the LGA 1700 socket.

?????
ADL-S 45x37.5mm LGA1700.

— 比屋定さんの戯れ言@Komachi (@KOMACHI_ENSAKA) January 2, 2020

The LGA 1200 socket has a lot in common with its predecessor. It comes with just 49 more pins and has identical 37.5mm x 37.5mm dimensions as LGA1150—it’s why coolers work with both sockets. With LGA 1700, however, there are rumored to be some big changes, including the chip shape changing from a square to a rectangle (45.00mm x 37.5mm), meaning no support from existing boards or coolers.

Alder Lake is rumored to launch in early 2022, though it might be later than that given we still have Comet Lake and Rocket Lake before then. The CPUs are said to mark Intel finally moving away from the 14nm process node and onto 10nm++. It’s also rumored to use a mix of big and little cores, with eight high-powered cores, eight energy-efficient ones, and integrated graphics (8+8+1), and later versions might support PCI 5.0 and DDR5 RAM.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/85081-intel-alder-lake-12th-gen-cpus-rumored-use.html

 

[Buhaj]

Intel makes the same processor on a new socket, AMD makes a new processor on the same socket.

 

[Tyrchlis]

Rob, you're so biased that your eyes are turning Red. Honestly, when is the last time Intel users expected multiple generations of CPU support across a single premium motherboard in the mainstream? Was it even in modern times at all? What was your snark even about "Buying 400 series won't be happy..." Pfffft. If anybody is buying a 400 series expecting more than a single CPU generation out of it, regardless of what Gigabyte says, they are fooling themselves.

Since Nehalem, we haven't seen a major architecture stretch past a single socket yet. AMD users are spoiled on that and sometimes forget Intel users must match chipset to CPU generation still, and have had to do so for some time. Personally, I think AMD is doing it right on that, Intel is grubbing money a bit on that front. Undeniable. However, Intel users have put up with it since i7 was born. The last time we saw multiple generations on Intel chipsets was Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad, not really generational, just more cores, but back then it was a big deal and saw many P35 motherboard owners upgrading. Those were the end days for upgrading CPUs on Intel based motherboards.

So yeah, praise AMD for using sockets right. But don't act like Intel requiring new motherboards every new CPU generation is something new or frustrating for Intel users. We're used to it or we wouldn't still be using Intel, now would we?

 

[mbrowne5061]

Rob, you're so biased that your eyes are turning Red. Honestly, when is the last time Intel users expected multiple generations of CPU support across a single premium motherboard in the mainstream? Was it even in modern times at all? What was your snark even about "Buying 400 series won't be happy..." Pfffft. If anybody is buying a 400 series expecting more than a single CPU generation out of it, regardless of what Gigabyte says, they are fooling themselves.

If people are being asked to buy a new socket/motherboard every generation or two, why shouldn't they consider all their options? You have to buy a new motherboard if you want a new CPU, so why not consider a platform that lets you upgrade your CPU and motherboard independently of one another? Back when the performance difference between Intel and AMD was miles apart in Intel's favor, sure they could take the 'what are you going to not - not upgrade?' route. Now that performance is at least comparable across price points, Intel's strategy is foolish at best from a business perspective - you want your customer to reconsider their tools as infrequently as possible, unless you can ensure that they will pick your tools for their upgrades.

 

[Tyrchlis]

If people are being asked to buy a new socket/motherboard every generation or two, why shouldn't they consider all their options? You have to buy a new motherboard if you want a new CPU, so why not consider a platform that lets you upgrade your CPU and motherboard independently of one another? Back when the performance difference between Intel and AMD was miles apart in Intel's favor, sure they could take the 'what are you going to not - not upgrade?' route. Now that performance is at least comparable across price points, Intel's strategy is foolish at best from a business perspective - you want your customer to reconsider their tools as infrequently as possible, unless you can ensure that they will pick your tools for their upgrades.

There is nothing new for Intel users in this. Name the last generation of chipset for Intel mainstream premium that carried more than one generation. You cannot since Nehalem. This is nothing new, and won't sell Intel users to change. AMD is doing sockets right, that doesn't change Intel user minds, hasn't changed their minds in over a decade, and likely won't change their minds anytime soon.

Making a point of it the way it was above was pure bias, it was digging in the insult on Intel, nothing more. Old news used to dig new pain. Not necessary or very effective in the eyes of those of us who are not new to this.

 

[Tyrchlis]

Do you know what WILL be the nail in Intel CPU users who buy for gaming? AMD taking a solid generation of gaming IPC AND clock speed together with Ryzen. It's not impossible. And even potentially likely with AMD's process lead. But it's not there yet. Selling socket upgradeability is just dodging that final truth that AMD is so close to finally achieving, I hate seeing it cheapened this way...

For the record, the instant that happens, I dump Intel and come back to AMD. It is not the case yet. But it is happening. And until then, when I see cheap shots, I will call them such.

I am excited that AMD is back in the running and on the verge of catching and maybe passing Intel in this next generation, but the wording in the title above implicated that those with their minds already set on a 400 series chipset are somehow going to even be FAZED by the news that it will only support one or maybe two generations of CPU is not news to them at all, and hardly upsetting.

 

[Shadowboxer]

Rob, you're so biased that your eyes are turning Red. Honestly, when is the last time Intel users expected multiple generations of CPU support across a single premium motherboard in the mainstream? Was it even in modern times at all? What was your snark even about "Buying 400 series won't be happy..." Pfffft. If anybody is buying a 400 series expecting more than a single CPU generation out of it, regardless of what Gigabyte says, they are fooling themselves.

Since Nehalem, we haven't seen a major architecture stretch past a single socket yet. AMD users are spoiled on that and sometimes forget Intel users must match chipset to CPU generation still, and have had to do so for some time. Personally, I think AMD is doing it right on that, Intel is grubbing money a bit on that front. Undeniable. However, Intel users have put up with it since i7 was born. The last time we saw multiple generations on Intel chipsets was Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad, not really generational, just more cores, but back then it was a big deal and saw many P35 motherboard owners upgrading. Those were the end days for upgrading CPUs on Intel based motherboards.

So yeah, praise AMD for using sockets right. But don't act like Intel requiring new motherboards every new CPU generation is something new or frustrating for Intel users. We're used to it or we wouldn't still be using Intel, now would we?

This site has been biased for quite a while. When AMD edges out Intel it “thrashes” or “demolishes” them. But when the reverse is true it’s “barely within margin of error” or “faster but you wouldn’t notice”.

Completely agree with you here too, this isn’t news. It would be news if Intel stopped limiting socket compatibility. This article is an attempt to make Intel look bad. If it was balanced there would have been some mention to the AMd users who own motherboard made by manufacturers who have chosen not to release a bios for the newer parts. And these people exist. In fact I think this is why Intel now changes the socket up all the time, to keep things simple, I don’t think selling a few extra very low margin chipsets is really going to make much difference to their current record breaking profits they get from their enterprise customers.

There has even been cases pointed out on GPU tests that when compared to AMD cards the results are slightly worse for Nvidia cards than when the Nvidia cards were compared against each other. I’m not bothered enough to check it out but I believe the author blamed drivers for the discrepancy.

I just roll with it. The benchmarks are still usually quite accurate. Very few people are unbiased.

 

[Irata]

This site has been biased for quite a while. When AMD edges out Intel it “thrashes” or “demolishes” them. But when the reverse is true it’s “barely within margin of error” or “faster but you wouldn’t notice.

I think you are confusing the comment section where some posters describe a 10% gaming lead as „destroying“ while a 100% lead in productivity has no real life implication with the articles.

 

[ShagnWagn]

Rob, you're so biased that your eyes are turning Red. Honestly, when is the last time Intel users expected multiple generations of CPU support across a single premium motherboard in the mainstream? Was it even in modern times at all? What was your snark even about "Buying 400 series won't be happy..." Pfffft. If anybody is buying a 400 series expecting more than a single CPU generation out of it, regardless of what Gigabyte says, they are fooling themselves.

Since Nehalem, we haven't seen a major architecture stretch past a single socket yet. AMD users are spoiled on that and sometimes forget Intel users must match chipset to CPU generation still, and have had to do so for some time. Personally, I think AMD is doing it right on that, Intel is grubbing money a bit on that front. Undeniable. However, Intel users have put up with it since i7 was born. The last time we saw multiple generations on Intel chipsets was Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad, not really generational, just more cores, but back then it was a big deal and saw many P35 motherboard owners upgrading. Those were the end days for upgrading CPUs on Intel based motherboards.

So yeah, praise AMD for using sockets right. But don't act like Intel requiring new motherboards every new CPU generation is something new or frustrating for Intel users. We're used to it or we wouldn't still be using Intel, now would we?

Agreed. Just report the news. I don't care what brand something is. I just want the facts. Please don't try to manipulate people by injecting your personal opinions on how we should think. The fake "news" outlets, or tabloids they should be called now, do this and it's terrible. Leave the opinions to us, or maybe post your own in the comment section instead. Thank you for sharing the information though. I think 2022 is going to be the year to replace my 2015 rig.

 

[Cooe14]

There is nothing new for Intel users in this. Name the last generation of chipset for Intel mainstream premium that carried more than one generation. You cannot since Nehalem. This is nothing new, and won't sell Intel users to change. AMD is doing sockets right, that doesn't change Intel user minds, hasn't changed their minds in over a decade, and likely won't change their minds anytime soon.

Making a point of it the way it was above was pure bias, it was digging in the insult on Intel, nothing more. Old news used to dig new pain. Not necessary or very effective in the eyes of those of us who are not new to this.

It was bullshit back during Nehalem and it's bullshit now. There is absolutely NO TECHNICAL REASON for them to change sockets this often. They could build a future proof socket like AMD's, but they don't. And the reason they don't is to sell more motherboard chipsets, Ethernet NICs, etc... And why shouldn't we keep calling Intel's anti-consumer behaviors out? You're literally saying we should just keep accepting being reamed up the butt because "that's the way it's always been"? That's SERIOUSLY your argument here??? O_o If anyone's biased here, it's you lol.

 

[war59312]

Well no surprise there. Intel at it's finest. Business as usual.

 

[grumblguts]

Why no one is buying them.
takes a pretty stupid person to buy intel today.

 

[Evernessince]

This site has been biased for quite a while. When AMD edges out Intel it “thrashes” or “demolishes” them. But when the reverse is true it’s “barely within margin of error” or “faster but you wouldn’t notice”.

Completely agree with you here too, this isn’t news. It would be news if Intel stopped limiting socket compatibility. This article is an attempt to make Intel look bad. If it was balanced there would have been some mention to the AMd users who own motherboard made by manufacturers who have chosen not to release a bios for the newer parts. And these people exist. In fact I think this is why Intel now changes the socket up all the time, to keep things simple, I don’t think selling a few extra very low margin chipsets is really going to make much difference to their current record breaking profits they get from their enterprise customers.

There has even been cases pointed out on GPU tests that when compared to AMD cards the results are slightly worse for Nvidia cards than when the Nvidia cards were compared against each other. I’m not bothered enough to check it out but I believe the author blamed drivers for the discrepancy.

I just roll with it. The benchmarks are still usually quite accurate. Very few people are unbiased.

Well given that AMD wins by anywhere from 30% to 120% in power consumption to multi-threading performance, that diction makes sense. Intel wins by 3% in gaming, that's all they got. Facts are facts.

There were the usual suspects on the Techspot comments section saying that even Intel's small lead in gaming performance "obliterated" or "demolished" AMD. I didn't see you then debating their use of vocabulary then, especially given that was far more objectively incorrect. In fact I'm pretty sure you rubber stamped your like on those comments yet here you are complaining about this.

 

[Lionvibez]

This is not surprising coming from Intel this is standard practice for them.

 

[Squid Surprise]

Here's the thing... the % of people who upgrade their CPU while keeping the same motherboard is minuscule. Intel makes most of their money by selling to businesses... and the % there is even smaller!

Enthusiasts are basically the only people who upgrade their CPU on the same motherboard - and they'll buy whichever CPU is best regardless - so no incentive for Intel to make their lives easier...

Yes, it would be nice if there was a universal socket that EVERY CPU would fit in... maybe one day that will even be a reality... but not any time soon.

 

[pit1209]

Here's the thing... the % of people who upgrade their CPU while keeping the same motherboard is minuscule. Intel makes most of their money by selling to businesses... and the % there is even smaller!

Enthusiasts are basically the only people who upgrade their CPU on the same motherboard - and they'll buy whichever CPU is best regardless - so no incentive for Intel to make their lives easier...

Yes, it would be nice if there was a universal socket that EVERY CPU would fit in... maybe one day that will even be a reality... but not any time soon.

In the meantime one more reason to go to the competition that offers the option they are reluctant to adopt.

The fact Intel has been making a joke out of customers since forever don't justify their actions specially when they are not the top chipmaker anymore.

 

[Squid Surprise]

In the meantime one more reason to go to the competition that offers the option they are reluctant to adopt.

The fact Intel has been making a joke out of customers since forever don't justify their actions specially when they are not the top chipmaker anymore.

For sure - a smart, INDIVIDUAL, purchaser should definitely seek out AMD for most use cases....
But Intel doesn't really care - and they ARE the largest chip maker... AMD is still MUCH smaller... unless you're counting ARM, Apple or Samsung - the largest PC chip maker is clearly Intel.

 

[Lounds]

Well given that AMD wins by anywhere from 30% to 120% from power consumption to multi-threading performance. Intel wins by 3% in gaming. Facts are facts.

There were the usual suspects on the Techspot comments section saying that even Intel's small lead in gaming performance "obliterated" or "demolished" AMD. I didn't see you then debating their use of vocabulary then, especially given that was far more objectively incorrect. In fact I'm pretty sure you rubber stamped your like on those comments yet here you are complaining about this.

I think the point is that there's more to computers than gaming. The majority of the world uses computers for work or education not for gaming.

 

[poohbear]

There is nothing new for Intel users in this. Name the last generation of chipset for Intel mainstream premium that carried more than one generation. You cannot since Nehalem. This is nothing new, and won't sell Intel users to change. AMD is doing sockets right, that doesn't change Intel user minds, hasn't changed their minds in over a decade, and likely won't change their minds anytime soon.

Making a point of it the way it was above was pure bias, it was digging in the insult on Intel, nothing more. Old news used to dig new pain. Not necessary or very effective in the eyes of those of us who are not new to this.

The point is Intel should reconsider things given the competition. Would we have ever seen an 8core/16 thread i7 @ $300 this soon if it wasn't for AMD? Absolutely not! Likewise, pretty sure they can stretch their mobos to 2-3 cpu generations like the competition.

 

[kiwigraeme]

What's not to like to keeping m/bs - sure you use to be able to get one for $60 - and a higher quality one for say $200 .

Why buy a $400 CPU now and put it in a cheap M/B -

Place all the associated parts are more expensive - 1tb M2 drives , HQ ram, BT, lots of sata , usb3 , usb c, fan controllers , heat sinks , vrm, wi/fi 6 , PCIe 4 etc -
Plus HQ capacitors and connectors .

I love the fact I can upgrade my 3700x to next gen if I so wish - buy a cheap m/b eg 470 to throw 3700x in to give to family .

M/Bs are not some lame DDR2 memory that has outstay it's welcome - It's a serious investment .

If intel users are hapy to buy a CPU for $400-$500 + a new M/B for $200 to handle O/Cing to claw out a few more FPS - them let intel harpoon them

 

[Evernessince]

Enthusiasts are basically the only people who upgrade their CPU on the same motherboard - and they'll buy whichever CPU is best regardless - so no incentive for Intel to make their lives easier...

Yes, it would be nice if there was a universal socket that EVERY CPU would fit in... maybe one day that will even be a reality... but not any time soon.

You are forgetting all the businesses buying Q (business chipset), H, and B chipsets. The reason older Intel CPUs fetch such a high price is because businesses are upgrading to a better CPU on their existing platform. For them, the high cost is worth it because the cost to upgrade the platform, reinstall windows, ect is far higher. I'd say there are far more business machines being upgraded to a better CPU on the same platform then enthusiasts.

I don't really see how this is going to help Intel's position when selling to businesses either. You can buy Intel and be forced to upgrade the platform for every computer in your business and re-image all the computers or you can buy AMD and simply drop in a new CPU. You are looking at saving anywhere from 1 - 2 hours of man time per machine by not having to remove then install the motherboard and then re-installing the OS from your company's image. That's assuming there are no issues. The more variables you introduce, the higher chance of a failure. Each part of the process has percentages of inherent failure. New motherboards have a DOA rate, sometimes imaging will fail or have an issue. With the AMD setup you are looking at significantly lower exposure to risk by not having to replace the platform your company has been using and not having to re-install the OS.

All this are just a fraction of the consideration a business should look at when evaluating which products to use. TCO is lower on AMD platforms as well. They also don't have monthly security vulnerabilities. You also get more bang for your buck. The only thing Intel has going for it is track record. It's been around in the CPU space for a long time with heavy investment.

Clearly Intel is aware of this, they cut their HEDT product prices in half and their next gen consumer CPUs and dropping prices again. No one is asking Intel for a universal socket, people are asking Intel to have enough foresight to think 3 years into the future and have a socket that can accommodate that. You have to wonder about the security and performance of a product with a design that only looking at performance in the now instead of pushing the next generation.

 

[Puiu]

Rob, you're so biased that your eyes are turning Red. Honestly, when is the last time Intel users expected multiple generations of CPU support across a single premium motherboard in the mainstream? Was it even in modern times at all? What was your snark even about "Buying 400 series won't be happy..." Pfffft. If anybody is buying a 400 series expecting more than a single CPU generation out of it, regardless of what Gigabyte says, they are fooling themselves.

Since Nehalem, we haven't seen a major architecture stretch past a single socket yet. AMD users are spoiled on that and sometimes forget Intel users must match chipset to CPU generation still, and have had to do so for some time. Personally, I think AMD is doing it right on that, Intel is grubbing money a bit on that front. Undeniable. However, Intel users have put up with it since i7 was born. The last time we saw multiple generations on Intel chipsets was Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad, not really generational, just more cores, but back then it was a big deal and saw many P35 motherboard owners upgrading. Those were the end days for upgrading CPUs on Intel based motherboards.

So yeah, praise AMD for using sockets right. But don't act like Intel requiring new motherboards every new CPU generation is something new or frustrating for Intel users. We're used to it or we wouldn't still be using Intel, now would we?

It's not that Intel changes the socket, it's that they do it for absolutely no reason. It was proven that they could have offered both backwards and forwards support for their CPUs. The changes in socket are all designed to sell more mobos.

 

[Carmaine]

Rob, you're so biased that your eyes are turning Red. Honestly, when is the last time Intel users expected multiple generations of CPU support across a single premium motherboard in the mainstream? Was it even in modern times at all? What was your snark even about "Buying 400 series won't be happy..." Pfffft. If anybody is buying a 400 series expecting more than a single CPU generation out of it, regardless of what Gigabyte says, they are fooling themselves.

Since Nehalem, we haven't seen a major architecture stretch past a single socket yet. AMD users are spoiled on that and sometimes forget Intel users must match chipset to CPU generation still, and have had to do so for some time. Personally, I think AMD is doing it right on that, Intel is grubbing money a bit on that front. Undeniable. However, Intel users have put up with it since i7 was born. The last time we saw multiple generations on Intel chipsets was Core 2 Duo to Core 2 Quad, not really generational, just more cores, but back then it was a big deal and saw many P35 motherboard owners upgrading. Those were the end days for upgrading CPUs on Intel based motherboards.

So yeah, praise AMD for using sockets right. But don't act like Intel requiring new motherboards every new CPU generation is something new or frustrating for Intel users. We're used to it or we wouldn't still be using Intel, now would we?

Agree. Does Rob not know that Intel averages 2 generations per socket since.....2008? Lol

 

[Evernessince]

Agree. Does Rob not know that Intel averages 2 generations per socket since.....2008? Lol

That doesn't make it any better in comparison to the competition. Any complaints lobbied at Intel for forcing customers to upgrade their entire platform are completely valid given that a competitor with a fraction of the revenue is providing twice the length in socket longevity.

No amount of name calling from Tyrchlis to the author will change those facts.

 

[OortCloud]

Ridiculous article and would never have been made had this been about AMD.
New sockets every couple of years/generations are pretty standard and not just from Intel.