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

[Irata]

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.

There was Socket 7....supported Intel, AMD, Cyrix, WinChip.

What happened to it? Here’s from Wikipedia:

”While AMD had previously always used Intel sockets for their processors, Socket 7 was the last one for which AMD retained legal rights. Intel had hoped by discontinuing Socket 7 development and moving to Slot 1 that AMD would be left with an outdated platform, making their processors non-competitive”

 

[pit1209]

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.

What are you referring to with not just from Intel?

The last time I checked the competition offered one socket for 4 generations and pretty substantial performance gains between them, Intel has a history of changing sockets for no reason whatsoever, let's stop the fanaticism and let's deal with facts.

 

[neeyik]

Bit bored tonight, so made this to show that change happens, all the time, no matter what flavour of vendor you fancy. Skipped the bizarre stuff, like Itanium and Xeon Phi.

 

[OortCloud]

What are you referring to with not just from Intel?

The last time I checked the competition offered one socket for 4 generations and pretty substantial performance gains between them, Intel has a history of changing sockets for no reason whatsoever, let's stop the fanaticism and let's deal with facts.

I think the chart kindly provided neeyik says it all.... I'm not a fanatic in any way, I bought a 3700 last Christmas and would say that AMD are absolutely the best value CPU to buy at the moment, but this article suggested that a 2 generation socket was unusual which it clearly isn't. Lets stop the fanaticism and let's deal with facts.

 

[neeyik]

...article suggested that a 2 generation socket was unusual which it clearly isn't.

Arguably, it is for what we've come to expect, of late. Intel have stayed with Socket H5 for 5 years and in that time, it's supported 4 generations of Core processors: Skylake, Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake, Coffee Lake Refresh. AMD have used AM4 for 4 years now, covering 3 generations of chips (Zen, Zen+, Zen 2).

I put the chart up to show that while, 5 years ago, socket changes were regular events from both vendors, matters have calmed down since then. Let's face it: some of Intel's previous changes H2 > H3 > H4 were rather unnecessary.

 

[Irata]

View attachment 86567

Bit bored tonight, so made this to show that change happens, all the time, no matter what flavour of vendor you fancy. Skipped the bizarre stuff, like Itanium and Xeon Phi.

Thanks - an interesting addition would be if in some cases new chipsets were required to use newer CPU on the same socket.

With „use“ I mean that it would run, but not if a chipset was needed to support all its features.

Just in case you are bored ?

 

[Lounds]

From a R&D standpoint having a new processor socket every couple of years seems very expensive and waste of time. Just build a socket with enough bandwidth for what your next 5 year plans are as a company.

 

[neeyik]

Bandwidth isn't the issue - it's the Vcc and GND pins for additional cores that's the problem. Take Intel's LGA 1151 socket: it supports 6th gen Core through to 9th gen, so it was originally designed for a maximum of 4 cores, using dual channel DDR4-2133 at 91W. The last processor to use the socket as 8 cores, DDR4-2666, at 127W.

The same 1151 pins has to cover supply voltages and signalling for both scenarios, despite the fact the 9th gen CPU has double the number of cores and supports faster memory, than the 6th gen. The only way to do this is to design the socket to have a lot of 'reserved' pins at launch. These can then utilised in whatever role is required, as the platform matures.

Prior to 10th gen Core chips, all Intel CPUs with more than 8 cores used LGA 2066 but since that requires the more expensive X299 chipset, they obviously needed to create a new socket that just used an updated 'Z390' chipset but had additional pins to allow more than 8 cores - after all, it's only 49 more pins and the bulk of the LGA 1151 pins are for the memory controller and PCIe interface. The number of PCIe lanes hasn't changed and the supported memory speed is only slightly faster.

It's very much a stop-gap setup for the 10th gen 14nm++ (how many ++ are we on now?) chips, while Intel still resolves their 10 nm production issues. They're obviously confident that they can all be resolved, and the rumoured LGA 1700 socket was almost certainly designed to be released much earlier, along with the 10 nm 10/11th gen CPUs. If it is indeed a 1700 pin socket, then the additional 500 pins will allow for a much longer lifespan than the 1200 one.

 

[Cooe14]

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.

Literally all of AMD's primary sockets (aka for mainstream desktop CPU's [not APU's]) for the past two decades say you're completely full of ****. It's only Intel who changes sockets literally every year or two. AM4 will end up with FOUR compatible generations of chips in it when all's said & done, so even if AMD hadn't already been doing this prior to AM4 (AM3/+ was around forever too [the chart above is stupid misleading by including sockets like the FM ones that used entirely different product families... -_- ]), THE GAME HAS CHANGED! It's simply no longer acceptable to change sockets for no reason other than to milk consumers. How the hell you can support such behavior with a straight face though, is completely beyond me. (Does burning $ for no reason excite you or something???)

 

[Cooe14]

View attachment 86567

Bit bored tonight, so made this to show that change happens, all the time, no matter what flavour of vendor you fancy. Skipped the bizarre stuff, like Itanium and Xeon Phi.

This chart is so damn misleading, it's freaking absurd. The FM sockets were NOT replacements for the AM sockets like Intel's mainstream LGA sockets are. They used entirely different product families & were around concurrently... AND the "+" AM sockets maintained compatibility! If you ACTUALLY know what you're looking at in this chart hurts your argument, not supports it. Both AM2 & AM3 (& the "+" revisions) were around for forever... just like AM4. It explicitly shows how Intel has changed mainstream CPU sockets WAY more often in this century so far (every year or 2 line clockwork).

STOP SUPPORTING & PARROTING INTEL'S BULLSH*T!

 

[mailpup]

@Cooe14, stop shouting.

 

[neeyik]

@Cooe14 - I initially wasn't going to reply to your remarks, given how rude you're being in this thread. However, you do raise some points that are worth addressing. Let's stick to your time frame of 'this century', I.e. from 2000 onwards.

In that period of 20 years, for standard desktop processors, Intel have released 9 sockets, with the longest periods of no change being from 2004 to 2008, and 2015 to 2020; the shortest periods 2000 to 2001, and 2008 to 2009. Going in reverse order:

LGA 1200 - supports 10th gen Core, Pentium, Celeron (so far)
LGA 1151 - supports 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th gen Core, Pentium, Celeron
LGA 1150 - supports 4th, 5th gen Core, Pentium, Celeron
LGA 1156 - supports Nehalem, Westfield Core, Pentium, Celeron
LGA 1366 - supports Nehalem Core i7
LGA 755 - supports Netburst Core, Pentium, Celeron (chipset dependent)
PGA 478 - supports Northwood Pentium, Celeron
PGA 423 - supports Willamette Pentium

Now, let's look at AMD in the same fashion:

AM4 - supports Zen, Zen+, Zen 2, Zen 3 Ryzen, Athlon, some A series
AM1 - supports Jaguar, Puma Athlon, Sempron
FM2+ - supports Kavari, Carrizo, Godavari, Richland, Trinity A-series, Athlon, Sempron
FM2 - supports Richland, Trinity A-series, Athlon, Sempron
AM3+ - supports Bulldozer, Vishera, Callista, Heka Phenom II, FX, A-series
FM1 - supports Llano A-series, Athlon II
AM3 - supports Thuban, Zosma, Deneb, Heka, Callista Phenom II, Athlon II, Sempron
AM2+ - supports Thuban, Zosma, Deneb Phenom II, Phenom, Athlon II, Athlon X2
AM2 - supports Orleans, Manilla, Windsor Athlon X2, Athlon, Sempron
Socket 940 - supports Clawhammer Athlon FX
Socket 939 - supports Venice, San Diego, Manchester, Palermo Athlon X2, Athlon FX, Athlon, Sempron
Socket 754 - supports Clawhammer, Newcastle, Venice, Paris, Palermo Athlon 64, Sempron
Socket A - supports Thunderbird, Palomino, Thoroughbred, Barton, Thorton Athlon, Duron, Sempron

Now I've almost certainly missed off some of the supported processors from the AMD list, as the compatibility list is pretty complex, especially in the older sockets.

At face value, Intel's approach is clear: each socket revision typically only supports a couple of generations, with LGA 1151 being the exception (and this was clearly driven by 10 nm node issues). Intel had to release a new socket for the 10th gen chips, as 1151 just can't support more than 8 cores. However, they're certainly open for criticism as to why they just didn't make them LGA 1700 and be done with in - CPUs don't have to use all of the pins in a socket.

AMD have tried to offer as much backwards support where possible, especially with the AM3 and AM4 line of sockets. At times, though, this approach has been somewhat confusing: for example, the Sempron 3100+ is socket 754, the 3200+ is socket 939, the 3300+ is 754, the 3400+ is 939, etc. Thankfully, this is no longer the case for the vast majority of desktop models - hopefully, AMD will continue with this when they switch to Zen 4 and a new socket.

 

[Irata]

@Cooe14 -
LGA 1151 - supports 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th gen Core, Pentium, Celeron

Isn‘t there a split between LGA 1151 100/200 series and then 300 series with the former supporting 6th / 7th gen and the latter 8th / 9th ? So technically you cannot count this as one socket since it does not have full cross generational support.

Not sure if a 7700k would work in a 300 series board but afaik a 9700k would not work in a 200 series board.

As always, kindly correct me if I am wrong.

 

[neeyik]

No, you're right - I'd missed the chipset restriction. Essentially, it would be like this:

LGA 1151 v2 - supports 8th, 9th gen Core, Pentium, Celeron
LGA 1151 v1 - supports 6th, 7th gen Core, Pentium, Celeron

Pins that were just reserve for Skylake and Kaby Lake became Vcc ones for Coffee Lake. I wonder if the same thing was done with LGA 775?

Edit: Yes it is the same, except worse! I started to try and make some sense of it, but it's horrifically complex - you've got the Core 2 Quad, Core 2 Duo, Core 2 Extreme, Pentium 4 EE, Pentium 4, Pentium EE, Celeron D, Celeron, and Pentium Dual Core all of the 'same' socket, but the chipset restrictions make almost a guessing game as to what processor will work with which motherboard chipset. Some it is broadly compatible, such as the 865 set, but others just cover the Pentium 4, such as the E7205. What a mess.

The original idea behind the chart was to simply show that socket releases are generally quite routine, be it from AMD or Intel, and nothing more than that. Really didn't want this to become such a Pandora's box...

 

[OortCloud]

Literally all of AMD's primary sockets (aka for mainstream desktop CPU's ??)

You need to calm down and go for a long walk - getting that angry about a discussion on CPU's is just not normal!

News just in: AMD just announced that Ryzen 4 series (Zen3) won't support B3xx and B4xx motherboards. The socket is the same but the new CPUs wont work in it. Given that B450 chipset is far and away the bestselling Ryzen platform that's less than ideal and just obsoleted a large proportion of current machines. Not so lovely now eh? As I said I don't have a side. I just buy the best value CPU at the time. (that happens to be Ryzen at moment, but was Intel for a long time before that). Picking sides in corporations is so childish and for some reason has become a huge thing on the Internet. Google or Apple, Sony or MS. etc etc. It's like choosing your favourite Great White as you bob in the water. They are interested in making money for investors and very little else. Sometimes it might appear that they are 'on your side' but that's just marketing spin and will only last as long as they think a bit of good PR is good for their market position.