Feel bad for anybody who bought one of these. Spent a whole lot of money for no upgrade path and a platform that's mostly outperformed for a fraction of the price by Coffee Lake :\
Not the way you seem to define it. Upgrade path is the path on the same platform to something more powerful. If I get a Celeron CPU, my upgrade path is a Pentium, i3, i5, i7. You seem to mean upgrade path as in being able to put next generations CPUs into the same socket? Or use the same CPU with the next gen chipset? The first one seems to rather narrow minded while the second one just seems stupid.
Actually AM4 & TR4 are guaranteed support through 2020's Ryzen 4th Gen (Zen 2+, 7nm+ [potentially 7nm EUV]) as long as AMD sticks to their current roadmap & promises. Also the tech behind it pretty much guarantees 4th Gen will be AM4/TR4's last hurrah, as AMD's faux-tick/tock rollout schedule prevents Ryzen 4th Gen as a tweak & process enhancement refresh (Zen 2+) from making significant arch changes, aka like those required for DDR5 support; which AMD has said will deliniate the socket/platfrom transition. Aka just like AMD's roadmap says, Zen 3 / Ryzen 5th Gen is where the switch to DDR5 (and thus IMC) & a new socket/board platfrom will occur.
(And I'm assuming when you said Ryzen 2 you meant Zen 2, aka the microarch of Ryzen 3rd Gen? Right? Zen (microarch) ≠ Ryzen (brand-name; think "Intel Core" for the other side of the fence). Not that it's impossible, but if they name official 7nm Zen 2 CPU line, "Ryzen 2" just a year after calling the previous line "Ryzen 2nd Gen" I'd be both extremely shocked & rather disappointed in AMD's marketing team lol.)
No that is not what you call an upgrade path. That is not very clear and subjective. If someone buy a i7-7700K then he doesn't have an upgrade path on the othe hand person with i7-7600K have an upgrade path to i7. So it's person specific. You can't generalize that. On the other hand if the same socket supports next gen CPU then you can generalize that the person with kaby lake has an upgrade path to cannon lake. That is what upgrade path means. i5 7th to i7 7th is an upgrade on the same path or architecture on the other hand i5 7th to i7 8th means an upgrade in a different path, hence called the upgrade path. So it means, yes you can upgrade your CPU depending on what you have but you don't necessarily have new upgrade path.
The very definition of upgrade 1. raise (something) to a higher standard, in particular improve (equipment or machinery) by adding or replacing components. "upgraded computers"
Having an upgrade path isn't CPU centric, generational or base on difficulty. If there is a way to upgrade it, you got an upgrade path. Whether its worth it or not is a different matter.
If you go from a Celeron to an i7 that's a massive upgrade. If you go from a Sandy i7 to an Ivy i7 on the same board, you get the new generation but typically just a few % more performance. Why should that be a legitimate "upgrade" whereas +100 to +200% performance is not? This narrow mindset comes from the single core days, where only new generation could be substantially better. This is simply not true any more.
I can completely understand Upgrading Graphics card - but CPU - I only did that original IBM PC and that was not much upgrade of all. I completely understand to upgrading the lower end i3 and maybe i5 to i7 once they are cheaper.
Initially when I purchase a dell dual Pentium Pro machine, I thought I could buy another CPU - but I never did it - but when I got my Xeon 5160 machine, I purchase two but never upgraded them even though bios/motherboard supported it.
We've done it several times at work with our Linux diskless workstations.
Start with an AMD Sempron. Upgrade the CPU to an Athlon64. Upgrade some stations to an Athlon64 X2.
Start with an AMD Athlon-II X2, upgrade some stations to an X3 or an X4.
Much less expensive (and less time-consuming) to purchase a CPU and more RAM than a completely new motherboard+CPU+RAM+case, etc. And easier to validate the hardware configuration. It's one of the reasons we've stuck with AMD systems so long.
We've done this a few times with servers as well. Start with a dual-processor motherboard and single-core CPUs. Then upgrade to quad-core CPUs. Or 8-core CPUs. Or 16-core CPUs. The G34 socket help up surprisingly well (so long as you were OK PCIe 2.x, USB 2.x, and DDR3) over the years. Granted, the Bulldozer-based Opterons weren't always an upgrade, but it still made hardware validation a breeze.
There are actually x299 boards out there which say "KBL-X only". They tend to be the cheapest x299 boards around, albeit of course in the end you really got exactly the same as with an ordinary z270 board - neither the chipset nor the cpu is actually really different...
I dunno about the outperformed by coffee lake claim. The big boys still need x299 to make the world go around (film, industry, finance, engineering, physics)
Of course that's true: better process, higher frequency, 2 more cores, bigger cache. X299 gets you twice the memory channels, but Kaby-X can't use them.
This is why buying Intel seriously sucks...I sincerely feel bad for anyone who bought into this platform..very soon, 8700k users will be shit out of luck too when for whatever reason the new 8 core Coffee Lake CPU needs a new socket...not that hard to support a socket for 3-4 years.
Apparently, it's hard for Intel to build a socket that lasts 3-4 years. My whole understanding of the main difference between the 100/200 chipsets and 300 chipsets is that its the same socket with a more robust pinout because Intel never planned for the 100/200 to support a six core processor. To make this whole stupid situation even more tragically hilarious, Intel never planned to release an eight core processor for the 300 chipset when they rushed it out one quarter early, so now we are getting a 390 chipset for those eight cores. Everyone who bought a 300 chipset is on old technology and in the same boat that 100/200 chipset owners were in before them.
It's not that they can't do so, it's that they've decided that the extra cost of building in a what-if capability that maybe 0.1% of people who buy a system will use isn't worth increasing the cost for the other 99.9%.
Specing minimum power delivery levels beyond what any current chips are rated for requires more capable power circuits. Supporting 2 generations of DDR requires extra pins on the sockets and 2 memory controllers on the CPU. Keeping chipset/cpu pairings back compatible for 4 years instead of 2 requires either freezing the interface for twice as long or making every newer generation part in the family capable of talking to both the current state of the art and all older members of the family.
With something like 99.9% of CPUs going into systems that will stay paired with the same mobo until they're scrapped together, Intel's decided that increasing BOM costs for every system build and increasing engineering costs for every new product launch aren't worth it.
Intel can make a socket that lasts 3-4 years, but the platforms that house those sockets are generally only good for one or at best two generations of processors since Sandy Bridge. I get the whole idea of Tick Tock being a architecture\process node thing, and that changing architectures would rally in new platforms...but it wasn't always the case. Previously Intel had generational compatibility with previous platforms going back at least 3 generations. I mean, the 440BX was able to control FOUR generations of processors across three different manufacturing nodes.
AMD is even more forgiving to end users, having only had two fundamental sockets (AM and FM, with that weird F socket for certain FX series CPU's) and and 3 platform types among them from 2009-2016. The majority of later AM2 boards (AM2+) were actually upgradable to AM3 via BIOS, something Intel never did, but promised, with the 80-series chipsets.
What I'd like to see from Intel is a motherboard with long-term-service / upgrades offered. It would catch many consumers with a sense of value-for-money, instead of losing-out to AMD on such items. But it seems the bigger the corporation, the less clued-in the marketing department.
<edit> much longer rant deleted that listed X99 as half-baked.
I've been running my 2500k for seven years, I'm sure the people who bought these can run these for ten years, or can afford to change their motherboard.
except that a cpu upgrade for the majority is not a significant upgrade year over year or even every 2 years. Take 6700k to 8700k which is by far the most significant jump we've had in a while and even then, the average DYI builder will likely not see a significant performance gain. The real upgrade is the platform. Switching from a Z170 to a Z370 you get some significant upgrades, as much as 3 m.2 ports, a much better I/O panel, simply visually compare a z170 board vs a z370 similar board and you will see what im referring to. People complaining about the platform change, tbh i get it, it sucks but in no way i would want to stick with a 2-3 year old board (even if it was possible) when I upgrade.
A K6 200 to a K6-2 300, about twice as fast at quake2 because of 3dnow.
A Phenom x3 to an x4. higher clocks and an extra core.
That's it. Both times it was AMD. In every other case I bought a new board with the processor. Honestly this is the first year upgrading intel cpu's would be interesting. More cores, faster spectre/meltdown, etc. But - I'd be wanting to replace Sandy bridge/nehalem/haswell chips with something in the same socket and ddr 3 support. And that's just not going to happen. Same with Ryzen in AM3+. I could upgrade a few AM3+ systems with Ryzen for a meaningful upgrade but that's not an option.
If they made a DDR3 ryzen or coffee lake board on the cheap I could get behind upgrading a few older systems. Having to buy DDR4 is the killer.
Wow intel discontinue not even one year old cpu. No Specific upgrade path and support. Intel is milking even big time with their new cpu. How no one seeing this
It makes sense because it was a useless product but try telling those that just bought these CPU's that oops you are now at EOL but hey we got some shiny new things for you to sink your money into if you want. SO yes I feel bad for those that bought these pieces of crap CPU's
You guys really borked x299 in almost every possible way.
1. Rush to market before MAJOR QA finished just to compete with unexpected rival = Check 2. Release consumer chip that made entire HEDT line virtually irrelevant = Check 3. Announce NEXT HEDT chipset less than a YEAR after x299 rollout = Check
X99 was a solid a long-lived platform. But I'm thinking I'll be stepping away from your 'ol chipset shuffle for a while.... Cause geez, while I'm considering Coffee Lake for my upgrade, you've already revealed a replacement for Z370 as well!! ? Why would I buy an 8700k now when I am virtually certain Z370 won't be able to run your inevitable 8-core mainstream cpu?
Because the next gen of Intel CPUs won't be gimped by Spectre/mentdown patches, and I want the next fast i7. And... I'm ready to upgrade now because my current gear still has some decent resale value. Therefore, my soon to be spent money needs to be spent on a platform with at least the possibility of a CPU upgrade, it would just suck to put my $ into a dead-end platform. I upgraded both my z97 and x99 rigs twice each... X470 will give me that kind of breathing room.
Intel took what was a fairly clear delineation, beginning with the 5th generation parts, that if you wanted more than 4 cores/8 threads, you had to invest in the X-series CPU and PCH. For whatever reason, Intel simply pitched that logic out the window with the 7640X and 7740X.
Intel had to know that without at least some sort of unique value proposition (more L3 cache than the 7700K, more PCIe lanes, an Iris Pro iGPU) that simply cherry-picking higher binned/clocked 7700Ks was not going to cut it with X-series users. Compounding the problem further, you could spend ~$60 USD more to move up to the Core i7-7800X, get 2 additional cores, a smidge more L3 cache and 12 extra PCIe lanes, which completley negates any cost savings when comparing with the 7740X.
The takeaway for me is that I begin to wonder if Intel understands what kind of user buys an X-series CPU and motherboard. I see two distinct groups - gamers and professionals, who both shy away from committing to the Xeon line, for obvious reasons (general suitability to task, no Quick Sync, overall higher cost and lack of access to certain CPUs at the consumer level). Perhaps these distinct groups are one in the same, but the common denominator is that they want/need/desire something more than the top of the line Core i7 consumer CPU offers them.
In the future, Intel should seriously consider eliminating the six-core SKU when it releases the next generation of X-series CPUs (8xxxX) and move to all Core i9 branding as a marketing differentiator. I also hope that Intel would resist any further Core i9 branding for non X-series CPUs. Having only one CPU - a 45-watt part at that - being called a Core i9 (the 8950HK) seems downright silly to me when you leave your most powerful Core-series CPU (the 8700K) as a Core i7 part.
All in all, I see the Kaby Lake X-series failure as a lesson to be learned for Intel. I do not have any delusions that they will.
Intel this week revealed plans to discontinue its Kaby Lake-X processors. The chips will not be supported by the company’s upcoming X399 platform for high-end desktops, so initialization of their EOL program is not surprising.
Download mx player, If you are an Android user, you know there are two methods for installing an application. The first one i the direct method using the official Play Store and the second one is sideloading the app with the help of an APK file.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
40 Comments
Back to Article
rtho782 - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
A relatively pointless product to begin with that only served to muddy the X299 water, this was made entirely pointless by 8700k.Good riddance.
MajGenRelativity - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
I agree wholeheartedlySamus - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Feel bad for anybody who bought one of these. Spent a whole lot of money for no upgrade path and a platform that's mostly outperformed for a fraction of the price by Coffee Lake :\Death666Angel - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Wait, no upgrade path? Isn't every Sky Lake X CPU an upgrade path with more cores?A Certain Someone - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
In that context, the 3rd gen core i5 user have a upgrade path to a core i7. You know what upgrade path means, don't you?Death666Angel - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Not the way you seem to define it. Upgrade path is the path on the same platform to something more powerful.If I get a Celeron CPU, my upgrade path is a Pentium, i3, i5, i7.
You seem to mean upgrade path as in being able to put next generations CPUs into the same socket? Or use the same CPU with the next gen chipset? The first one seems to rather narrow minded while the second one just seems stupid.
ACE76 - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Ryzen and Ryzen + all work on x370 and B350 boards...and Ryzen 2 will also...what point are you trying to make?Cooe - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Actually AM4 & TR4 are guaranteed support through 2020's Ryzen 4th Gen (Zen 2+, 7nm+ [potentially 7nm EUV]) as long as AMD sticks to their current roadmap & promises. Also the tech behind it pretty much guarantees 4th Gen will be AM4/TR4's last hurrah, as AMD's faux-tick/tock rollout schedule prevents Ryzen 4th Gen as a tweak & process enhancement refresh (Zen 2+) from making significant arch changes, aka like those required for DDR5 support; which AMD has said will deliniate the socket/platfrom transition. Aka just like AMD's roadmap says, Zen 3 / Ryzen 5th Gen is where the switch to DDR5 (and thus IMC) & a new socket/board platfrom will occur.(And I'm assuming when you said Ryzen 2 you meant Zen 2, aka the microarch of Ryzen 3rd Gen? Right? Zen (microarch) ≠ Ryzen (brand-name; think "Intel Core" for the other side of the fence). Not that it's impossible, but if they name official 7nm Zen 2 CPU line, "Ryzen 2" just a year after calling the previous line "Ryzen 2nd Gen" I'd be both extremely shocked & rather disappointed in AMD's marketing team lol.)
A Certain Someone - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
No that is not what you call an upgrade path. That is not very clear and subjective. If someone buy a i7-7700K then he doesn't have an upgrade path on the othe hand person with i7-7600K have an upgrade path to i7. So it's person specific. You can't generalize that.On the other hand if the same socket supports next gen CPU then you can generalize that the person with kaby lake has an upgrade path to cannon lake. That is what upgrade path means. i5 7th to i7 7th is an upgrade on the same path or architecture on the other hand i5 7th to i7 8th means an upgrade in a different path, hence called the upgrade path.
So it means, yes you can upgrade your CPU depending on what you have but you don't necessarily have new upgrade path.
Manch - Thursday, May 3, 2018 - link
The very definition of upgrade 1. raise (something) to a higher standard, in particular improve (equipment or machinery) by adding or replacing components."upgraded computers"
Having an upgrade path isn't CPU centric, generational or base on difficulty. If there is a way to upgrade it, you got an upgrade path. Whether its worth it or not is a different matter.
MrSpadge - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
+1If you go from a Celeron to an i7 that's a massive upgrade. If you go from a Sandy i7 to an Ivy i7 on the same board, you get the new generation but typically just a few % more performance. Why should that be a legitimate "upgrade" whereas +100 to +200% performance is not? This narrow mindset comes from the single core days, where only new generation could be substantially better. This is simply not true any more.
Eletriarnation - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Yeah, definitely an upgrade path there - just an expensive one.Death666Angel - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
The whole platform is expensive, that's kind of it's reason d'etre. If you want reasonable prices, get the consumer grade platform. :)Death666Angel - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
*raisonHStewart - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
I can completely understand Upgrading Graphics card - but CPU - I only did that original IBM PC and that was not much upgrade of all. I completely understand to upgrading the lower end i3 and maybe i5 to i7 once they are cheaper.Initially when I purchase a dell dual Pentium Pro machine, I thought I could buy another CPU - but I never did it - but when I got my Xeon 5160 machine, I purchase two but never upgraded them even though bios/motherboard supported it.
phoenix_rizzen - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
We've done it several times at work with our Linux diskless workstations.Start with an AMD Sempron. Upgrade the CPU to an Athlon64. Upgrade some stations to an Athlon64 X2.
Start with an AMD Athlon-II X2, upgrade some stations to an X3 or an X4.
Much less expensive (and less time-consuming) to purchase a CPU and more RAM than a completely new motherboard+CPU+RAM+case, etc. And easier to validate the hardware configuration. It's one of the reasons we've stuck with AMD systems so long.
We've done this a few times with servers as well. Start with a dual-processor motherboard and single-core CPUs. Then upgrade to quad-core CPUs. Or 8-core CPUs. Or 16-core CPUs. The G34 socket help up surprisingly well (so long as you were OK PCIe 2.x, USB 2.x, and DDR3) over the years. Granted, the Bulldozer-based Opterons weren't always an upgrade, but it still made hardware validation a breeze.
mczak - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
There are actually x299 boards out there which say "KBL-X only".They tend to be the cheapest x299 boards around, albeit of course in the end you really got exactly the same as with an ordinary z270 board - neither the chipset nor the cpu is actually really different...
Morawka - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
I dunno about the outperformed by coffee lake claim. The big boys still need x299 to make the world go around (film, industry, finance, engineering, physics)MrSpadge - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Of course that's true: better process, higher frequency, 2 more cores, bigger cache. X299 gets you twice the memory channels, but Kaby-X can't use them.MrCommunistGen - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Someone already beat me to it, so I'll second it: "Good riddance."ACE76 - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
This is why buying Intel seriously sucks...I sincerely feel bad for anyone who bought into this platform..very soon, 8700k users will be shit out of luck too when for whatever reason the new 8 core Coffee Lake CPU needs a new socket...not that hard to support a socket for 3-4 years.kwerboom - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Apparently, it's hard for Intel to build a socket that lasts 3-4 years. My whole understanding of the main difference between the 100/200 chipsets and 300 chipsets is that its the same socket with a more robust pinout because Intel never planned for the 100/200 to support a six core processor. To make this whole stupid situation even more tragically hilarious, Intel never planned to release an eight core processor for the 300 chipset when they rushed it out one quarter early, so now we are getting a 390 chipset for those eight cores. Everyone who bought a 300 chipset is on old technology and in the same boat that 100/200 chipset owners were in before them.DanNeely - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
It's not that they can't do so, it's that they've decided that the extra cost of building in a what-if capability that maybe 0.1% of people who buy a system will use isn't worth increasing the cost for the other 99.9%.Specing minimum power delivery levels beyond what any current chips are rated for requires more capable power circuits. Supporting 2 generations of DDR requires extra pins on the sockets and 2 memory controllers on the CPU. Keeping chipset/cpu pairings back compatible for 4 years instead of 2 requires either freezing the interface for twice as long or making every newer generation part in the family capable of talking to both the current state of the art and all older members of the family.
With something like 99.9% of CPUs going into systems that will stay paired with the same mobo until they're scrapped together, Intel's decided that increasing BOM costs for every system build and increasing engineering costs for every new product launch aren't worth it.
smilingcrow - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Here, here.smilingcrow - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Hear, hear!Samus - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Intel can make a socket that lasts 3-4 years, but the platforms that house those sockets are generally only good for one or at best two generations of processors since Sandy Bridge. I get the whole idea of Tick Tock being a architecture\process node thing, and that changing architectures would rally in new platforms...but it wasn't always the case. Previously Intel had generational compatibility with previous platforms going back at least 3 generations. I mean, the 440BX was able to control FOUR generations of processors across three different manufacturing nodes.AMD is even more forgiving to end users, having only had two fundamental sockets (AM and FM, with that weird F socket for certain FX series CPU's) and and 3 platform types among them from 2009-2016. The majority of later AM2 boards (AM2+) were actually upgradable to AM3 via BIOS, something Intel never did, but promised, with the 80-series chipsets.
Notmyusualid - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
I think you are pretty much on the money here.What I'd like to see from Intel is a motherboard with long-term-service / upgrades offered. It would catch many consumers with a sense of value-for-money, instead of losing-out to AMD on such items. But it seems the bigger the corporation, the less clued-in the marketing department.
<edit> much longer rant deleted that listed X99 as half-baked.
euler007 - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
I've been running my 2500k for seven years, I'm sure the people who bought these can run these for ten years, or can afford to change their motherboard.HStewart - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
I have a ten year xeon 5160 and the problem is not with the CPU but the sound driver on the Supermicro mother board crashes on boot on Windows 10.So just allowing upgrade of CPU is not always the right way to handle it.
Hxx - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
except that a cpu upgrade for the majority is not a significant upgrade year over year or even every 2 years. Take 6700k to 8700k which is by far the most significant jump we've had in a while and even then, the average DYI builder will likely not see a significant performance gain.The real upgrade is the platform. Switching from a Z170 to a Z370 you get some significant upgrades, as much as 3 m.2 ports, a much better I/O panel, simply visually compare a z170 board vs a z370 similar board and you will see what im referring to. People complaining about the platform change, tbh i get it, it sucks but in no way i would want to stick with a 2-3 year old board (even if it was possible) when I upgrade.
andrewaggb - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
I've bought a lot of computers over my lifetime.I think I've only upgraded a cpu twice.
A K6 200 to a K6-2 300, about twice as fast at quake2 because of 3dnow.
A Phenom x3 to an x4. higher clocks and an extra core.
That's it. Both times it was AMD. In every other case I bought a new board with the processor. Honestly this is the first year upgrading intel cpu's would be interesting. More cores, faster spectre/meltdown, etc. But - I'd be wanting to replace Sandy bridge/nehalem/haswell chips with something in the same socket and ddr 3 support. And that's just not going to happen. Same with Ryzen in AM3+. I could upgrade a few AM3+ systems with Ryzen for a meaningful upgrade but that's not an option.
If they made a DDR3 ryzen or coffee lake board on the cheap I could get behind upgrading a few older systems. Having to buy DDR4 is the killer.
Tkan215 - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Wow intel discontinue not even one year old cpu. No Specific upgrade path and support. Intel is milking even big time with their new cpu. How no one seeing thisshabby - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
Intel + upgrade path = lolEveryone knows intel doesnt provide upgrade paths, they do that in purpose to sell more chipsets.
rocky12345 - Tuesday, May 1, 2018 - link
It makes sense because it was a useless product but try telling those that just bought these CPU's that oops you are now at EOL but hey we got some shiny new things for you to sink your money into if you want. SO yes I feel bad for those that bought these pieces of crap CPU'sPhrogChief - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Dear Intel,You guys really borked x299 in almost every possible way.
1. Rush to market before MAJOR QA finished just to compete with unexpected rival = Check
2. Release consumer chip that made entire HEDT line virtually irrelevant = Check
3. Announce NEXT HEDT chipset less than a YEAR after x299 rollout = Check
X99 was a solid a long-lived platform. But I'm thinking I'll be stepping away from your 'ol chipset shuffle for a while.... Cause geez, while I'm considering Coffee Lake for my upgrade, you've already revealed a replacement for Z370 as well!! ? Why would I buy an 8700k now when I am virtually certain Z370 won't be able to run your inevitable 8-core mainstream cpu?
AMD and X470 is getting my $ this time.
Sincerely,
A Z77, Z97, X99 owner
Ket_MANIAC - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Why would you upgrade from an 8700K to the 8 core? What's the point?PhrogChief - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Because the next gen of Intel CPUs won't be gimped by Spectre/mentdown patches, and I want the next fast i7. And... I'm ready to upgrade now because my current gear still has some decent resale value. Therefore, my soon to be spent money needs to be spent on a platform with at least the possibility of a CPU upgrade, it would just suck to put my $ into a dead-end platform. I upgraded both my z97 and x99 rigs twice each... X470 will give me that kind of breathing room.Zdigital2017 - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Intel took what was a fairly clear delineation, beginning with the 5th generation parts, that if you wanted more than 4 cores/8 threads, you had to invest in the X-series CPU and PCH. For whatever reason, Intel simply pitched that logic out the window with the 7640X and 7740X.Intel had to know that without at least some sort of unique value proposition (more L3 cache than the 7700K, more PCIe lanes, an Iris Pro iGPU) that simply cherry-picking higher binned/clocked 7700Ks was not going to cut it with X-series users. Compounding the problem further, you could spend ~$60 USD more to move up to the Core i7-7800X, get 2 additional cores, a smidge more L3 cache and 12 extra PCIe lanes, which completley negates any cost savings when comparing with the 7740X.
The takeaway for me is that I begin to wonder if Intel understands what kind of user buys an X-series CPU and motherboard. I see two distinct groups - gamers and professionals, who both shy away from committing to the Xeon line, for obvious reasons (general suitability to task, no Quick Sync, overall higher cost and lack of access to certain CPUs at the consumer level). Perhaps these distinct groups are one in the same, but the common denominator is that they want/need/desire something more than the top of the line Core i7 consumer CPU offers them.
In the future, Intel should seriously consider eliminating the six-core SKU when it releases the next generation of X-series CPUs (8xxxX) and move to all Core i9 branding as a marketing differentiator. I also hope that Intel would resist any further Core i9 branding for non X-series CPUs. Having only one CPU - a 45-watt part at that - being called a Core i9 (the 8950HK) seems downright silly to me when you leave your most powerful Core-series CPU (the 8700K) as a Core i7 part.
All in all, I see the Kaby Lake X-series failure as a lesson to be learned for Intel. I do not have any delusions that they will.
PhrogChief - Wednesday, May 2, 2018 - link
Astute analysis.jameswhatson - Thursday, May 10, 2018 - link
Intel this week revealed plans to discontinue its Kaby Lake-X processors. The chips will not be supported by the company’s upcoming X399 platform for high-end desktops, so initialization of their EOL program is not surprising.Download mx player, If you are an Android user, you know there are two methods for installing an application. The first one i the direct method using the official Play Store and the second one is sideloading the app with the help of an APK file.
https://mxplayerappdownload.com/mx-player-apk-down...