Urg, damn marketing people, they are the worst! From my experience with them I expect one engineer mentioned it off hand, they lept on it and no one else thought to tell them different, or the management structure treats marketing over engineering. I've personally experienced both multiple times and it is the worst!
Aside from the absolutely ridiculous power consumption of these chips and lack of genuine new features (aside from WIFI 6) they really didn't need to talk crap. I don't know exactly how these will pan out, but the prices are at least headed in the right direction. The 10 core model *should* be level with or beat the 3900x, and that is about all Intel can hope for (aside from the massive power consumption, heat and other caveats). They seem to think that people are uneducated and stupid, which is bad. People these days have the tools to know absolutely everything, simply by sitting back and watching videos online. "Still the gaming champion!" and so on would have done the job well enough. The problem is that pretty much any one knows exactly what this is. It's a 10 core 9900k. Possibly with a higher all core overclock, but running on the ragged edge with boost speeds any way. Mostly because that is all Intel have left. Personally (and from what I have gathered around the net) I would have launched this on X390. Apparently it was easily doable. I would have then saved the "new features only they don't work yet" for Rocket Lake and made more of a noise about that. Marketing things now that don't even work is just well, bizarre.
ITX is worth consideration. If you can get by with one (or two if you use both m.2 slots) x4 expansion slots you can put an m.2-PCIe extender board in the same position the mATX slots would be in the same chassis. A PCIe Bifurcation riser is also an option, taking the x16 slot and turning it into two x8 slots (widely supported since Z170, so can be assumed to be present here too). ITX boards will often have an expanded featureset compared to mATX boards (catering to the high-end SFF market), so unless you really need an x16 slot and one or more x8 slots, then ITX is a viable option. Joke of the week here!
That's the exact reason why you can now get boards that have BIOS flashback, or rather automatic flashing with no CPU installed. That's no reason to buy a whole new board, man.
I guess its their 2 CPU cycle, if they gave Z390 a third series then people will expect it next time. Just easier PR to do it on a new platform.
MOAR SOCKITZ https://www.techradar.com/news/inte...021-leaving-z490-motherboards-out-in-the-cold ALL THE SOCKITZ !
They are worth hundreds of billions, I offer to be them And thats the long and short or it, people can say what they like, Intel are still the largest CPU company in the world and one of the most profitable companies. All these people saying mean things, I think the shareholders, directors and everyone else there are perfectly fine
What I think is interesting is the x490 chipset will do PCIe 4.0 when the 11 series release, but it doesn't need a cooling fan...
Because it only does it on one slot and only does it if the board partner has fitted appropriate re timers which they might not do from the sounds of the anandtech article linked to save dough, unless I misunderstood, so really not that interesting, sounds like a pass to me until a proper chip/chipset comes out unless you are in the market and you just want a fast Intel chip then job done.
From what I've been reading and seeing some of the boards, namely the high end Asus ones, are basically good to go with it. Not that PCIe 4.0 really matters at all...
Two CPU gens per sock, two chipset gens per socket, with interoperability between both. It's been that way for a decade now, that the exact same has been announced for H5 (LGA1200) should be as newsworthy as SHOCKING PHOTOS AS SUN RISES IN MORNING.
No surprise here. Z490 this year, Z590 next year with 11th gen and official PCIe 4, then 12th gen with DDR5.
Eh, I thought it was just for the PCIe 4, (or maybe the fast m2's that seem to have found their way under the chipset heatsink) - enlighten me please
The majority of early generation boards (300 series) don't run Zen 2 chips, and 500 series boards don't run first-gen CPUs period.
A B350 would. Easily. In fact I just looked for the crappiest B320 board I could find and checked the CPU support. https://www.asrock.com/MB/AMD/A320M-HDV/index.asp#CPU Doesn't seem to be any issues at all. I wouldn't overclock a high end CPU, but then whoever bought that board wouldn't want to would they? There's no defending Intel over this. It's a crappy practice that people hated even as far back as the late 90s. When I first got into PCs the best part of it for me was upgrading. Now? I just wait, plug the holes and then build a new PC. But upgrading, especially when you are making a huge jump is awesome. Intel have always been against that. The reason is simple, licensing fees and selling more chipsets. AMD seem quite content to sell a chipset, then sell you more CPUs. Why? because Keller designed Zen from the ground up to be easy to produce and cost efficient. Intel on the other hand are still stuck with their monolithic design. The biggest problem I have with Intel? firstly making it so that you need a really expensive board to overclock with. Secondly, the outlay on your PC. So board, CPU and RAM. Only the RAM can be carried forward. That means you are looking at £1000 for a 10900x and board (which you could buy a 3900x and board for about £600 easily) and then when 10 cores is the old 6 cores you need to do that all over again. I did look at high end Intel stuff when I bought my new PC. I could have gotten roughly the same performance on X299 but the price would have been higher. However? it's a dead end. This "core war" is still going on. It won't be long before AMD can release even higher core counts into AM4, which will leave Intel behind. Well, it will leave them making ever bigger sockets with more pins for their monolithic expensive CPUs. It's just not worth it. Not for the consumer. Remember, these are all dirty tricks they came up with when AMD were not competitive. Like putting crap paste on your CPUs and saying "We can't solder them" which they U turned on so basically they were lying. Now they are soldering CPUs again. Do you mean to tell me they needed AMD to teach them how to do it? of course not.
You literally just picked boards 1 generation older, thus confirmung what I said. I think AMD has screwed itself over, as seriously, how many cores can you increase it to in the next revision? We already have a 64c128t chip that is near useless as no one can utilise that many cores. So sure, they'll add more but it'll be pointless. PCIe 4.0 is basically a gimmick, so what else do they have to add?