Personally my two cents on the matter, I upgrade my CPU so rarely that the idea of keeping the same motherboard just doesn't seem like a thing for me. Years ago when moores law was in full swing, I could see the idea of keeping the MB to be great, but the differences each year are now far smaller, going from a 1600 to 2600 is a nice jump sure. But not one i'd ever make considering the money per the gains. And you have to remember keeping the same MB for many generations can lead to issues, like compatibility, limiting feature sets example PCIE4 not being able to be used to older boards, (maybe secruity issues), i know some AMD MB's had some issue with BIOS memory being too small etc etc, there is sadly only so much one can do. I do think a MB should be able to do at least two generations, but beyond that I feel there might be too many issues and limitations for both the MB vendors and for AMD/Intel to deal with. But considering i went from a 2700k to 8700k and chances are won't jump again till who knows when I can't get my own head round wanting to have a MB support so many generations. This just doesn't appear to me personally, but each to their own, and like i said I don't see why a MB can't support at least two generations, that seems fair to me but Guess sometimes for the evolution of a product a brand new design that doesn't support old hard ware is needed.