LGA Socket 1700 for Alder Lake-S in 2021?

Discussion in 'Frontpage news' started by Hilbert Hagedoorn, May 4, 2020.

  1. Hilbert Hagedoorn

    Hilbert Hagedoorn Don Vito Corleone Staff Member

    Messages:
    41,856
    Likes Received:
    9,927
    GPU:
    AMD | NVIDIA
    From the looks of it Comet Lake-S and Rocket-Lake-S will be the only two generations processors that will work on the LGA1200 series motherboards, at least that's how it seems right now. That means y...

    LGA Socket 1700 for Alder Lake-S in 2021?
     
  2. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,809
    Likes Received:
    3,366
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    I do not think they need 500 extra pins for power delivery. Would CPU with this configuration have use for 3 memory channels? I guess so.
    Would it be possible to squeeze few more PCIe lanes or direct SATA/USB like Zen has? Sure.

    While I see good reason to bash intel for new socket with every generation, this time new socket may be justified by benefits it provides.
     
  3. asturur

    asturur Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    358
    GPU:
    Geforce Gtx 1080TI
    While i hope to reuse my current MB for an zen3 chip, for the generic market, like 99% of people, a motherboard and a cpu last long. When is time to upgrade, whatever cpu is compatible with a long lasting motherboard is likely too slow.
    If you bought a ryzen first gen, when that is an old platform, it will also be the 3x00 series.

    The new socket is a problem is a topic that is valid just for the people that like to jump at every small perf increase, likely a very few that do not justify any kind of attention from intel.

    I like to bash them too, but i realize is not really important.
     
  4. RavenMaster

    RavenMaster Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,269
    Likes Received:
    170
    GPU:
    1x RTX 3080 FE
    Would be nice if this was 7nm and supported DDR5 RAM and PCI-E 4.0
     

  5. Ricardo

    Ricardo Member Guru

    Messages:
    161
    Likes Received:
    112
    GPU:
    1050Ti 4GB
    That's a pretty superficial analysis. There are many benefits for inter-compatibility of CPUs and MOBOs:

    - Same socket for longer means if your MB breaks, you can still buy a replacement brand new and maybe even with better features, for longer
    - Upgrade path: not everyone buys the best CPUs right off the bat - you could buy a 4 core processor now and then upgrade later while maybe even getting better deals due to waiting and/or going used market - check sandy bridge, it was viable until a few years ago, even though it's almost a decade old, and it was quiet cheap and easy to setup.

    So no, not the majority of people just buy a new CPU and MOBO - many people look for upgrades or replacement parts, and depending on the platform that may be easy or a complete nightmare.
     
  6. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,236
    Likes Received:
    552
    GPU:
    GTX 1070
    Maybe this is simply how Intel is labeling the CPU's going forward? So 8 cores, 8 threads plus one GPU? The big little concept seems a bit weird in these power envelopes since we know from AMD you can fit 16 cores in a 105w TDP. Thats only going to get better on the new nodes. I am very skeptical of big little in anything over 45 watts.
     
    Last edited: May 4, 2020
  7. H83

    H83 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    3,553
    Likes Received:
    934
    GPU:
    MSI Duke GTX1080Ti
    So many sockets...:\ Why canĀ“t Intel simplify things like AMD is doing with a socket for mainstream CPUs and another for "server" ones...
     
  8. EspHack

    EspHack Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,694
    Likes Received:
    127
    GPU:
    ATI/HD5770/1GB
    big little for desktop? sounds like they are realistically planning ahead to work around their current situation if it were to last for longer than what they would hope

    by that i mean a 10900k-type fire hazard bundled with a more reasonable laptop chip so they can avoid looking like AMD with its 5ghz FX thingy that came with a water cooling unit

    that way they can maybe keep claiming best gaming cpu while not burning up your rig on idling browser tabs, having a chip that runs at desktop-like perf while also capable of running for 10 hours on a laptop(4900hs) is what true progress looks like tho
     
  9. JamesSneed

    JamesSneed Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,236
    Likes Received:
    552
    GPU:
    GTX 1070
    If that is true AMD will slaughter them on anything that doesn't run off a battery. Which is why I tend to think if this is true the reported TDP's and uses are limited to laptops and smaller portables if any of it is even true at all.
     
  10. asturur

    asturur Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    358
    GPU:
    Geforce Gtx 1080TI
    I'm still curious ho the LGA 1200 board with 16 pci lanes from the comete lake cpu will support the rocket-lake that has 20 lanes.
    Using the `gave` here seems premature. Let's see what happen.
     

  11. asturur

    asturur Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,140
    Likes Received:
    358
    GPU:
    Geforce Gtx 1080TI
    People that look for replacement parts or look for a deal in used parts are few compared to the majority that just buy a whole ne desktop/laptop.
    That is true.
    The motherboard swap problem does not hit their market, at most it barely scratch it.
    I'm not saying i'm not happy for my long lasting AM4 motherboard, after my long lasting x58 platform. I'm saying that from a selling point of view, the people that gets angry for this are very few. Enthusiast will change anyway, uneducated consumers will change everything anyway. Making long lasting motherboards for them is an effort with very low returns.
     
  12. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,083
    Likes Received:
    2,420
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Finally! I've been wanting something like big-LITTLE for x86 for years. This isn't exactly the approach I'd have wanted (I'd rather have a set of high-frequency with short pipelines, and a set of low-frequency with long pipelines) but this is a good step in the right direction. Whether there really needs to be 8 cores for low power tasks though.... I'm not so sure. That seems a bit overkill. Even ARM doesn't do 8 low-power cores, and their low power cores are computationally inferior.

    This is one of the few cases where I'd give Intel a pass for a new socket. This is an architecturally different approach. Socket 1200 is total crap though and completely unnecessary.
     
  13. Stairmand

    Stairmand Master Guru

    Messages:
    282
    Likes Received:
    115
    GPU:
    nVidia RTX 3090
    I just don't get the point of big.LITTLE for desktops. Laptops yes, but desktops? All that extra silicon and complexity to save a few watts? Current CPUs already clock down pretty aggressively in low power tasks.
     
  14. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,083
    Likes Received:
    2,420
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    Well that's why I said I don't like their approach. I agree that having efficient cores and power-hungry cores for desktop is kinda pointless, but, I think the idea of 2 sets of cores with different capabilities (but otherwise similar power consumption) would make for a much better overall CPU.
    Servers, workstations, and PCs dedicated to gaming (and nothing else) wouldn't need such a thing; they're better off having all cores be exactly the same. But for home, office, and general-purpose PCs, having 2 sets of cores would be very beneficial to maximizing performance and efficiency.
     
  15. user1

    user1 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    1,699
    Likes Received:
    585
    GPU:
    hd 6870
    A little presumptive, we dont really know if amd is going to do a clean switch, am2-am3+ were electrically compatible for the most part, which led to some odd boards that could support athlon64 x2 all the way to bulldozer , provided you have the correct memory installed (ddr2 or ddr3)
     

  16. Fox2232

    Fox2232 Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    11,809
    Likes Received:
    3,366
    GPU:
    6900XT+AW@240Hz
    Today. Efficient vs. Power Hungry is function of clock. Intel's chips are still power efficient at around 3.5GHz, but they are thermal nightmare at 5GHz.
    AMD has chips which have good Power efficiency even at 4GHz, start to be bad at 4,3GHz and 4,5GHz is just pointless waste of energy. (And require quite some unseemly voltage to get there.)

    And since we are in situation where 10% performance sacrifice (lower clock) can result in half power consumption, some extra power efficient cores are not needed.
    And from overclocking perspective, they are even obstruction. As there is good chance they will need separate power delivery and voltage control. BIOS complexity and number of values to check and tune will be unpleasantly high as every such value can be source of instability.

    Then again, My experience with Atoms is sufficient to dislike intel's small, low IPC, low clock cores. Sure, they had ability to idle at 2,5W. But 2,26GHz under full load on 4 cores equaled to 11W and performance was still mediocre at best.
    What do I need extra weak cores on desktop when I have SMT/HT available which prevents OS being choked by game? If we have not had very affordable 8C/16T chips, I could see benefit. But wait time for data processing in SMT/HT will be shorter than on fully free weak core.

    And then comes the caching. Like L1 architecture = easy, it just works (nVidia TM style). But what about L2, L3? When data have to go from slow core to fast, will it take longer than switching from one fast core to another?
    Or will they have linux-like ability to keep threads on same core instead of them being switched around like crazy?
    (Windows needed that behavior long time ago.)

    If we went to make list of all that can go wrong for gaming PC or latency sensitive applications, we would surely conclude that we do not want those weak cores at all.
     
  17. D3M1G0D

    D3M1G0D Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    2,068
    Likes Received:
    1,341
    GPU:
    2 x GeForce 1080 Ti
    Small performance increase? I manage to more than double my computing power from my 1800X to my 3950X - double the core count as well as a substantial IPC increase. This isn't like the old days, when a 1% improvement was enough for a new generation of Lake chips.
     
  18. schmidtbag

    schmidtbag Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    6,083
    Likes Received:
    2,420
    GPU:
    HIS R9 290
    @Fox2232
    Did you not read the post you quoted? Pretty much everything you said there is why I'm saying I don't want low-power cores in a desktop, but rather, equally powerful cores but at different types of tasks. I agree with pretty much everything you're saying but I think you're misinterpreting me.

    Though, I do think a traditional big.LITTLE design would be good for mobile devices (and again, home, office, or general-purpose PCs).
     
  19. sykozis

    sykozis Ancient Guru

    Messages:
    21,934
    Likes Received:
    1,124
    GPU:
    MSI RX5700
    Even if Intel manages do to big.LITTLE correctly, MS will just screw it up anyway..... Modifying the scheduler to send the correct threads to the correct cores is not something I think MS is capable of doing... They're already having a hard enough time releasing an update for Windows 10 that doesn't cause major issues.... Why give them something else to botch???
     
    schmidtbag likes this.
  20. wavetrex

    wavetrex Maha Guru

    Messages:
    1,442
    Likes Received:
    1,087
    GPU:
    Zotac GTX1080 AMP!
    I feel that by the time this socket 1700 is released AMD will be capable of offering 16 equally powerful Zen 4 cores as a "Ryzen 5", while having 24-32 on the "Ryzen 7-9", all these on mainstream platform.
    And each one of them will be 30% faster than existing Zen 2 cores, all running on 5nm TSMC, no "little" ones, while Zen 4 Threadripper will have 64, 96 or 128 of the same powerful cores.

    Intel might be slightly faster in some "gaming scenario", running everything on low on RTX 3080 Ti in a 3 year old game, while obviously losing hard in everything else.

    It will be nice to watch Intel being the loser for a few years ;-) Perhaps they finally wake up... I still remember the Athlon 64 days and how it roflstomped all over Pentium 4. Can't wait to see that happen once again. But ... I'll be much older when it does.
     

Share This Page