Why didn't Intel make any extreme CPU's on the 1150 socket?

dudemiseter182 · 18 Feb 2016 at 16:46

First of all, i'm not a noob. I know that the extreme cpus of this sockets era are using the socket 2011. I have just been wondering why they didn't make an extreme (generally by this I mean 6+ cores and hyper-threading) CPU on the 1150 socket?

I mean, 4790k is great with high clock speeds, 4 cores 8 threads etc. But am I the only one who wants more cores?

linktoinsanity · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:20

At a guess I would say it is probably down to the lack of a market, therefore not worth the effort on Intel's part. Most potential Extreme CPU buyers would probably be on the higher end platform.

joeyjojo · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:27

To differentiate the platforms presumably. Intel love having different platforms for different "users". Lets them control the features and the prices.

Martini1991 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:36

joeyjojo said:
To differentiate the platforms presumably. Intel love having different platforms for different "users". Lets them control the features and the prices.

I don't get the rage in this post, given AMD operate the same with two separate platforms? I get that's going to change in the future, but as it stands, they're the same.

But to answer the OP, it is to have 2 different platforms one for mainstream and enthusiast, and I'm all for that.

dudemiseter182 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:37

I guess so. It's just personally, I would've like to seen something along the lines of a 6 core 12 thread i7 on the 1150 socket. Something like the same internals as the 5820k but obviously only supporting ddr3. Then I guess the ram would be the only main thing to differentiate them by.

Martini1991 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:40

dudemiseter182 said:
I guess so. It's just personally, I would've like to seen something along the lines of a 6 core 12 thread i7 on the 1150 socket. Something like the same internals as the 5820k but obviously only supporting ddr3. Then I guess the ram would be the only main thing to differentiate them by.

I've always seen bandwidth touted as a concern for a 6 core 12 thread Intel on dual channel.

Although I think they've taken a bit too long to have a hexcore on a mainstream platform, given how many sockets we've been through now on the mainstream side of things.

But there will also be technical reasons.

dudemiseter182 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:41

Martini1991 said:
I don't get the rage in this post, given AMD operate the same with two separate platforms? I get that's going to change in the future, but as it stands, they're the same.

This is one of the few reasons I like AMD, they bring the consumer grades and the enthusiast grade hardware closer together. I would like to see something like this done by intel, for instance having all the i7's (inc. extreme ed.), i5's, i3's, pentium's and celeron's, all on the same socket. And then putting the Xeon's on a different socket because they will be predominantly used for different work.

dudemiseter182 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:44

Martini1991 said:
I've always seen bandwidth touted as a concern for a 6 core 12 thread Intel on dual channel.

Although I think they've taken a bit too long to have a hexcore on a mainstream platform, given how many sockets we've been through now on the mainstream side of things.

But there will also be technical reasons.

I understand where you're coming from with this, and I get that the bandwidth limitations of using that socket as opposed to the 2011 socket would mean a reduction in performance, but to be honest that's something I could live with if it meant I could at least see some performance gains of a 6 core, 12 thread CPU on the same socket.

Martini1991 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:45

dudemiseter182 said:
This is one of the few reasons I like AMD, they bring the consumer grades and the enthusiast grade hardware closer together. I would like to see something like this done by intel, for instance having all the i7's (inc. extreme ed.), i5's, i3's, pentium's and celeron's, all on the same socket. And then putting the Xeon's on a different socket because they will be predominantly used for different work.

I didn't know how to reply to this. But I'll give it a shot.

That's a rather simplistic view of things (Bordering on ignorance, no offence.), and I'd research the current state of affairs more.

dudemiseter182 said:
I understand where you're coming from with this, and I get that the bandwidth limitations of using that socket as opposed to the 2011 socket would mean a reduction in performance, but to be honest that's something I could live with if it meant I could at least see some performance gains of a 6 core, 12 thread CPU on the same socket.

This mentality is a little confusing.
Frankly the price difference between the mainstream platform i7 chip and enthusiast entry hexcore is pretty meagre, if you want 6 cores, it's more than affordable at the same price point. (Which in itself is a problem, the Skylake chips are.... Meh price wise)

dudemiseter182 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:49

Martini1991 said:
I didn't know how to reply to this. But I'll give it a shot.

That's a rather simplistic view of things (Bordering on ignorance, no offence.), and I'd research the current state of affairs more.

I don't believe that I was ignorant in my post, I was simply suggesting a concept that could be favorable amongst the majority of intel consumers.

Martini1991 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:50

dudemiseter182 said:
I don't believe that I was ignorant in my post, I was simply suggesting a concept that could be favorable amongst the majority of intel consumers.

By completely ignoring reality, and how the state of affairs are (For both vendors and their respective platforms, and then history etc)

dudemiseter182 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:51

Martini1991 said:
I didn't know how to reply to this. But I'll give it a shot.

That's a rather simplistic view of things (Bordering on ignorance, no offence.), and I'd research the current state of affairs more.

This mentality is a little confusing.
Frankly the price difference between the mainstream platform i7 chip and enthusiast entry hexcore is pretty meagre, if you want 6 cores, it's more than affordable at the same price point. (Which in itself is a problem, the Skylake chips are.... Meh price wise)

That's not factoring in the total cost of the upgrade to the user. The CPU, Mobo and Ram would all need to be changed for the step up to the hexcore+ type CPUs at it's current state.

dudemiseter182 · 18 Feb 2016 at 17:53

Martini1991 said:
By completely ignoring reality, and how the state of affairs are (For both vendors and their respective platforms, and then history etc)

Being open-minded doesn't necessarily mean ignoring reality.

Martini1991 · 18 Feb 2016 at 18:02

dudemiseter182 said:
That's not factoring in the total cost of the upgrade to the user. The CPU, Mobo and Ram would all need to be changed for the step up to the hexcore+ type CPUs at it's current state.

I was comparing brand new.
I don't really know what to say for the rest anymore.

Just saying things without substance lol.

CapitalOne · 18 Feb 2016 at 18:48

Isnt it as simple as the extreme parts being essentially fron the xeon platform?

Apologies if thats my ignorance showing, but always what I had assumed.

Disco_P · 18 Feb 2016 at 21:13

Surely if they made a hexacore for the 115x socket then they'd have to have a separate line making them or have all your lines spending a lot of money making hexacores then disabling lots of cores for the mainstream and budget chips which would be a waste of money.

joeyjojo · 19 Feb 2016 at 08:19

Martini1991 said:
I don't get the rage in this post, given AMD operate the same with two separate platforms? I get that's going to change in the future, but as it stands, they're the same.

But to answer the OP, it is to have 2 different platforms one for mainstream and enthusiast, and I'm all for that.

No rage. Look at any Intel roadmap and they're always split into various tiers, the most artificial distinction being between "mainstream" and "enthusiast" users (which is the difference that the OP is enquiring about). There's no practical reason to split these products up, other than to upsell to LGA 2011.

You mentioned AMD, not me. But I would say that at least AMD have completely separate PC and server lines, without this "enthusiast" premium one in the middle.

pandem0nium · 19 Feb 2016 at 12:57

the mainstream chips are based on mobile parts - efficient low power parts whereas the enthusiast chips are based on server parts.

mmj_uk · 19 Feb 2016 at 16:47

pandem0nium said:
the mainstream chips are based on mobile parts - efficient low power parts whereas the enthusiast chips are based on server parts.

Exactly.

Although I'd say that they ARE mobile parts just in a different physical package.

Caracus2k · 19 Feb 2016 at 17:03

pandem0nium said:
the mainstream chips are based on mobile parts - efficient low power parts whereas the enthusiast chips are based on server parts.

This has certainly been true of late... socket 1366 and 2011 'Enthusiast' chips come from what they can extract from the server lineup. The igu's on even the top end 'consumer' cpu's show their origins from the more power use and integrated component orientated low power/ mobile market. Don't know why people get themselves all in a tissy about Intel differentiating their product lineups as they do. Its just good business sense and engineering sense. A more 'one size fits all' approach would not deliver what different customers would require and it makes some sense to group server/ enthusiast and mobile/ consumer markets.

Intel do seem to be a little to ready to change socket types and or chipsets however..... Take for example skylake and the upcoming 'kabylake' refresh. The high end kaby chips are going to need yet another new motherboard to get the most out of them!

https://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showthread.php?t=18703197