I didn't watch the video, but why would you choose it based on the motherboard? Both will have pretty much the latest features.
I think I will chose AMD or Intel based on the motherboard as opposed to the CPU. Anyone else feel that way?
I didn't watch the video, but why would you choose it based on the motherboard? Both will have pretty much the latest features.
I don't trust enthusiast CPUs from Intel either, what with all the murders they've been responsible in the past couple of years. One of them escaped from prison recently and has killed again! I think it was Jimmy "The Leggs" Johnson, a 5820K. They're bad apples I tell you. They come from the bad side of the fab.
I didn't watch the video, but why would you choose it based on the motherboard? Both will have pretty much the latest features.
They have 3. H110, H170, and Z170. The B150, Q150, and Q170 are business/corporate orientated. Not really targeted for "consumers". With the kaby lake launch, they are introducing H270 and Z270 to support additional PCI-E lanes as their main difference. Then of course there's the business fleet of chipsets too, the B250, Q250, and Q270.Intel needs to do away with having 8 different chipsets for the consumer MOBOs.
That can go both ways depending on what you're basing their performance on.In fact they can perform worse.
Thunderbolt 3 came out after the X99 was released/announced. So not having native support is understandable. X99 cost more because it offers more.The MOBOs are more expensive and the consumer platform received Thunderbolt 2 and Thunderbolt 3 before the enthusiast MOBOs.
No.Intel is doing it backwards in my opinion.
So... you complain about the LGA2011 for too expensive, but you want to get rid of the more budget friendly socket? Getting rid of one doesn't make the other cheaper.I say get rid of the LGA 1151 and stick with the 2011.
Had you bother to watch the video they could simply make an inexpensive chipset and a highend chipset for the LGA 2011 and eliminate the LGA 1151. Having two different platforms came about less than 10 years ago. There is no need for it.They have 3. H110, H170, and Z170. The B150, Q150, and Q170 are business/corporate orientated. Not really targeted for "consumers". With the kaby lake launch, they are introducing H270 and Z270 to support additional PCI-E lanes as their main difference. Then of course there's the business fleet of chipsets too, the B250, Q250, and Q270.
That can go both ways depending on what you're basing their performance on.
Thunderbolt 3 came out after the X99 was released/announced. So not having native support is understandable. X99 cost more because it offers more.
No.
So... you complain about the LGA2011 for too expensive, but you want to get rid of the more budget friendly socket? Getting rid of one doesn't make the other cheaper.
I can tell you're not good at doing business.
Intel will make more money but it does not benefit the customer. They used to have the same LGA platform with high-end and low-end chipsets available. There was no need to change other than make more money.
I think you're a little too focused on the pure tech specs and not the business behind this. Having separate platforms for professionals/businesses and consumers makes a lot of sense for numerous reasons. Intel has had pretty crap competition and naturally we've seen their prices climb as they dominate the market. Can't really blame Intel for making superior products and profiting off it, they are a business after all.
Gotcha, I jumped in this thread late so might have misinterpreted you initially. Also ask anyone here, I'm a big AMD fan and am really excited for Zen. If it performs as anticipated then I'll definitely be dropping some cash on a platform upgrade. I really like them as a company, but their CPU's have sucked for a while comparatively.That is my point dude. Intel could do what they wanted because of lack of competition from AMD. That is why Intel has so many bat shit crazy chipsets. With the new Zen series I think Intel will have to follow suit. I don't think it is wise to have the H series, the B series, the Z series the X series and all the other crap load of chipsets and on top of that LGA 2011 and 1151. They way Intel was going for the last eight years was good for Intel. No one said other wise. I am saying AMD's Zen series should make things interesting. I will probably opt for AMD or Intel based based on who has the better paradigm but you can do what you want.
I'd like to think so but the 8xxx processors didn't really do that at all when they first came out. Only just now starting to frequently use all 8 cores on my 8320, and that's mainly a result of consoles moving towards more cores.I think the AMD Zen series will finally make 8 core and 16 core CPUs mainstream. After Intel released the Core 2 Quad in 2006 I and many others thought by 2012 we would have 16 core CPUs for $600.00 but without competition the prices don't drop.