• aard@kyu.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      4 months ago

      Intel is well known for requiring a new board for each new CPU generation, even if it is the same socket. AMD on the other hand is known to push stuff to its physical limits before they break compatibility.

      • neo@lemy.lol
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        4 months ago

        But why? Did Intel make a deal with the board manufacturers? Is this tradition from the days when they build boards themselves?

        I thought they just didn’t care and wanted as little restrictions for their chip design as possible, but if this actually works without drawbacks, that theory is out the window.

    • just_another_person@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      4 months ago

      They’ve been pulling this shit since the early days. Similar tricks were employed in the 486 days to swap out chips, and again in the Celeron days. I think they switched to the slot style intentionally to keep selling chips to a point lol

      • turmacar@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        It’s been at least since the “big iron” days.

        Technician comes out to upgrade your mainframe and it consists of installing a jumper to enable the extra features. For only a few million dollars.

        • tal@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          4 months ago

          https://www.cia.gov/readingroom/docs/DOC_0000498114.pdf

          Soviet Computer Technology: Little Prospect for Catching Up

          We believe that there are many reasons why the Soviets trail the United States in computer technology:

          • The Soviets’ centrally-planned economy does not permit adequate flexibility to design or manufacturing changes frequently encountered in computer production; this situation has often resulted in a shortage of critical components — especially for new products.
              • ZombiFrancis@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                4 months ago

                Marginally. The paper analyzes the capabilities as they existed in the 1980s, but doesn’t draw strong conclusions as to why that may be. It does demonstrate how reliance on central planning results in inadequaciea when said central planning is not operating well, though.

                The paper doesn’t really mention it but the central planning of the USSR was actively reeling from Brezhnev dying, Andropov dying, and Chernenko either dying or about to die at the time the CIA thing was written. So yeah, correct is an accurate if imprecise way to put it.

                • captainlezbian@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  4 months ago

                  Yeah it’s more a criticism of the ussr in the 80s. Central planning with more tech focus and more democracy would likely not face that specific issue.

                  But also there’s room for shit like kanban communism which definitely wouldn’t have these problems

  • mlg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    4 months ago

    Turns out, the difference in the socket is just a few pins here and there, and you can make a 8th or 9th generation Coffee Lake CPU work on your Z170/270 board if you apply a few Kapton tape fixes and mod your BIOS,

    Modders giving me a new reason to keep my ye olde z170 mobo instead of just making a new machine with all the nice hardware

  • dan1101@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    4 months ago

    For some reason I don’t think I even knew Intel made motherboards.

    • themoken@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      4 months ago

      They don’t, but they define the socket the processor slots into and probably did this to market the newer chips as more advanced than they are (by bundling a minor chip upgrade with an additional chipset upgrade that may have more uplift).

      I see no other reason to kneecap upgrades like this when upgrading entails the consumer buying more of your product.