How important is socket compatibility (CPU upgrade path) to you?

[Arachnotronic]

Motherboard manufacturers would of course rather sell you a new motherboard than provide continued updates to old boards.

Yes. Updating the BIOS and qualifying new CPUs on the old socket is a lot of work for the mobo manufacturers, and they get paid exactly zilch for it.

 

[Indus]

This here is the answer. I've had many motherboards die after a few years in service and the only options were to either get gouged for a new old stock board, buy dodgy used boards, or throw the CPU out... hate throwing perfectly good chips out.

I did upgrade CPU's a few times during the P2/P3/Athlon days, perhaps it's not as important during times when the 90% marketshare leader has been limiting their top mainsteam offering to 4C/8T for what seems like forever, but now with them going from 4C/8T to 6C/12T to 8C/16T within a comparative blink of an eye (with what looks like a new chipset/socket for each step) even the most ardent fanboys have to be grinding their teeth.

Man you must have terrible luck with boards.

But then again I always used Gigabyte boards. I have some still running after 14 years.. Pentium Northwood 1.6 which oc'ed to 2.4. I also have a core 2 duo with a gigabyte running as my print server.

 

[CHADBOGA]

This here is the answer. I've had many motherboards die after a few years in service and the only options were to either get gouged for a new old stock board, buy dodgy used boards, or throw the CPU out... hate throwing perfectly good chips out.

It is "an" answer.

I've never updated just the CPU in my system and I am not sure if I ever will, but sure I have nothing against the ability to do that, but as it is not a burning need for me, I give it literally ZERO weight, in what CPU & motherboard I will buy to start things off.

 

[ezodagrom]

When I buy a new CPU/motherboard, I want them to last as long as the memory cycle at the time (for example, once I get a Coffee Lake based system, I want it to last until DDR5 reaches mainstream), so socket compatibility is something that doesn't matter for me at all.

 

[StrangerGuy]

I mostly buy budget boards so ~$100 every 3 years is peanuts to me.

Besides ever since I started this hobby in 2001, there has been exactly zero instances where I felt worthwhile to change the CPU without buying a new mobo.

 

[WildW]

Not really any more. Back when MHz was doubling every year, sure, but recent CPUs barely get any faster from one year to the next, barring major revolutionary jumps for which you'd expect a new board.

My 2500k is coming up to it's sixth birthday next week. More upset about the cost of DDR4 than of a new motherboard, though I can see why it's time for a change.

 

[Arachnotronic]

Upgrade path is nice, but it's not something that affects my purchase decision. I like the new features that I get with new platforms/motherboards.

 

[scannall]

Upgrade path is nice, but it's not something that affects my purchase decision. I like the new features that I get with new platforms/motherboards.

What new features in the last several generations?. There really haven't been any worth mentioning. The next generational things will be DDR5 and PCIe4/5. Which will hopefully happen at the same time.

 

[sandorski]

I like having it, but it usually works out that I upgrade only after a complete platform change. It was more important and actually used back in the Socket A days.

 

[mikeymikec]

Like another poster here I made a lot of use of processor upgrades personally in the days of socket A: 1800+, 2500+, 3200+.
For customers I've made a little use of it in the era of socket 939/AM2, going from single to dual core.
AM3 has yielded the most benefit for customers, going from say an Athlon II X2 250 to an X4 640 or X6 960T.

I once tried to make use of it on my wife's Intel rig; she started on a Pentium G620 (Sandy), the board (ASUS P8H67-M PRO) listed Ivy compatibility, I picked a processor on the supported list (i3 3220 or 3225 IIRC), did all the required dances and jigs of double BIOS updates etc, nothing. A year or two later I picked up a 2550K for her on ebay which should do her until the end of that board's days.

So mainly in a business context I would make more use of it if I could, but since I got burned I'm a little more shy of trying it even if official support is listed (ASUS were of no help, I expected this frankly). I'd stick to the same generation of CPU and that's it.

Since embracing Intel for my PC builds since Sandy came along, I've normally recommended i3s until Kaby, I made use of the G4650 once IIRC, now it's either a Pentium or an i5 depending on the customer's budget. I build for the long term generally speaking, the vast majority of my builds have still being going after 8 years, I replaced a 2004 build last year though which I was quite impressed with

As I try to recommend a good long-term processor choice these days I doubt I'll be doing CPU upgrades much in future, though I suppose if Intel i5s drop considerably in price before they reach paperweight status there may be some Pentium/i3 -> i5 upgrades on the cards at some point.

 

[Topweasel]

Not really any more. Back when MHz was doubling every year, sure, but recent CPUs barely get any faster from one year to the next, barring major revolutionary jumps for which you'd expect a new board.

My 2500k is coming up to it's sixth birthday next week. More upset about the cost of DDR4 than of a new motherboard, though I can see why it's time for a change.

I wonder how much of our distaste of upgrading CPU's in a socket is caused by the last 7 years of no competition from AMD. Ignoring the 8700k which exists either as foresight or solo intention, there have been so few improvements from CPU to CPU that we have it now ingrained that there is little demand to upgrade within a socket. Because of that the idea that just between a single pin for whatever reason Intel states that the socket "had" to be changed, it wasn't an issue. Who cared if Haswell didn't work in your board, or Skylake, or Kaby lake. We are talking about 5 years before a tangible upgrade, and no one expects a socket to last 5 years.

But then we look at the possibility of Ryzen 3 (Zen 2) being a borderline 5GHz CPU with 12 cores. That's a 50% increase in cores (heh like the 8700) and a 25% increase in clockspeed. Coming at a time that memory and PCIe lane speed isn't going to change much. So there isn't a whole lot of reason to swap out the board.

Not even saying that is really worth it either. But food for thought. We used to get tangible differences within a socket. That has changed. But maybe it didn't need to and maybe at least on one side of the isle we might see if that holds true.

For me it's not the most important thing. I didn't get my 1700 with a plan to swap it out. I am more likely to get a Zen 2 based TR than upgrade the 1700. I also have been extremely lucky to not have failures in my personal computers mobo wise. So I haven't had a whole lot of reasons to worry about board availability. That said if I was still using my 3930k as my primary machine, I would be panicking if the board dies because finding a good X79 board nowadays is so difficult. But who knows, knowing that my board might be able to support the next big thing, makes me feel better. Because what if the next big thing is something decent. Instead of gutting my computer to put that in I can upgrade that and go much cheaper with the supporting parts for my 1700 in whatever system I plan it into.

 

[DaveSimmons]

I upgraded a CPU or two in the socket 370 and slot 1 days but nothing in at least the last decade, so zero importance for me.

 

[Sable]

you know, I thought it did. It used to. I was mildly conned into buying an 83mhz overdrive but it DID make a big difference to my 486sx33.

Since then, AMD Xp1700 to 2400 was also good.

BUt I've had my 2500k for so long motherboards have totally changed. THAT'S the reason to upgrade.

Was chatting with one of my colleagues today. We agreed we buy the PC for now to be good for the next 5 years +. By that time it's a total system upgrade.

Unless something changes in the next few years the same reasoning will apply. Buy for now. It depends on use case. Need big multicore go AMD (again, use case and budget). But need to drop an 8 core intel in same socket is meaningless. Barring crazy changes in ability to code for multicore there's no need.

Server multi core business then yes, you want to be able to buy a 16 core and then pop in a 32+ core in a couple of years.

 

[SPBHM]

the last 3 motherboard I bought for my main PC were the cheapest possible options, so I'm kind of OK with the idea of having to upgrade both CPU and MB for a newer gen of CPUs
if you buy higher end boards I think it's more of a problem.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I upgraded my Socket 775 rigs twice, and would have been three times, but I was too lazy / didn't want the downtime to replace the CPUs for an interim upgrade.

Would have been: E2140 @ 2.8-3.2 -> E5200 -> Q9300. I skipped the E5200 upgrades though.

 

[WildW]

That said if I was still using my 3930k as my primary machine, I would be panicking if the board dies because finding a good X79 board nowadays is so difficult.

This is actually a much better argument for wanting longevity in a CPU socket. Not the ability to upgrade but to be able to keep using a perfectly good CPU if the motherboard dies after a couple of years.

 

[TheGiant]

This is actually a much better argument for wanting longevity in a CPU socket. Not the ability to upgrade but to be able to keep using a perfectly good CPU if the motherboard dies after a couple of years.

i7 3930 was released in q4 2011. Do you really remember a time when a motherboard for a 6 years old cpu was accessible without problems? so many changes - chipsets, voltage requirements even with the same sockets, ram speed or even ram type etc...

old parts are more expensive and you can buy a new mb, cpu and ram that has the performance for the same or even less price
and the work with the replacement is the same, because you still need to get everything out of the case...

 

[Mr Evil]

...Do you really remember a time when a motherboard for a 6 years old cpu was accessible without problems?..

Not long ago, my old AM3 motherboard died. I replaced it with a new motherboard that was released only last year, which supports CPUs from as long ago as 2009. Because of that, my old CPU will remain useful for many more years.

 

[Topweasel]

This is actually a much better argument for wanting longevity in a CPU socket. Not the ability to upgrade but to be able to keep using a perfectly good CPU if the motherboard dies after a couple of years.

Exactly the cheapest way for me to maintain my performance of that machine would mean spending 120 on 32GB of DDR4, 120-140 for a motherboard with the featureset I needed, and a 1600 for $200. It's a far cry from the 1k that those parts cost me originally to get that setup. But that's $450 for a solution that a board that I could maybe find for a little less than $200 if it was still being used today was available.

 

[bigboxes]

Exactly the cheapest way for me to maintain my performance of that machine would mean spending 120 on 32GB of DDR4, 120-140 for a motherboard with the featureset I needed, and a 1600 for $200. It's a far cry from the 1k that those parts cost me originally to get that setup. But that's $450 for a solution that a board that I could maybe find for a little less than $200 if it was still being used today was available.

Show me where you are getting 32GB of DDR4 for $120.

 

[LTC8K6]

Not long ago, my old AM3 motherboard died. I replaced it with a new motherboard that was released only last year, which supports CPUs from as long ago as 2009. Because of that, my old CPU will remain useful for many more years.

You still bought a new motherboard though.
If you had not had to, you would have an ancient AM3 mobo of questionable reliability.

 

[Topweasel]

Show me where you are getting 32GB of DDR4 for $120.

It's roughly what I paid for it when I purchased my 1700 setup in march. If it's worse then it just furthers my point. I spent $100 4.5 years ago on the DDR3 in my 3930k system.

 

[Ferzerp]

Less than zero. I am a frequent upgrader (every 2 years or so), but I cannot recall a single time where platform upgrades have not provided a compelling reason to replace the motherboard when rebuild time came along. It can be a pretty big detriment due to having to design CPUs to support the old design choices.

 

[mindless1]

Depends. I'm not usually an early adopter of a platform but the earlier into it I build a system, the larger the performance: dollar ratio to upgrade CPU later as newer faster CPUs drop in price. Plus I put a lot of thought into the PCI/PCIe slots (never mATX) so some features I can add as I go along.

You still bought a new motherboard though.
If you had not had to, you would have an ancient AM3 mobo of questionable reliability.

Meh, the box I'm typing on right now has a 7 year old Asus AM3 board in it and I have no reason to suspect its reliability. Back in the old days I used to heavily overclock, even epoxy on heatsinks where there weren't any, strap fans blowing across VRMs, etc, but in recent years I've ran boards well within their margins and the board manufacturers switching to solid/polymer capacitors has helped lifespan a lot too.

Come to think of it the last motherboard failure I had was more of an open ended lack of support, when Abit went under I had an IP35-E board that only half supported the E2180 CPU I had in it overclocked by 50%. It had some screwy memory bug where if there was a power outage it would take a dozen attempts to get it to post, then it was fine again after it made one successful post (until next power outage) and no the battery wasn't low, and clearing CMOS / stock CPU speed didn't matter.

 

[PeterScott]

Zero. Even as someone that likes to run computers into the ground.

My 2008 C2Q is the least problematic part.

The old motherboard is more of a pain than the old CPU.

The old MB has USB-2, SATA II, slow DDR-2 memory. That is actually much more noticeable in day to day usage than the CPU which is still fine for much of my usage.

Unless you are buying the lowest end CPU today, you are unlikely going to see a significant difference when you upgrade in the future, as you are stuck with old everything else.