Question IF AMD & Intel processors were still compatible...

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,859
180
106
AMD and Intel used their own propriety slots and sockets after their settlement. Socket 370 (Intel) and Socket A (AMD) were physically similar, but electrically incompatible. Likewise Slot 1 (Intel) and Slot A (AMD) were physically similar, but electrically incompatible. But by sharing superficially identical sockets and slots it made it cheaper for industrial partners to support both.

We had Socket 370 to Slot 1 Slockets, and we had Socket A to Slot A Slockets. But you never had AMD to Intel or vice versa Slotkets.
 

zir_blazer

Golden Member
Jun 6, 2013
1,123
366
136
Is Core i5-1035G1 possible in Type 6 with 4 SODIMM slots and 128GB RAM? How much would it cost? What about drivers? It would work in Windows?
I can't answer that directly, but if you bothered to check the EPYC Embedded COM Express Type 7 module I posted before, it has 4 SODIMM Slots and Windows 10 compatibility. Drivers I suppose would be available. Look around for what you like and check its specifications.
Ryzen Embedded supports 1 DPC only so you can do 2 SODIMM with it, not 4. I don't know why AMD limited them that way since they are using the same die than desktop parts that do support 2 DPC.

The problem is costs. The carrier boards are around 500 U$D and the modules themselves another 500 U$D at minimum (If you actually manage to get a public price, since the vendors for embedded stuff works on custom quotes only). I don't actually know either whenever Carrier Boards are universal or not since manufacturers seems to only consider compatibility with their own parts. From a price standpoint it makes ZERO sense.
The point is that you could theorically get inside a standard desktop Case an ATX Carrier Board that could use both Intel and AMD Processors in their own daughterboards and have cross vendor compatibility similar to Socket 7. Seems like the sort of thing that may make sense for a Youtuber doing videos more than any practical purpose.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MadRat

A///

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2017
1,458
1,103
136
Most likely you're thinking of Slockets, but these were for Intel PPro/P2/P3 era platforms. Those were to use Socket 370 or Socket 8 Processors (Pentium Pro) in Slot 1 Motherboards. Heck, there were also some Slot 1 to Slot 2 adapters so that you could put your cheap Pentium 2 in a Pentium 2 Xeon Motherboard. Which is the equivalent of SODIMM to DIMM adapters which currently exist, coming to think about it.
Very likely. I never came across one IRL back in those days and only came across it again in material about 10 years back while reading a computer restoration blog on computers before things became more standardized.
 

MadRat

Lifer
Oct 14, 1999
11,859
180
106
Very likely. I never came across one IRL back in those days and only came across it again in material about 10 years back while reading a computer restoration blog on computers before things became more standardized.
Oh, you missed out then. You could use a Slotket to run Pentium !!! in some boards that did not officially support it. Pentium !!! was surprisingly backwards compatible in places you would have never expected. The BIOS just identified it as an unknown Pentium with MMX support. Some were unlocked so it was easy to get quite a bit of performance out of those old Slot1 motherboards. And some of the original dual-CPU motherboards in Slot1 flavors sporting Intel Northbridge chipsets were extremely favorable over 3rd party chipset boards. The 3rd party Northbridges tended to be much higher latency in comparison. You were truly rocking it to be dual CPU back then.
 

A///

Golden Member
Feb 24, 2017
1,458
1,103
136
Oh, you missed out then. You could use a Slotket to run Pentium !!! in some boards that did not officially support it. Pentium !!! was surprisingly backwards compatible in places you would have never expected. The BIOS just identified it as an unknown Pentium with MMX support. Some were unlocked so it was easy to get quite a bit of performance out of those old Slot1 motherboards. And some of the original dual-CPU motherboards in Slot1 flavors sporting Intel Northbridge chipsets were extremely favorable over 3rd party chipset boards. The 3rd party Northbridges tended to be much higher latency in comparison. You were truly rocking it to be dual CPU back then.
On the contrary, I had tons of fun dealing with bad hardware back in those days.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: moinmoin and MadRat

ElFenix

Elite Member
Super Moderator
Mar 20, 2000
102,263
7,754
126
Still don't know how Cyrix was legally able to launch CPUs ~2 years late on Socket 370 though.
settlement from potential patent issues that VIA had on intel.
On the basis of the IDT Centaur acquisition,[6] VIA appears to have come into possession of at least three patents, which cover key aspects of processor technology used by Intel. On the basis of the negotiating leverage these patents offered, in 2003 VIA arrived at an agreement with Intel that allowed for a ten-year patent cross license, enabling VIA to continue to design and manufacture x86 compatible CPUs. VIA was also granted a three-year period of grace in which it could continue to use Intel socket infrastructure.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
20,486
9,563
136
settlement from potential patent issues that VIA had on intel.
Damn. It really is a shame it took leverage like that just to get Cyrix back onto Intel platforms. And of course by the time Cyrix was able to deliver, it was too little too late, but.

I honestly wish we still had cloner/also-rans building CPUs for Intel or AMD sockets. Even though with so many motherboard features being moved onto the CPU package thesedays, it might be impossible for cloners to keep up.
 

TheELF

Diamond Member
Dec 22, 2012
3,818
642
126
Damn. It really is a shame it took leverage like that just to get Cyrix back onto Intel platforms. And of course by the time Cyrix was able to deliver, it was too little too late, but.
They aren't on the intel platform.
x86 does not belong to intel and anybody can make and sell them if they want to.
All the patents to make one that would be even barely usable for todays world do belong to intel and amd though.
That's also the reason all the clone cpus went away, ever since 486 they just can't keep up with reverse engineering all the things without using any of the original code or design.

The patent suits are just being done for money, or like in this case to negotiate to get access to a different patent that will make them money.
 

PingSpike

Lifer
Feb 25, 2004
21,706
532
126
I meant their motherboard platform. Intel kicked all the cloners off their boards after Socket 7.
Via C3 somehow managed to work with socket 370, although the chipsets were kind of old by the time it was introduced IIRC.

It wouldn't make much difference nowadays, but it would have been nice for awhile.
I'm not so sure. AMD "sort of" has two chipset makers at the moment, Asmedia (contracted) and themselves. The chipsets have some different advantages. I'd certainly appreciate a chipset with better split of lanes or one that didn't have x570's awful power consumption. There probably just isn't enough of a market for it.
 

DrMrLordX

Lifer
Apr 27, 2000
20,486
9,563
136
Via C3 somehow managed to work with socket 370, although the chipsets were kind of old by the time it was introduced IIRC.
check earlier in this thread. VIA basically forced Intel into it.


I'm not so sure. AMD "sort of" has two chipset makers at the moment, Asmedia (contracted) and themselves. The chipsets have some different advantages. I'd certainly appreciate a chipset with better split of lanes or one that didn't have x570's awful power consumption. There probably just isn't enough of a market for it.
Problem is that most of the old-school functions of a chipset have been moved onto the SoC. Chipsets only extend connectivity. On AMD platforms the chipset ports are kind of an afterthought. If you had a third party making CPUs for AMD boards, they'd be stuck with x570 or whatever and who knows what that third party would offer in terms of SoC functions?
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY