Intel screws high end users yet again.

It looks like Intel has finally released a version of RST that supports TRIM in RAID-0 arrays...the problem is that they've blocked older chipsets from being able to use it, including those with X79 chipsets!! Isn't it nice to have Intel looking out for you and "strongly encouraging" you to "upgrade" by forcing you to by a lesser board to overcome an arbitrary software limitation? I'm beginning to wonder why Intel even bothers making a single processor version of LGA2011...they'd be better off by limiting LGA2011 to dual Xeons. Oh, that's right, then they'd have no dumping ground for all those Xeons that are defective and would have to lower the prices on neutered low end Xeons to sell off all the defective dies. I think that's all the single processor LGA2011 market means for Intel...a convenient garbage can to allow them to get something for a defective chip and protect the higher margin of the "Xeon" chips. They treat this market like a garbage can as well...:mad:

Link to Anand's look at the driver:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/6161/i...rds-we-test-it

Link to Intel's download page (with no X79 boards listed):

http://downloadcenter.intel.com/Deta...?DwnldID=21407

If I recall correctly, the BETA preview of that driver worked on more chipsets.

disappointing yes, do i regret going with x79? nahhh

Isn't X79 nearly new?? Means me with my piddly little X58 are completely boned.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WangChung

Isn't X79 nearly new?? Means me with my piddly little X58 are completely boned.

---

Most people would think so, but apparently someone who has purchased an LGA2011 platform hasn't purchased the privilege of having this functionality...:rolleyes:

Soon Intel will get their wish. As the mid-range chips gain more and more functionality, there will be less and less need to use a "high end" (high end in name only) processor. The only problem is that as I said before, Intel would lose their handy dumping ground for defective Xeons...they'll maintain the "high end" single processor market just for this purpose. Knowing Intel, it wouldn't surprise me to see them neuter certain features (more PCI-E lanes for example) on the mid-range chips of consumer Haswell just to keep power users buying their defective crap (the defects from their Xeon EPs). These disabled features will no doubt be available on the hard locked mainstream Haswell Xeon (not Haswell-E), but neutered off of the mainstream consumer chips.

As of this point, high end users have no real choice but to take whatever slop Intel decides to dish out. This high end user, however, will remember this very clearly and for a long time into the future. If a viable alternative (AMD) ever re-materializes as a performance competitor like they were back in the A64/P4 days, I'll think back to times like this and a large portion of my purchasing decision at that point will be made with the contempt that Intel has shown us recently very clearly in mind.

^i have to think...its AMDs poor performance that is encouraging Intel to be sloppy with its support of the highest-end. i mean, what are you going to do for your MOAR PERFORMANCE fix? buy a bulldozer? LMFAO

X79 mobo with Intel OROM 3.2.0.1022 or higher supports RAID 0 TRIM in Windows 8.

haha, just like intel to stunt growth. being as this is an overclocking community right. how come everyone is so interested in paying for that overclock. its not like intel is even at 50% higher performance.
they stopped 8 core desktops. cause of the economy. that was there reasoning for canceling stuff.
they don't even have people designing the new processors since core2. AI's do.
so its not about money. its not about not having it available. its about the exact same thing that made socket 939 the king. intels greed and hyper threading heaters.
and just like back then. intels "better" performance is only in a select range of software. of which they prob only have that performance crown due to software optimizations.
P4 repeats. same price too isn't it, $1000 for the winning processors. vs the 200 amd which obviously wins in the price to perf battle.

i was waiting for this driver for my x48 and when i saw it was available i was like oh no, shoulda waited for my amd. but now i am just sure it was the best choice.
cause i am still frustrated with intel not letting firmware for my kingston 40GB ssds, from greed again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Greg83

so its not about money. its not about not having it available. its about the exact same thing that made socket 939 the king. intels greed and hyper threading heaters.

---

Exactly, and hopefully it comes back to bite them in the arse. They have the processors available. Intel can make an 8 Cores Extreme Edition VERY easily and quickly. They refuse do it, however, because they make more money selling an 8 core die as a Xeon and Intel's dogmatic view is that "Xeons will not be overclocked," hence the locking of the E5-2687W. Besides, if enthusiasts had 8 Core Extreme Editions to buy, Intel wouldn't be selling as many of the i7-3960x and i7-3930K chips. This would result in an inability get rid of those defective pieces of crap at their current high price (because there are only so many people who are in the market for a processor in that price range). This would result in an oversupply of defective chips, which would require another lower value SKU to appeal to the mid to lower end of the market and this would directly encroach upon the mainstream Ivy platform and chips, requiring a re-adjustment there as well.

Conclusion: the i7-3960x and i7-3930K exist only because they provide an avenue for Intel to get rid of its defective Xeons and charge a premium for doing so.

As for this latest fiasco regarding no TRIM support on X79 or older boards, they're simply doing it because they can. Additional time (and money) would be required to validate on older platforms, so instead of bothering, it's easier and more profitable to force people to upgrade to the mainstream Ivy chips, even if what they're using at present is superior to Ivy. This is a win-win situation for Intel and they win by not having to invest a small amount of additional money to validate an older platform. They also make more money when people are forced to buy new hardware that they probably don't need in order to get the functionality enabled. There is no downside for Intel because there is no current viable alternative competitor for people to chose instead, so annoyed customers have to swallow this BS (or do without the functionality).

Bottom line is that they have an effective monopoly and are exploiting it to the maximum and as is per normal, consumers end up getting shafted ad infinitum...:mad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by cx-ray

X79 mobo with Intel OROM 3.2.0.1022 or higher supports RAID 0 TRIM in Windows 8.

---

According to who?

^
What?

I think both the X79 high-end chipset and the Z68 enthusiast chipset both deserve trim for raid0 arrays. Time will tell if Intel listens.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaxx

I think both the X79 high-end chipset and the X68 enthusiast chipset both deserve trim for raid0 arrays. Time will tell if Intel listens.

---

Why would they? They know we don't have a choice and there is no incentive for them to bother.

it would be also very easy for intel to make this work. provide a new raid rom for the chipsets and release to manufactures.
on the processor topic again. since intel is focusing and on track with the updating of the cores themselves. there is nothing stopping intel from making $300 8 core 16 thread processor. where things WOULD have been if not there stance since the 2008 economy probs.
its not like its too expensive. it should be back like phemon 2 vs 775 core 2 quad. intel wins by 30% now. won by 30% then. in certain apps. but atleast then there was some competitiveness and obvious progress. now intel performs an hero. cause only thing keep intel's selling is a customer willing to waste money. cause price to perf. amd wins. cause lower cost, greatest overclocking potential in %. 30% better perf with an intel, but 30% higher cost too.

I don't see what the outrage is. X79 is a workstation/server platform. You really don't need it and shouldn't be bothering with it for desktops. I honestly prefer server platforms be a bit behind the curve and get things latter as there is more time for validation. I don't care if my desktops and laptops at work catch fire and immolate, they are desktops, I do care if something goes wrong with a server. I don't care about the latest whizbang features, I want stability, stability, stability, stability, you get the point?

I agree they should segment it, and simply remove overclocking and all the other "gaming, main stream" sort of features from the server platform. It's a pain in the ass, what I want out of a server doesn't really mesh with "enthusiast" at all.

Out of my list of gripes with x79, this wouldn't even rate. Lack of native SAS is far more obnoxious.

from what i remember the x79 chipset is essentially the high end version of the z68 and not the z77, in other words despite the 7 in the name of the x79 its effectively considered a old product.

I'm trying to understand something here. Forgive me for being a storage duntz but....

It seems like it ONLY works on boards that support Intel's RST caching feature, no?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crash5s

I don't see what the outrage is. X79 is a workstation/server platform. You really don't need it and shouldn't be bothering with it for desktops. I honestly prefer server platforms be a bit behind the curve and get things latter as there is more time for validation. I don't care if my desktops and laptops at work catch fire and immolate, they are desktops, I do care if something goes wrong with a server. I don't care about the latest whizbang features, I want stability, stability, stability, stability, you get the point?

I agree they should segment it, and simply remove overclocking and all the other "gaming, main stream" sort of features from the server platform. It's a pain in the ass, what I want out of a server doesn't really mesh with "enthusiast" at all.

Out of my list of gripes with x79, this wouldn't even rate. Lack of native SAS is far more obnoxious.

---

Don't need it? This is XtremeSystems, not Have-Enough-Computer-To-Only-Meet-My-Needs-Systems. Most of us don't need half of the hardware we have. Should I settle for the mainstream platform's lousy PCI-E lane and CPU core count, and pitufilly low memory capacity because I don't need it? Of course not! Personally, I actually need the increased PCI-E lane count to run multiple graphics adapters and multiple RAID cards and the increased memory capacity is very handy. Even if I could make do with less, I want the best and I'm willing to pay for it. Is there a good reason why a server part like the E5-2687W can't do double duty? An unlocked E5-2687W would serve both the server market and the high end enthusiast market. For the asking price of the CPU, there is no reason why the multiplier should be locked at all. A server system will not even see the unlocked nature of the chip nor allow any adjustment, so there is no danger in using an unlocked CPU in a server motherboard. Only two boards on the market right now would actually allow a multiplier increase, and it's not likely that they'd end up in a server.

Validation is a requirement in a server product, yes. While I don't like waiting for new technology, I agree that there are inherent benefits to using a mainstream platform for validation and then releasing a server variant after. However, a fully functional enthusiast CPU based on the latest technology that is released six months ahead of the server variant would allow Intel to have a great deal of validation and bug finding done by enthusiasts, who are keen on pushing a new platform to its limits. We use all sorts of hardware and software in all sorts of weird configurations that probably aren't even considered at Intel. We could be an invaluable resource and allow Intel to produce even more robust products. Instead Intel has taken to treating us with little to no respect and even outright contempt. They deny us their best products and sell us defective crap, have twice forced upgrades down our throat (lack of G1 SSD TRIM support and now this) and assume we'll always be there to throw money at them. Intel turned over a new leaf and showed how friendly and decent they can be when AMD was going toe-to-toe with them during the P4/A64 era. Back then I was rejoicing that Intel had finally seen the light and would stop acting ignorant and arrogant. Unfortunately, the new leaf turned right back over when AMD fell behind, and now there's a rock on that leaf...:(

"Intel screws high end users yet again."

It looks like that. Half dead chips are sold too, for long time now, remember celeron 2 - coppermine and P III ?
If PIII with L2 256Bk cache was broken then they sell it as celeron with half enabled cache 128Kb.
For that kind of money chips arent worth, but there is factory problem, intel cant make 100% chips working 100%, so they sell stuff, as long is ok to ppl

Usaly full versions of chips cost alot, like 40% more then it suppost to.
Broken chips cost 40% less then original 100% working.
In anyway intel still earns some $$

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nikolasz

"Intel screws high end users yet again."

It looks like that. Half dead chips are sold too, for long time now, remember celeron 2 - coppermine and P III ?
If PIII with L2 256Bk cache was broken then they sell it as celeron with half enabled cache 128Kb.
For that kind of money chips arent worth, but there is factory problem, intel cant make 100% chips working 100%, so they sell stuff, as long is ok to ppl

Usaly full versions of chips cost alot, like 40% more then it suppost to.
Broken chips cost 40% less then original 100% working.
In anyway intel still earns some $$

---

It's always funny to read your posts lol :up:

yes extreme systems including extreme common sense. back in 2008, with socket 1366, intel planned an 8 core on it. then economy. then they said oh, people don't want to spend money on that.
we'd have 8 core intels at $400 or less by now. if intel was as extreme as they shoulda been, the attitude they had when they finally got core2 out the door and finally competed vs amd.

its not been very long intel had the crown now and they seem to want to loose it again. cause even if they do finally release an 8 core when amd has something competitive they're still overpriced vs how amd goes about it and if it takes amd having to compete for intel to release whats available, possible and was even planned. then why would anyone care about what intel has.

intel is loosing its market in the laptops, cause they don't compete there well, they're loosing the market completely in tablets which they can't compete with arms and need an i5 in a tablet.

north america has virtually no desktop pc market left, its only those who build there own pc's keeping intel's processor prices high , cause they'll buy it.

its not very extreme, to buy a processor that costs 33% more, performs upto 33% better and has a less % of overclock headrom then the amd.
and not even gonna get you the mhz world record.

they've done really well keeping to tick tock tick tock, but the consume has received none of the benefit, the tick tock brought us in expectations. its a stunted growth . i just cannot see myself going back to an intel again, the processing power is already beyond necessary and intel won't even release these "high end" parts to the consumer market at all, if they keep this up. cause there will not be a market for it, if they're relying on overclockers in america

i for one. only left socket a 2500+ when there was a 100% perf increase with socket 939 in my budget. then left that for the 100 perf increase of core 2. then upgraded for the 100% perf increase of core2quad. then again for the 100% perf increase of amd 8120. it was in budget.
if arm makes a move into desktop next, that'll likely be my next pc cause they're just so darn cheap. makes no sense to just spend 100% the costs of a new processor. for 10-30% more perf.

now lets hope someone at intel has the common sense to say, we should force motherboard makers to update the bios roms. so that we can sell more ssd's. since they're in the ssd market, to those who'll just waste money and its a good deal, almost 100% scaling with 2 ssds. not looking at the 4K reads anyway.

Intel can attempt to screw over consumers, but there are plenty of folks out there, including me, who have the skills to rip out one of their new O-ROMs and inject it to get TRIM support up and running on "older" chipsets. Because of such things as this I think its enough to make intel at least pause and think. Even if they don't, people like me will continue to mod UEFIs and get the functionality.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lutjens

Don't need it? This is XtremeSystems, not Have-Enough-Computer-To-Only-Meet-My-Needs-Systems. Most of us don't need half of the hardware we have. Should I settle for the mainstream platform's lousy PCI-E lane and CPU core count, and pitufilly low memory capacity because I don't need it? Of course not! Personally, I actually need the increased PCI-E lane count to run multiple graphics adapters and multiple RAID cards and the increased memory capacity is very handy. Even if I could make do with less, I want the best and I'm willing to pay for it. Is there a good reason why a server part like the E5-2687W can't do double duty? An unlocked E5-2687W would serve both the server market and the high end enthusiast market. For the asking price of the CPU, there is no reason why the multiplier should be locked at all. A server system will not even see the unlocked nature of the chip nor allow any adjustment, so there is no danger in using an unlocked CPU in a server motherboard. Only two boards on the market right now would actually allow a multiplier increase, and it's not likely that they'd end up in a server.

Validation is a requirement in a server product, yes. While I don't like waiting for new technology, I agree that there are inherent benefits to using a mainstream platform for validation and then releasing a server variant after. However, a fully functional enthusiast CPU based on the latest technology that is released six months ahead of the server variant would allow Intel to have a great deal of validation and bug finding done by enthusiasts, who are keen on pushing a new platform to its limits. We use all sorts of hardware and software in all sorts of weird configurations that probably aren't even considered at Intel. We could be an invaluable resource and allow Intel to produce even more robust products. Instead Intel has taken to treating us with little to no respect and even outright contempt. They deny us their best products and sell us defective crap, have twice forced upgrades down our throat (lack of G1 SSD TRIM support and now this) and assume we'll always be there to throw money at them. Intel turned over a new leaf and showed how friendly and decent they can be when AMD was going toe-to-toe with them during the P4/A64 era. Back then I was rejoicing that Intel had finally seen the light and would stop acting ignorant and arrogant. Unfortunately, the new leaf turned right back over when AMD fell behind, and now there's a rock on that leaf...:(

---

x79 is a server/workstation platform, I know people here like to pretend that isn't the case but that makes them wrong, not intel.

To be really frank as someone that works with servers and workstations I don't like it that the bother to put time in on features that aren't server or workstation related. It's obnoxious and idiotic. Why waste time on that crap? I'd rather have no overclocking on x79 period and just have proper SAS support. I'd prefer far more separation than they currently have.

Really :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing about what's going on with x79 outside of servers is like griping over what nvidia is doing with quadro's if you are a gamer. Oh no it's late! Not what it could be... congrats it wasn't really a product intended for you.

The only thing I'll give you is that intels marketing wasn't fully honest, they should have never marketed x79 for desktops and kept it workstation. Bluring the lines isn't really helping anybody.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ket

Intel can attempt to screw over consumers, but there are plenty of folks out there, including me, who have the skills to rip out one of their new O-ROMs and inject it to get TRIM support up and running on "older" chipsets. Because of such things as this I think its enough to make intel at least pause and think. Even if they don't, people like me will continue to mod UEFIs and get the functionality.

---

But why should you have to? Intel's too lazy and cheap to do the right thing and support the users of their older products, even when one of those older products is their "high end" tier and has been around for much less than one year . It shows the complete lack of interest that Intel has in keeping customers happy at this point. They've attached support for RAID 0 TRIM only to their newest product as a way to force people to upgrade. It shows exactly how much Intel stands behind its products...after they have your money, they don't care. I'm very surprised they haven't cut their warranty on retail CPUs down hard yet (although I'm sure that's coming) :rolleyes:

being as you're focusing on workstation, would that mean that multiple ssds would be of benefit having trim? even if it meant through an sas controller?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by crash5s

x79 is a server/workstation platform, I know people here like to pretend that isn't the case but that makes them wrong, not intel.

To be really frank as someone that works with servers and workstations I don't like it that the bother to put time in on features that aren't server or workstation related. It's obnoxious and idiotic. Why waste time on that crap? I'd rather have no overclocking on x79 period and just have proper SAS support. I'd prefer far more separation than they currently have.

Really :banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:ing about what's going on with x79 outside of servers is like griping over what nvidia is doing with quadro's if you are a gamer. Oh no it's late! Not what it could be... congrats it wasn't really a product intended for you.

The only thing I'll give you is that intels marketing wasn't fully honest, they should have never marketed x79 for desktops and kept it workstation. Bluring the lines isn't really helping anybody.

---

Not a product intended for me? I use my computer as a workstation and to game. My computer wasn't intened to be used as a workstation...does that make it somehow wrong or immoral? It's a multipurpose computer that does everything extremely well. I'm unwilling to accept whatever mainstream crap that Intel decides to offer. Sorry, 32GB of RAM and 16 PCI-E lanes aren't good enough. Quad core processors aren't good enough. Some of us demand more from our systems and don't run the common configuration of normal CPU, motherboard, 8GB of RAM, one SSD and one storage drive. Most of us around here don't care what a product was intended to do, we care about what it can do, and this is the basis behind what the enthusiast community and overclocking is. We push the envelope of hardware. We're not content to have a chip at its rated speed, when its capable of so much more and often try to see what something is really capable of rather than meekly take what we're given. Consequently, we often look to enterprise hardware, as in the past it has been at the forefront of technology and capability.

For Intel to charge us a premium price for a defective, harvested CPU and call it an "Extreme Edition" is disgusting and to intentionally deny a fully featured product when they could sell a decent number of them for a large premium for no good reason is maddening. We're among Intel's most loyal customers and to be insulted and marginalized is incredibly disrespectful. To continually do this to your best customers, especially when said customers are looked to by their friends and family for advice is a very questionable business strategy. The expertise of some folks on this site should be exploited by Intel and indeed it would be very valuable to them. Instead, in Intel's mind, we're considered less important than the ply count of the toilet paper in Otellini's washroom.:(

New Tech is coming out so fast these days that its a waste of money and resouces to keep out dated platforms up to date it seems.

Socket 1366 boards are getting hard to find these days and tbh 920's, 990x's are still plenty good CPU's to run. I had my old trusty Giga UD3 finnaly go out on me after 3 years or so which I was running a 990x @ 4.8ghz and used my Giga UD7 and 2500K @ 5.0ghz as a replacement until I get a 3960x system up and running, I feel like I took a huge step backwards. Don't get me worng tho the 2500K system does just fine but I have gotten used to more cores & memory.

Just watch as the people who end up getting ARM or ATOM laptops and tablets start using them, loading up there junk and start complaining about how slow they are. ARM & ATOMs suck and we all know it, but people buy them to save a few bucks then complain about performance.

As far as TRIM goes I don't think I have run a platform that has ever used it as I mostly run Raid 0's all the way back to my older MTRON Battleship which lasted 5 years, now replaced by two 120gb Intel 520's and I get better performance vs 8 of the MTRONs. Its not the end of the world to me at this time because it won't be that long until I upgrade to a platform that I can use TRIM on Raid's.

Why don't we see 8 core desktop CPU's ? Main reason is heat, and well Intel is stuck with the mindset that they know best. We all know that we can use a nice water cooling setup to cool those down but they have to design them to run with air coolers or they would get to many blown up CPU's in the RMA channel.

The server world is waking up also for some applications. I build high speed servers for a living and at first my clients don't believe that a server can run at 5.0ghz so they get a test unit. First thing they say is OMG !! then we get phone calls like... I just keep throwing stuff at it and it doesn't slow down. We have our HSSM - High Speed Server Modules installed at Equinox NY4, Chicago, LA and this month in the UK and every single client says they will trade stuff like IPMI over speed anyday as there are ways to work around it. Will we ever see unlocked Xeon E5-2687W's, I don't think so which is a shame as I would kill for those, so would my clients.

It's interesting to hear that servers are overclocked on a regular basis and that people are happy with the results and the performance. What aggravates me is that because the chips are locked, we don't even have the option. If they were unlocked, we'd have to option to bump up the multiplier if we wanted (and indeed $2000 should get us that ability), or simply leave the chip at default. A server from any of the OEMs would be completely unaffected, but for those who have the right board and the expertise, it would be incredible. There are many professional segments like day traders, graphics artists and the like that would likely jump at the opportunity to squeeze out a few more MHz from these chips and would ensure the environment in which they run is suitable for the operation at higher speeds. For the rest of us who like to tinker, dual unlocked E5-2687Ws under water at 4.5GHz+ would provide for an incredibly powerful system and Intel would sell many more chips as a result.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lutjens

But why should you have to? Intel's too lazy and cheap to do the right thing and support the users of their older products, even when one of those older products is their "high end" tier and has been around for much less than one year . It shows the complete lack of interest that Intel has in keeping customers happy at this point. They've attached support for RAID 0 TRIM only to their newest product as a way to force people to upgrade. It shows exactly how much Intel stands behind its products...after they have your money, they don't care. I'm very surprised they haven't cut their warranty on retail CPUs down hard yet (although I'm sure that's coming) :rolleyes:

---

I'm not saying what intel is doing is right, just that people like me are the resistance. We will fight on. :lsfight:

I'm sure it won't be impossible to add raid-0 trim support on X58 chipsets, if not officially certainly through the unofficial route.

Personally -4 years now- I found no reason to migrate from my x58 setup. It's not that I'm being cheap, it's only that the new chips are not clearly better, in fact they may even be less capable. I have triple channel, unlocked 6-core support, 52 pci express 2.0 lanes (granted it's not 3.0 but it holds up nicely). I'm not going to lose all that merely to get raid-0 trim support (even though I'm on raid0 for years now as well)... The unofficial route is the way to go, don't care for the new chipsets unless they start being as awesome as they used to be...

I dont get it, thats the standard RST driver, doesn't all X79 boards use the RSTe drivers which are on a separate development branch that is usually a bit behind the normal drivers? (enterprise drivers require more testing to be considered stable enough)

Hell, if your not using a beta RSTe driver from a 3rd party site like Station-Drivers then your not even getting TRIM on individual SSD's if the controller is set to Raid. That now standard RST feature hasnt yet trickled down to the stable RSTe driver yet so its probably going to be a while before we get this new feature on the enterprise branch.

Not so fast guys:

Intel’s TRIM Support for RAID Coming to X79 "Soon"

:) :)

somebody with weight yell at them?

Quote:

---

Only P67, Z68, Z77, H67, H77, Q67 and Q77 chipsets are currently supported, which tends to leave some Intel’s highest paying clients (enthusiasts and power users) out in the cold so to speak. Older motherboards based on chipsets not mentioned above aren’t supported either, but that’s likely due to the complications and limited ROI involved with porting the newest driver structures over to EOL’d platforms.

---

Does this mean series 6 and 7 will both end up with trim for raid0?

Amd got 16 cores.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/serve...l-numbers.aspx
http://www.amd.com/us/products/prici...r-opteron.aspx

And what you guys need to do, is get one cpu, mainboard :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaxx

Does this mean series 6 and 7 will both end up with trim for raid0?

---

Looks like it. If you look at the release notes, several of Intel's 6 series boards are listed as supported.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Zaxx

Does this mean series 6 and 7 will both end up with trim for raid0?

---

In theory, but only if the mainboard manufacturer can be bothered to releases a bios update as the driver is just one of the requirements.

Updating the orom in the bios isn't a problem...;)

Is this a conspiracy theory forum?

Sure is a lot of assumptions going on here. Intel has only just launched this feature. You need to give them at least 1-2 Months before you can conclude they won't be delivering this feature to X79 chipsets in my opinion.

I have no problem modifying my Z68 mb bios's (MIVE-Z) to make Intel RST driver detect my mb's chipset as Z77, i have allready modified my bios with latest Intel Raid Rom.

If it works on Z77, it will work on Z68, eventually.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Vicey

Sure is a lot of assumptions going on here. Intel has only just launched this feature. You need to give them at least 1-2 Months before you can conclude they won't be delivering this feature to X79 chipsets in my opinion.

---

Our news post already addressed this. Intel has stated publicly that an RSTe driver for X79 is incoming.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SKYMTL

Intel’s feedback also brings up a good point: the RST development for the X79 chipset is on the RSTe (or Enterprise) branch rather than the standard RST development cycle used for other mass market chipsets. This process with its extra validation steps is likely the main reason why we have not seen an RSTe driver that supports RAID 0 yet.

---

Thanks for the update SKYMTL. The explanation around RST and RSTe branches makes sense regarding X79 support and is greatly appreciated. Clarification regarding upcoming support should have been released by Intel in the release notes when the driver was released to avoid confusion, but its nice to know that support will eventually materialize. While this is indeed good news, it's unfortunate that the X58 chipset isn't being supported as well, even on a basic RST (non-e) level of validation. The driver should work on the X58 (not be intentionally blocked), even if Intel made it available on an "at your own risk" basis. While still quite robust, the platform is more than 3 years old and I understand why they wouldn't want to bother with it. It's not near the outrage that the X79 promised to be.

Lutjens. Stop being angry and go outside.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kain665

Lutjens. Stop being angry and go outside.

---

Sorry, I get annoyed when a company I've supported very well over the years tries to screw me, and I'm not afraid to voice my displeasure. I'm not willing to simply take what I'm given if its insufficient. The consumer's position in the market would be much better off if there were more people who actually stood up and made their voice heard instead of rolling over and mutely taking what they're given with no complaint.

Vote with your money, if you care so much.

i really hope for P67 support; i'm at 95% capacity on my 128gb SSD 830 and adding a second drive is cheaper than buying a 256gb drive

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by masterg

somebody with weight yell at them?

---

I think its more likely that someone with a bone to pick with intel started making a fuss as commonly seen on the internet, so Mr. Anand decided to validate or disprove rumor mill claims. Smart journalists will typically refrain from any serious criticism prior to the company making an official statement, a practice that doesn't seem to be very common these days.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kain665

Vote with your money, if you care so much.

---

You know I see this phrase thrown around a lot, but I can assure you from personal experience that voting with your wallet has about as much effect against corporate practices as a torn condom has against unwanted pregnancy.

One can abstain from buying products which:
-have a major defect in it's supporting platform due to gross negligence (which had been deliberately kept secret until after launch in order to meet fiscal projections),
-have most of the promised new platform features disabled in firmware due to inability to deliver sufficient stability within fiscal time frame (gotta launch that badboy anyway),
-have their performance potential deliberately limited to protect another market segment,
but for every well informed individual that chooses to do so there are hundreds who sheepishly stand in line waving their money at Intel's latest and "greatest" toys.

I've sold my LGA775 build in January of 2011 eagerly anticipating Sandy Bridge, yet due to the factors mentioned above I have yet to own a new system of similar capability. I've been voting with my wallet ever since and yet Intel's commitment to deliver has only gotten worse in the meantime.

On the other hand the Internet gives potential costumers like us a wonderful ability to voice our opinions and for these opinions to actually be heard. Raising a stink against a company on a public forum can have an actual effect I've found out, as many of my personal complaints or suggestions were somehow fixed/realized within successive product line ups.

When somebody presents an argumented complaint that you disagree with, please refrain from attacking them with cheap shots like accusations of conspiracism (defstar) or platitudes like "vote with your money". Either present an opposing opinion of your own or set them straight with legitimately sourced facts if you think they're completely wrong.

You may be satisfied with Intel's current offerings and have no issue with their corporate practices but lutjens clearly thinks otherwise and so do I... and I'm glad he's the one raising these issues because frankly I've gotten too lazy and quite simply disillusioned to the point where i can barely muster a fck.

http://www.techpowerup.com/170822/TR...ming-Soon.html

Quote:

---

While the PC enthusiast community at large welcomed news of SSD TRIM command being made possible in RAID 0 setups, provided Intel 7-series chipset RAID controllers are used, users of Sandy Bridge-E HEDT platform, running Intel X79 chipset, didn't. The feature was advertised to be initially available only to users of 7-series client chipset (such as Z77, H77), with Rapid Storage Technology (RST) driver version 11.0 and above. Intel made amends by announcing that users of Intel X79 chipset will be able to take advantage of TRIM command in RAID 0 setups, with a future version of RSTe (Rapid Storage Technology Enterprise) driver, without being specific about the version or its release date.

Said Intel in its note, "Current RSTe drivers specific to X79 do NOT support TRIM on RAID 0, but an updated RST driver version coming soon will add support for X79 based systems, including the TRIM on RAID 0 feature. Note that on client 7-series chipsets (non X79), RST driver version 11.0 and beyond supports TRIM on RAID 0."

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nikolasz

Amd got 16 cores.

http://www.amd.com/us/products/serve...l-numbers.aspx
http://www.amd.com/us/products/prici...r-opteron.aspx

And what you guys need to do, is get one cpu, mainboard :)

---

16 core ! So what ?

1-Those things have very low clock speed.

2-Those things are based on crappydozer which have very low IPC.

Low clock speed + low IPC = horrible single-threaded performance

Even in heavy multi-threaded benchmarks it doesn't perform that good. Do not let those 16 cores fool you

Here check a comparison between Xeon X5670 (6-core Gulftown) vs Opteron 6276 (16 core crappydozer) in heavy multi-threaded such as cinebench and 7-zip
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph5058/42233.png
http://images.anandtech.com/graphs/graph5058/42258.png


Opteron 6276 costs $900 in newegg. I don't see any reason to buy this over i7 3930K specially if you not building a server machine. Opteron 6276 is going to be day and night slower in gaming and lightly-threaded application. And in multi-threaded app it won't beat 3930K

Working in the industry, I can tell you that accusing companies of "screwing high end users" or any other antagonizing spin on their business practices on a forum won't change a thing. You'd have to have a pretty large opinion of yourself or be just ignorant to think otherwise.

I come to XS to read news and follow interesting threads. I don't come to XS to read threads bashing big bad companies that (Gasp!) maximize profit from their products - I can go to plenty of other forums for that.

i had no issues installing the driver on my P67 sabertooth with both raid option rom 11.2 and an updated bios with raid option rom 11.5

i'm going to report back once i receive my second ssd 830

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sholvaco

You may be satisfied with Intel's current offerings and have no issue with their corporate practices but lutjens clearly thinks otherwise and so do I... and I'm glad he's the one raising these issues because frankly I've gotten too lazy and quite simply disillusioned to the point where i can barely muster a fck.

---

I wonder what "corporate practice" you're speaking about. I don't remember Intel promised TRIM support for any of those chipsets. Even for 77-series it wasn't promised. I don't understand why would someone bash Intel for adding bonus functionality for some of its product lines. Would it be better not to add this functionality at all? After all no one bashes AMD for lack of RAID TRIM support in the whole chipset line.

amd would have to fix the poor scaling in raid 0 first, i'd be more interested in Lsi Areca and so on supporting trim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kain665

Working in the industry, I can tell you that accusing companies of "screwing high end users" or any other antagonizing spin on their business practices on a forum won't change a thing. You'd have to have a pretty large opinion of yourself or be just ignorant to think otherwise.

I come to XS to read news and follow interesting threads. I don't come to XS to read threads bashing big bad companies that (Gasp!) maximize profit from their products - I can go to plenty of other forums for that.

---

Forum to forum is difference, is how ppl come to state of mind, to put topic name such as this. It is debate.
Im proud to see that kind of topic name.

One thing i like to add.
Im shure there is problem making factories and robots to make new chips that cost alot. But if chips are made alot faster and still may be half broken due of speed of pruduction, then this kind of production+fixing chips with software, fill gaps to all users.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kl0012

I wonder what "corporate practice" you're speaking about. I don't remember Intel promised TRIM support for any of those chipsets. Even for 77-series it wasn't promised. I don't understand why would someone bash Intel for adding bonus functionality for some of its product lines. Would it be better not to add this functionality at all? After all no one bashes AMD for lack of RAID TRIM support in the whole chipset line.

---

Sorry I was speaking within the context of their last three platform launches (launching with a defective chipset (SB), launching an unfinished product (SB-E), substandard heatspreader integration (IB)).

In retrospect Lutjens' outcry over lack of trim support on x79 may have been premature but it is not included in the current release nor was there a clarification on it's state at the time the OP was made.

Kain I'm not delusional enough to think a single person's outrage will sway a major corporation like Intel but this is a discussion forum where opinions are exchanged and if someone feels that they have a justifiable concern they are welcome to share it. The least they can achieve is agreement from like minded individuals and maybe instill critical opinion within others. If a large enough mass of people start voicing these same concerns even Intel has to lend an ear. Beats the hell out of quietly sulking in the corner, which is basically what you are suggesting we should do.