Intel screws high end users yet again.

[lutjens]

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...

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

[3lfk1ng]

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

[Circaflex]

disappointing yes, do i regret going with x79? nahhh

[WangChung]

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

[lutjens]

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...

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.

[Generic user #2]

^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

[cx-ray]

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

[Greg83]

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.

[lutjens]

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...

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

According to who?

[SkItZo]

^
What?

[Zaxx]

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.

[lutjens]

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.

[Greg83]

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.

[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.

[naokaji]

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.

[SKYMTL]

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?

[lutjens]

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...

[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 $$

[STaRGaZeR]

"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

[Greg83]

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.

[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.

[crash5s]

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 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.

[lutjens]

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)

[Greg83]

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?

[lutjens]

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 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.