Intel this week revealed plans to discontinue its Kaby Lake-X processors. The chips will not be supported by the company’s upcoming X399 platform for high-end desktops, so initialization of their EOL program is not surprising. Interested parties will be able to get their Core i5/Core i7 processors in LGA2066 packaging for about a year, but they will need to order the chips by the end of November.

Intel on Monday announced plans to discontinue all versions (tray and boxed) of its Core i5-7640X and Core i7-7740X CPUs. PC makers and component resellers interested in these processors will have to order them by November 30, 2018. Intel will ship the final codenamed Kaby Lake-X chips by May 31, 2019, so technically interested parties have a year to buy these chips if they need them.

Intel introduced its Core i5-7640X and Core i7-7740X CPUs in mid-2017 in order to enable hardcore enthusiasts and professional overclockers to set overclocking records using quad-core Kaby Lake-X CPUs while taking advantage of the company’s latest HEDT platform. Usage of the X299-based motherboards with LGA2066 form-factor ensures better power supply to processors and thus helps to hit higher clocks. The plan was heavily criticized by product reviewers and motherboard makers since Kaby Lake-X CPUs require different voltages and memory kits than the high core count Skaylake-X CPUs. Furthermore, the launch of Intel’s six-core Coffee Lake processors in October made Kaby Lake-X products considerably less attractive.

Related Reading:

Source: Intel

POST A COMMENT

40 Comments

View All Comments

  • ACE76 - Tuesday, May 01, 2018 - link

    This is why buying Intel seriously sucks...I sincerely feel bad for anyone who bought into this platform..very soon, 8700k users will be shit out of luck too when for whatever reason the new 8 core Coffee Lake CPU needs a new socket...not that hard to support a socket for 3-4 years. Reply
  • kwerboom - Tuesday, May 01, 2018 - link

    Apparently, it's hard for Intel to build a socket that lasts 3-4 years. My whole understanding of the main difference between the 100/200 chipsets and 300 chipsets is that its the same socket with a more robust pinout because Intel never planned for the 100/200 to support a six core processor. To make this whole stupid situation even more tragically hilarious, Intel never planned to release an eight core processor for the 300 chipset when they rushed it out one quarter early, so now we are getting a 390 chipset for those eight cores. Everyone who bought a 300 chipset is on old technology and in the same boat that 100/200 chipset owners were in before them. Reply
  • DanNeely - Tuesday, May 01, 2018 - link

    It's not that they can't do so, it's that they've decided that the extra cost of building in a what-if capability that maybe 0.1% of people who buy a system will use isn't worth increasing the cost for the other 99.9%.

    Specing minimum power delivery levels beyond what any current chips are rated for requires more capable power circuits. Supporting 2 generations of DDR requires extra pins on the sockets and 2 memory controllers on the CPU. Keeping chipset/cpu pairings back compatible for 4 years instead of 2 requires either freezing the interface for twice as long or making every newer generation part in the family capable of talking to both the current state of the art and all older members of the family.

    With something like 99.9% of CPUs going into systems that will stay paired with the same mobo until they're scrapped together, Intel's decided that increasing BOM costs for every system build and increasing engineering costs for every new product launch aren't worth it.
    Reply
  • smilingcrow - Wednesday, May 02, 2018 - link

    Here, here. Reply
  • smilingcrow - Wednesday, May 02, 2018 - link

    Hear, hear! Reply
  • Samus - Tuesday, May 01, 2018 - link

    Intel can make a socket that lasts 3-4 years, but the platforms that house those sockets are generally only good for one or at best two generations of processors since Sandy Bridge. I get the whole idea of Tick Tock being a architecture\process node thing, and that changing architectures would rally in new platforms...but it wasn't always the case. Previously Intel had generational compatibility with previous platforms going back at least 3 generations. I mean, the 440BX was able to control FOUR generations of processors across three different manufacturing nodes.

    AMD is even more forgiving to end users, having only had two fundamental sockets (AM and FM, with that weird F socket for certain FX series CPU's) and and 3 platform types among them from 2009-2016. The majority of later AM2 boards (AM2+) were actually upgradable to AM3 via BIOS, something Intel never did, but promised, with the 80-series chipsets.
    Reply
  • Notmyusualid - Wednesday, May 02, 2018 - link

    I think you are pretty much on the money here.

    What I'd like to see from Intel is a motherboard with long-term-service / upgrades offered. It would catch many consumers with a sense of value-for-money, instead of losing-out to AMD on such items. But it seems the bigger the corporation, the less clued-in the marketing department.

    <edit> much longer rant deleted that listed X99 as half-baked.
    Reply
  • euler007 - Tuesday, May 01, 2018 - link

    I've been running my 2500k for seven years, I'm sure the people who bought these can run these for ten years, or can afford to change their motherboard. Reply
  • HStewart - Tuesday, May 01, 2018 - link

    I have a ten year xeon 5160 and the problem is not with the CPU but the sound driver on the Supermicro mother board crashes on boot on Windows 10.

    So just allowing upgrade of CPU is not always the right way to handle it.
    Reply
  • Hxx - Tuesday, May 01, 2018 - link

    except that a cpu upgrade for the majority is not a significant upgrade year over year or even every 2 years. Take 6700k to 8700k which is by far the most significant jump we've had in a while and even then, the average DYI builder will likely not see a significant performance gain.
    The real upgrade is the platform. Switching from a Z170 to a Z370 you get some significant upgrades, as much as 3 m.2 ports, a much better I/O panel, simply visually compare a z170 board vs a z370 similar board and you will see what im referring to. People complaining about the platform change, tbh i get it, it sucks but in no way i would want to stick with a 2-3 year old board (even if it was possible) when I upgrade.
    Reply

Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now