Thursday, April 26th 2018

Intel Confirms Z390 and X399 Chipsets in Official Documents

Intel unintentionally confirmed the existence of two of its upcoming client platform chipsets, the Z390 Express, and the X399 Express. The latest release-notes documentation of its Rapid Storage Technology driver, mentions Z390 and X399, alongside the CPU micro-architectures they support. The Z390 supports current-generation "Coffee Lake" and upcoming "Cannon Lake" processors, while the X399 supports HEDT derivatives based on the two architectures, namely "Coffee Lake-X" and "Cannon Lake-X," with no mention of "Skylake-X."

What happens to the X299, you ask? The table mentions the chipset as supporting SKL-X (Skylake-X) and KBL-X (Kaby Lake-X), but it's not clear if Intel is only referring to the forgettable i7-7740X and i5-7640X with "KBL-X." The Z390 is rumored as being Intel's next top mainstream-desktop chipset, with a long overdue update to onboard audio standards, in being a departure from the "Azalia" HD audio specification, onward to the new Programmable Quad-Core Audio with new SoundWire digital audio interface. The chipset is also rumored to feature 10 Gbps USB 3.1 ports.
Add your own comment

26 Comments on Intel Confirms Z390 and X399 Chipsets in Official Documents

#1
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
X399 AMD, X399 Intel...
Posted on Reply
#2
gmn 17
Cool, new motherboard chipset for HEDT this year
Posted on Reply
#3
cucker tarlson
"eidairaman1 said:
X399 AMD, X399 Intel...
Some dude will try to cram threadripper into s2066. You know it will happen somewhere :laugh:
Posted on Reply
#4
Gungar
"cucker tarlson said:
Some dude will try to cram threadripper into s2066. You know it will happen somewhere :laugh:
Well it's 100% AMD's fault.
Posted on Reply
#5
Ferrum Master
Sound interface has overcome year 2000 and mimics what ARM makers did like 5 years ago... for example Qualcomm Hexagon...

FTW INTEL... such an innovation.

Where's the new PCIE?? The main thing... if it doesn't have this chipset is already EOL POS.
Posted on Reply
#6
theGryphon
"Gungar said:
Well it's 100% AMD's fault.
As much as I root for AMD, applaud them with the disruption they brought to the CPU market, and openly support them with my decision to build a Ryzen system, this chipset numbering is the most childish and fruitless thing I've come to see by any legitimate business. It reeks of pettiness, lack of self-esteem, and lack of character. It's laughable but not in a funny way; it's just ridiculous. I still cannot wrap my head around what all those executives were thinking.

I mean, sure, someone down the line may have suggested "you know what would be funny? what if we upend Intel with the chipset numbering scheme by using the same lettering but one larger number?". The thing is, the first manager to hear of this should've shut it down by saying "that's not even funny. what use would that have? we should come up with a new naming scheme to assert who we are"

Seriously, I wanna give a good smack on the back of the heads of those executives who went for this kindergarten level crap...
Posted on Reply
#7
TheGuruStud
"theGryphon said:
As much as I root for AMD, applaud them with the disruption they brought to the CPU market, and openly support them with my decision to build a Ryzen system, this chipset numbering is the most childish and fruitless thing I've come to see by any legitimate business. It reeks of pettiness, lack of self-esteem, and lack of character. It's laughable but not in a funny way; it's just ridiculous. I still cannot wrap my head around what all those executives were thinking.

I mean, sure, someone down the line may have suggested "you know what would be funny? what if we upend Intel with the chipset numbering scheme by using the same lettering but one larger number?". The thing is, the first manager to hear of this should've shut it down by saying "that's not even funny. what use would that have? we should come up with a new naming scheme to assert who we are"

Seriously, I wanna give a good smack on the back of the heads of those executives who went for this kindergarten level crap...
Pretty sure it achieved it's purpose of pissing off Intel. Intel are giant babies, so this is hilarious.
Posted on Reply
#8
Vya Domus
"Gungar said:
Well it's 100% AMD's fault.
Exactly how it was their fault ? Was X399 a special name reserved just for Intel ? If anything it's their fault for naming their chipset like that knowing that their competitor used the same name. They are not obliged to keep a certain nomenclature.
Posted on Reply
#9
evernessince
"theGryphon said:
As much as I root for AMD, applaud them with the disruption they brought to the CPU market, and openly support them with my decision to build a Ryzen system, this chipset numbering is the most childish and fruitless thing I've come to see by any legitimate business. It reeks of pettiness, lack of self-esteem, and lack of character. It's laughable but not in a funny way; it's just ridiculous. I still cannot wrap my head around what all those executives were thinking.

I mean, sure, someone down the line may have suggested "you know what would be funny? what if we upend Intel with the chipset numbering scheme by using the same lettering but one larger number?". The thing is, the first manager to hear of this should've shut it down by saying "that's not even funny. what use would that have? we should come up with a new naming scheme to assert who we are"

Seriously, I wanna give a good smack on the back of the heads of those executives who went for this kindergarten level crap...
Yes, because Intel owns every name they could potentially ever use for their chipsets or CPUs....Oh wait they don't.

Saying that Intel has a right to X399 is like saying Apple is the only one how can have rounded corners on their phones (which they actually have a patent for!).

I can tell you want AMD where thinking: why don't we use nomenclatures that are already established so that our customers instantly know where are products stand.

Do you realize how long it would have taken to build up customer awareness if AMD didn't tier it's processors using R3 R5 R7 and didn't name it's chipset with A, B, and X? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
Posted on Reply
#10
las
If Z390 won't have PCIe 4.0 it will be very disappointing. 4.0 was finalized Q3 2017.
Posted on Reply
#11
dj-electric
"las said:
If Z390 won't have PCIe 4.0 it will be very disappointing. 4.0 was finalized Q3 2017.
Redesining a PCIE controller takes a huge amount of time after finalizing specs.
Posted on Reply
#12
Live OR Die
Guess ill have to replace my X299 with a X399 and a new CPU wooooo
Posted on Reply
#13
dj-electric
"Live OR Die said:
ill have to
You must, or else...
Posted on Reply
#14
TheLostSwede
"las said:
If Z390 won't have PCIe 4.0 it will be very disappointing. 4.0 was finalized Q3 2017.
And not intended for "consumer" products. PCIe 5.0 is the next mass market standard.
Posted on Reply
#15
Th3pwn3r
"TheGuruStud said:
Pretty sure it achieved it's purpose of pissing off Intel. Intel are giant babies, so this is hilarious.
Yeah, I'm sure Intel are crying while counting the huge piles of money they make.
Posted on Reply
#16
ddarko
"while the X399 supports HEDT derivatives based on the two architectures, namely "Coffee Lake-X" and "Cannon Lake-X," with no mention of "Skylake-X."
There a footnote "sx" next to X399 in the PCH SKU Details column which says "This SKU is supported with SKL-X CPU only."
Posted on Reply
#17
eidairaman1
The Exiled Airman
"las said:
If Z390 won't have PCIe 4.0 it will be very disappointing. 4.0 was finalized Q3 2017.
Pcie 4 is primarily aimed at the server market, consumer grade parts are being skipped over for pcie 5.0 to replace 3.0
Posted on Reply
#18
Kaotik
Seriously, can you even TRY when writing these news?
Yes, the document lists CNL and CFL with the X399, but it also specifically mentions that X399 is only supported on SKL-X (which is also known as Skylake-X). There is no mentions of "CNL-X" or "CFL-X" either, even though there obviously should be if there would be any CNL or CFL CPUs for X399. Instead it looks like the 2nd CPU to be supported by X399, in addition to Skylake-X, will be Cascade Lake-X (which will probably appear as CSL-X or CCL-X)
Posted on Reply
#19
john_
New month, new chipset for the 1151 platform.
Posted on Reply
#20
jabbadap
"Kaotik said:
Seriously, can you even TRY when writing these news?
Yes, the document lists CNL and CFL with the X399, but it also specifically mentions that X399 is only supported on SKL-X (which is also known as Skylake-X). There is no mentions of "CNL-X" or "CFL-X" either, even though there obviously should be if there would be any CNL or CFL CPUs for X399. Instead it looks like the 2nd CPU to be supported by X399, in addition to Skylake-X, will be Cascade Lake-X (which will probably appear as CSL-X or CCL-X)
Yeah Platform/ PCH/ Segment table are for chipsets, not processors. X299 Kaby Point HEDT and Basin Falls PCH, x399 Cannon Point HEDT and CFL/CNL PCH. Cascade Lake haven't been released so it just probably why it's not mentioned on that x399 supported processors. But yeah only real news on that is SKL-X is supported but KBL-X is not on x399 chipsets. And the real question mark is, will x299 support Cascade Lake X cpus.

"john_ said:
New month, new chipset for the 1151 platform.
Motherboard manufacturer's heaven. But yeah in more seriously High end Cannon point H platform chipset is only one which is missing on lineup, and z390 will be just that.
Posted on Reply
#21
Parn
The chart confirms Z370 is a rebadged Z270 as it is listed under 200 series chipset as KBP-H. So no support for cannonlake.
Posted on Reply
#22
efikkan
I wonder if this is another typo, or how this fits in with Cascade Lake-X (the refresh of Skylake-X) which will arrive in Q2/Q3 2018.
Posted on Reply
#23
Kaotik
"Parn said:
The chart confirms Z370 is a rebadged Z270 as it is listed under 200 series chipset as KBP-H. So no support for cannonlake.
It's been actually confirmed since it was released from the feature charts, it's even called "KBL Refresh PCH-H". We also know new features introduced by Z390 (CNL PCH-H) already (new programmable "quad core audio dsp", soundwire digital audio interface, integrated USB 3.1 Gen 2, integrated WiFi/BT, integrated SDXC-controller, updated integrated TB3, 2 new standby power management modes)
Posted on Reply
#24
Brusfantomet
"evernessince said:
Yes, because Intel owns every name they could potentially ever use for their chipsets or CPUs....Oh wait they don't.

Saying that Intel has a right to X399 is like saying Apple is the only one how can have rounded corners on their phones (which they actually have a patent for!).

I can tell you want AMD where thinking: why don't we use nomenclatures that are already established so that our customers instantly know where are products stand.

Do you realize how long it would have taken to build up customer awareness if AMD didn't tier it's processors using R3 R5 R7 and didn't name it's chipset with A, B, and X? If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
The reason we got the Pentium name was because Intel was unable to trademark the name 586. Granted X399 is also a letter in front of the three-digit number.
Posted on Reply
#25
cdawall
where the hell are my stars
"Gungar said:
Well it's 100% AMD's fault.
100% agree what nonsense to clone Intel for chipset naming.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment