Monday, February 8th 2021

Intel B460 and H410 Chipsets Don't Support 11th Gen Core "Rocket Lake"

In a controversial move that baffles our technical understanding of how processor+chipset (platforms) work, Intel has decided to restrict the mid-tier B460 and entry-level H410 desktop motherboard chipsets from supporting 11th Gen Core "Rocket Lake-S" processors. A BIOS Updates Support page for Intel 400-series chipsets on the company website mentions "Motherboards based on Intel B460 or H410 chipsets are not compatible with upcoming 11th Gen Intel Core processors."

The company states that only the top Intel Z490 and next-best H470 chipsets support "Rocket Lake-S" from the 400-series, and such motherboards require a BIOS update from the motherboard manufacturer or pre-built OEM. We're having a hard time figuring out why the B460 or H410 have been excluded. With the H410, an argument can be made on insufficient CPU VRM capabilities of most motherboards; but the same can't be made for the B460, with several motherboard manufacturers having developed premium DIY motherboards with capable VRM solutions (eg: the ROG B460-F Gaming, or B460 AORUS Elite). Those looking to save some dough on mid-tier motherboards to use with "Rocket Lake" should now wait for Intel to launch the B560 chipset.
Source: Intel
Add your own comment

61 Comments on Intel B460 and H410 Chipsets Don't Support 11th Gen Core "Rocket Lake"

#1
watzupken
"We're having a hard time figuring out why the B460 or H410 have been excluded."

Nothing to figure out man. This is Intel, and this is what they do all the time. Its been proven time and again, so no surprises here. Not compatible because they said so. Yet there are still people defending Intel is what baffles me.
Posted on Reply
#2
ExV6k
Pathetic move from a pathetic company.
Posted on Reply
#3
Cobain
Give me a good reason for someone with a h410/b460 motherboard, wanting to upgrade to a 11700 or 11900 with hard RAM speed limit. I can't find one.
Posted on Reply
#4
Caring1

Intel B460 and H410 Chipsets [S]Don't[/S] Won't Support 11th Gen Core "Rocket Lake"

Hopefully somebody will make a Bios available so these chips can be used, despite the conspiracy to force us to constantly upgrade parts.
Posted on Reply
#5
TheLostSwede
Uhm, where are all the people with virtual pitchforks now? They sure all came out in force when AMD tried to do something similar with their 400-series chipsets...
Posted on Reply
#6
Countryside
Well im still gonna buy b460 and an 10400f, in total will cost me 235 euro in the other hand if i bought an b550 and ryzen 3600 the total would be 355, Ryzen prices are ridiculous at the moment
Posted on Reply
#7
1d10t
Even in last breath of LGA 1200, Intel was still arrogant. Anyone who has H410/B460 better buy new shiny Z590, and be ready to buy again for Elderlook.
Does single thread is really that appealing now? :rolleyes:
Posted on Reply
#8
Countryside
1d10tEven in last breath of LGA 1200, Intel was still arrogant. Anyone who has H410/B460 better buy new shiny Z590, and be ready to buy again for Elderlook.
Does single thread is really that appealing now? :rolleyes:
Appealing are the prices, in my country i5 10400f costs 150euro and ryzen 3600 costs 265, never ever will i pay more than 200 for an 6 core cpu
Posted on Reply
#9
londiste
CobainGive me a good reason for someone with a h410/b460 motherboard, wanting to upgrade to a 11700 or 11900 with hard RAM speed limit. I can't find one.
How about a 11400? When hard RAM speed limit is 3200, that is much less of an issue.
Posted on Reply
#10
BSim500
CountrysideAppealing are the prices, in my country i5 10400f costs 150euro and ryzen 3600 costs 265, never ever will i pay more than 200 for an 6 core cpu
^ This is exactly the issue right now. As much as Intel pulls cr*p like this, when an i5-10400F (6C/12T) is £128, an i7-10700F (8C/16T) is £242 but a Ryzen 5600X (6C/12T) is £299, and a B550 board is +£40 or so more on top vs the same B460 (eg, comparing MSI Mortar WiFi for both), then a lot of people still aren't going to go Ryzen due to AMD's crazy price increases / out of stock problem for the 98% of the human race who aren't Americans living next door to a Microcentre. RAM speed locks are never good but 2933MHz (for i7-10700F) is close enough to 3200MHz that most non-enthusiasts aren't going to buy a Z board for that last 200MHz. Now if the 5600X were half the price (as 1600 / 1600AF / 2600 & 3600 were at one point) and actually in stock, competition in many regions might be a bit more compelling in practise than in theory.
Posted on Reply
#11
ExcuseMeWtf
CountrysideAppealing are the prices, in my country i5 10400f costs 150euro and ryzen 3600 costs 265, never ever will i pay more than 200 for an 6 core cpu
At that point idc about prices, it just feels morally wrong to give money to this rotten corp.
Posted on Reply
#12
fynxer
B560 motherboards will Sky Rocket in price

This is just a way make more money.

They better rename CPU to "Sky Rocket" instead
Posted on Reply
#13
Peter1986C
BSim500^ This is exactly the issue right now. As much as Intel pulls cr*p like this, when an i5-10400F (6C/12T) is £128, an i7-10700F (8C/16T) is £242 but a Ryzen 5600X (6C/12T) is £299, and a B550 board is +£40 or so more on top vs the same B460 (eg, comparing MSI Mortar WiFi for both), then a lot of people still aren't going to go Ryzen due to AMD's crazy price increases / out of stock problem for the 98% of the human race who aren't Americans living next door to a Microcentre. RAM speed locks are never good but 2933MHz (for i7-10700F) is close enough to 3200MHz that most non-enthusiasts aren't going to buy a Z board for that last 200MHz. Now if the 5600X were half the price (as 1600 / 1600AF / 2600 & 3600 were at one point) and actually in stock, competition in many regions might be a bit more compelling in practise than in theory.
Indeed, were I upgrading from my Haswell-refresh right now I would have gone for a i5-10400f. I won't though because honestly I have bigger priorities (and this rig is still handling things fine).
ExcuseMeWtfAt that point idc about prices, it just feels morally wrong to give money to this rotten corp.
Perhaps you have a point. So I guess that those who can wait till the market normalises a bit, better do so.
Posted on Reply
#14
windwhirl
TheLostSwedeUhm, where are all the people with virtual pitchforks now? They sure all came out in force when AMD tried to do something similar with their 400-series chipsets...
At the very least AMD went for the whole 400-series and on aging socket, which together had a little bit of technical merit, all things considered. Intel limiting Rocket Lake to "selected chipsets from the 400-series" on a socket and chipset line that is not even a year old... I just



I'm angry and I'm not even interested in this product lol
Posted on Reply
#15
TheLostSwede
No crazy pricing here, but then again, no sub $300 CPUs in stock from either team.
Cheapest thing here in stock is a i7-10700F for $320 or a Ryzen 7-3700X for $340.
Posted on Reply
#16
sepheronx
Why bother upgrade to Rocket lake? Adds little benefit tbh. PCIE 4.0? So? Bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 doesn't seem to be bottlenecking current GPU's. And besides PCIE 4.0 X4 NVME's speeds, there is little to no real world performance gain.

So why waste the money in it? Alder lake is anyway end of this year or early next anyway.
Posted on Reply
#17
TheLostSwede
sepheronxWhy bother upgrade to Rocket lake? Adds little benefit tbh. PCIE 4.0? So? Bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 doesn't seem to be bottlenecking current GPU's. And besides PCIE 4.0 X4 NVME's speeds, there is little to no real world performance gain.

So why waste the money in it? Alder lake is anyway end of this year or early next anyway.
I'm sure someone with a brand new graphics card... Oh, right, you can't really buy those...
Posted on Reply
#18
sepheronx
TheLostSwedeI'm sure someone with a brand new graphics card... Oh, right, you can't really buy those...

I would say the newer GPU's are not limited in bandwidth with PCIE 3.0. Actually, what is interesting is that PCIE 4.0 was claimed to be needed for SAM, but in the end, that wasn't the case and PCIE 3.0 worked fine too.

I guess if Bryan from Tech Yes used a B450 motherboard and a B550/570 to test the same CPU just so that it rounds out the discrepancy in performance due to the Intel CPU vs the Ryzen 3000 series CPU, but I guess the 4K greatly reduces the difference between the CPU's in the performance front and maximizes the stress on the GPU.
Posted on Reply
#19
windwhirl
sepheronxAnd besides PCIE 4.0 X4 NVME's speeds, there is little to no real world performance gain.
The only reason I can see why you'd actually care a whole lot about it is that you spend time copying and moving around at least a few dozen GBs a day, and maybe not even then.
sepheronxSo why waste the money in it? Alder lake is anyway end of this year or early next anyway.
Maybe by then all the price gouging will have calmed down too.
Posted on Reply
#20
londiste
sepheronxWhy bother upgrade to Rocket lake? Adds little benefit tbh. PCIE 4.0? So? Bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 doesn't seem to be bottlenecking current GPU's. And besides PCIE 4.0 X4 NVME's speeds, there is little to no real world performance gain.
Core architecture upgrade is a pretty major factor.
By all indications Rocket Lake performance at the same frequency should be close to Zen3.
In case you do not care about power consumption it'll still clock close to the same frequencies as Intel's other 14nm CPUs have which should put the absolute performance at a respectable level.
Posted on Reply
#21
iO
Ah, good old Intel shafting its consumers again...
Posted on Reply
#22
TheinsanegamerN
And I thought AMD's chipset confusion with supporting ryzen 5000 was a PITA. Why even bother with new chipsets if you cant support your own chips? One of intel's strong points has been its consistent support, weakening that will backfire.
Posted on Reply
#23
ODOGG26
TheinsanegamerNAnd I thought AMD's chipset confusion with supporting ryzen 5000 was a PITA. Why even bother with new chipsets if you cant support your own chips? One of intel's strong points has been its consistent support, weakening that will backfire.
What consistent support? Haven't they always been like this to consumers?
Posted on Reply
#24
TheLostSwede
sepheronx

I would say the newer GPU's are not limited in bandwidth with PCIE 3.0. Actually, what is interesting is that PCIE 4.0 was claimed to be needed for SAM, but in the end, that wasn't the case and PCIE 3.0 worked fine too.

I guess if Bryan from Tech Yes used a B450 motherboard and a B550/570 to test the same CPU just so that it rounds out the discrepancy in performance due to the Intel CPU vs the Ryzen 3000 series CPU, but I guess the 4K greatly reduces the difference between the CPU's in the performance front and maximizes the stress on the GPU.
Wasn't there some AMD GPU that had a PCIe 4.0 x8 interface only where it made a difference?
Based on the tests here done by @W1zzard over the years, once we hit PCIe 2.0 there hasn't really been any significant gains from the PCIe interface when it comes to game performance.
Posted on Reply
#25
80-watt Hamster
sepheronxWhy bother upgrade to Rocket lake? Adds little benefit tbh. PCIE 4.0? So? Bandwidth of PCIe 3.0 doesn't seem to be bottlenecking current GPU's. And besides PCIE 4.0 X4 NVME's speeds, there is little to no real world performance gain.

So why waste the money in it? Alder lake is anyway end of this year or early next anyway.
If on Skylake or later? Probably no reason at all. This is true EVERY generation; upgrades from a recent* platform hardly ever make sense. But maybe someone's coming from 1155 or AM3 (or earlier!), or starting from scratch. IF choosing an Intel platform and buying new, you've got the choice of 400- or 500-series. May as well go 500 if the price is right.

*For a given value of recent, on which YMMV. KBL is probably the newest arch worth upgrading from, IMO, presuming one's looking for higher core count.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment
Copyright © 2004-2021 www.techpowerup.com. All rights reserved.
All trademarks used are properties of their respective owners.