Gigabyte Launch X170 and X150 motherboards for Xeon CPUs with ECC memory support

[WYP]

Gigabyte Launch X170 and X150 motherboards for Intel Skylake Xeon CPUs with ECC memory support. Do you like the desert Camo styling?

Read more on Gigabyte's X170 and X150 motherboards.

 

[Doomslayer]

To me they look to be a cheap rip off of the ASUS sabertooth motherboards ^_^

I understand there aiming at a different market with this.

 

[TPC]

They look better than the current Sabertooths.
Could also be my bias since I love digi camo, brings back some nostalgia.

 

[Doomslayer]

They look better than the current Sabertooths.
Could also be my bias since I love digi camo, brings back some nostalgia.

Yes, They do look a little bit better than the sabertooth boards but not saying much i don't really like camo.

Plus the model is a made up model way to go Gigabyte to make people more confused.

 

[Feronix]

Yes, They do look a little bit better than the sabertooth boards but not saying much i don't really like camo.

Plus the model is a made up model way to go Gigabyte to make people more confused.

I think it's meant to state that it's still (mostly) the Z170 chipset but with the X, standing for Xeon support, something that Intel locked users out of on normal desktop boards now.

Also, you can see the left board is clearly still the G1 Gaming with a pattern on the shrouds. It even says "G1 Gaming" on it. :mellow:

 

[Doomslayer]

Also, you can see the left board is clearly still the G1 Gaming with a pattern on the shrouds. It even says "G1 Gaming" on it. :mellow:

Yeah i know they can't make up there minds :lol:

From what i heard on Tek Syndicate's video that Gigabyte is the only company who is going to have the X series motherboards.

 

[AlienALX]

I think it's meant to state that it's still (mostly) the Z170 chipset but with the X, standing for Xeon support, something that Intel locked users out of on normal desktop boards now.

Also, you can see the left board is clearly still the G1 Gaming with a pattern on the shrouds. It even says "G1 Gaming" on it. :mellow:

Intel didn't lock people out of using Xeons dude. That choice was entirely down to the mobo maker and didn't really consist of locking people out, more just bothering to sit down and test and add support.

Asrock are usually the best when it comes to supporting Xeons but I've got a ES 8 core CPU in a Giga X79 UD3 and it works fine.

 

[TPC]

Intel didn't lock people out of using Xeons dude. That choice was entirely down to the mobo maker and didn't really consist of locking people out, more just bothering to sit down and test and add support.

Asrock are usually the best when it comes to supporting Xeons but I've got a ES 8 core CPU in a Giga X79 UD3 and it works fine.

No, the 170 chipset is not campatible with any 1151 xeon. No bios can fix that. Intel has seen that the often cheaper xeons which still have the power of a fully fletched I7 basicly make them loose money and they literally locked the "normal" mobos.

 

[Fetchez La Vache]

That colourscheme.....
Gigabyte could have brought back the blue from their Z87 UD boards as Blue is objectively better than any other colour but went with desert camo.....

 

[Feronix]

Intel didn't lock people out of using Xeons dude. That choice was entirely down to the mobo maker and didn't really consist of locking people out, more just bothering to sit down and test and add support.

Asrock are usually the best when it comes to supporting Xeons but I've got a ES 8 core CPU in a Giga X79 UD3 and it works fine.

Unlike previous generations, Skylake-based Xeon E3 no longer works with a desktop chipset that supports the same socket, and requires C230 chipset to operate.

Source

I think this is due to the fact that a lot of people bought the Xeon E3 CPUs (1230, 1230 V2, 1230 V3) as they basically have the price of an i5, but the rendering performance of a locked i7. Of course Intel doesn't want this cause it means they make less money, so they restricted the mainstream platform (in this case the Z170 chipset) from usage of the Xeon E3 series CPUs, so people have to use Core i series.

 

[AlienALX]

Hmm I see. Rotten sods I didn't know they had done that... You're right though, people would have gone with the Xeons because they were much cheaper than the rip off desktop counterpart.

 

[TPC]

Hmm I see. Rotten sods I didn't know they had done that... You're right though, people would have gone with the Xeons because they were much cheaper than the rip off desktop counterpart.

but now you can get them on the desktop, with a motherboard which is based on a normal board rather than a speced down serverboard.

 

[JR23]

Hmm I see. Rotten sods I didn't know they had done that... You're right though, people would have gone with the Xeons because they were much cheaper than the rip off desktop counterpart.

Are they though IRL? The locked slightly cut back not 'K' chips are decent value, ish. It's not really worth discussing now Skylake destroyed the entire CPU market by inflating everything with undeserved hype.


As for this board looking like a cheap Sabertooth, I didn't even know it was possible, I think the slightly more coherent clearly more expensive one looks ok, in the right build, it would be very cool. I don't really see how the FPS playing digital camo vibe aligns with the more discerning professional interested in a little Xeon, but ok.

JR

 

[AlienALX]

but now you can get them on the desktop, with a motherboard which is based on a normal board rather than a speced down serverboard.

For years and years you could run Xeons in any board that supported them. That's pretty much why we have this "X58 craze" going on, because you can shove in a cheap Xeon for around £60 and get six overclockable cores.

A few years ago I wanted to upgrade because I had a bad I7 950 that ran hot all of the time. That meant no overclocking, as it quickly hit the max temps. I couldn't get anywhere near 4ghz, even on a NHD14.

So I bought a £47 MATX Gigabyte motherboard and a quad core Sandybridge Xeon (same as the I5 2400) for about £40 less than the I5 2400. Only main difference? 2400 has IGPU which I didn't need or use any way.

I've also got a Gigabyte X79 UD3 that I paid £52 for (Amazon return) and a 8 core 16 thread Ivybridge Xeon I paid £130 for. I inititally used it as a Hackintosh and it was absolutely superb. I benched at over twice the score of a I5 4690k @ 4.5ghz.

I then retired the Hackintosh because I got a new monitor with only one input (boo ) and it now serves as my wife's gaming PC with a Titan Black in it.

But over the past couple of years Intel have made a few Xeons that are basically locked (we knew that any way) but they are like the same as the desktop CPU only much, much cheaper. Think I7 4790 (non K) for £80 less !

So it's rotten that they have done this because these boards (with this mysterious chip on that probably does FA) will likely be more expensive, offsetting the saving you make by dumping IGPU and buying the Xeon.

So boo, poor show Intel (though why would I expect FA different from them?)

I'm still eyeing up 10c 16t Xeons atm for my X99 rig. I can get one for less than £250.