Asus ROG GL702ZC owners lounge

Well you really only have two choices if you want true desktop processing power: this AMD, or one of the Clevos. I really wanted TB3, but at this price point, nothing from Clevo comes close except for the
P751TM1-G...and it was very tempting. The base model has an 8700K and 1060, both upgradeable; TB3; 4 DIMM slots; and 2x M.2 NVMe and 2x 2.5inch SATA3. Very, very tempting for a base price around US$1650. But it is a 15.6 incher, and that, for me, is a dealbreaker. I am also not confident regarding cpu upgradeability, since Intel has the nasty habit of doing "something" so that old motherboards/sockets can't accept newer cpus past one upgrade. As it stands, AMD has stated that the AM4 socket will be supported until (through?) 2020 - which isn't far away, really, but hey, if I can upgrade the cpu 2 more times I'll be happy.

I think part of me also wanted to own the first AMD laptop with a desktop processor.

 

Ordered my new ROG Strix GL702ZC yesterday; delivery next week. Will post again on that date. I can hardly wait!!!

Upgrading from my Lenovo Y700 FX-8800P/R9 M385X.

I refuse to buy intel/nvidia out of something approaching principles. Nice no longer having to make sacrifices for those principles. Go AMD!

 

Don't think we can expect AMD to act on this.
If the replies I got on AMD community website are any indication, their position seems to be the following:
Wattman = overclocking, and laptops have limited thermal constraints.

None of their mobile GPU's to date support Wattman with the latest drivers... it seems that AMD programmed their drivers to NOT display/enable Wattman if a mobile GPU is detected, and the device ID in our RX 580 is likely identifying it as a mobile one (even though its a desktop RX 580 5GB with a 20% underclock - resulting in only 10% less performance).

This actually doesn't make me too optimistic for future support on this laptop as far as Asus goes.
I can easily see them stopping BIOS releases for GL702ZC and that we probably won't get anything for Ryzen+, Ryzen 2 or 3 (or that we might get Ryzen+ support... but more difficult for 2 or 3 because by then, I'm suspecting Asus would want to move on and just end up charging more money to people by forcing them to upgrade the whole thing as opposed to just the CPU).

Oh well... guess we will have to wait and see as it's still too early to tell.... and in the meantime, rock this machine.

 

No one should ever have to compromise or sacrifice their principles (if they are proper ones obviously).

Good to see you finally upgraded.
I was using my Acer 5930G (P9600/9600mGT) for 9 years before finally jumping to GL702ZC.

I also refused to get a laptop with Intel/Nvidia as I knew AMD will be coming out with new hardware, so I opted to wait and see how it pans out (it was worth the wait), plus I knew of Intel's bribing tactics, and Nvidia also lining devs pockets with money so they would optimize games and software specifically for their hardware (which put me off supporting those kinds of companies and practices - mind you, in a monetary based system, this kind of thing is pervasive through the industry). Granted, AMD could be said to be doing the same for titles they sponsor, but AMD doesn't have the cash Nvidia has, and that whole proprietary/closed software and hardware on Nvidia's end is really pitiful, especially when AMD is using TressFX and OpenCL, which can be used by anyone.

In short, devs should optimize for both AMD and Nvidia, and actually make games that are optimized for PC to begin with (not just bad console ports - in practically most cases, textures and even audio files - just to name a few - have 0 compression of any kind, which puts that much more strain on the system and requires a lot of space on an SSD drive which has limited space).

 

Has anyone tried running an APU in this yet?

 

I had the exact same question. What would a 65W Ryzen 5 2400G do in one of these? For some reason this excites me. Perhaps in a few years I can swap the CPU out for the (then) newest APU? I receive my new GL702ZC on Monday. I can not wait!

 

Doubtful it would work as hoped, as the motherboard needs to have a video out built-in for the APU's GPU output. The GL702ZC doesn't have an APU integrated GPU video output, only the RX 580 video output.

Besides the APU GPU's are performing about as good as GTX 1030, or below a AMD 550, so it wouldn't make sense against the GL702ZC RX 580, even neutered for mobile.

And, the APU CPU would be a downgrade of CPU performance as well.

Better to wait and get the Ryzen+ updated CPU's also arriving soon. The new 2xxx Ryzen+ CPU's use the upgraded silicon process and tweaks as the new 2xxx Ryzen APU's, and allocate all of their power and thermal resources for CPU performance improvements; those are the updated CPU's of interest to upgrade the GL702ZC.

 

Isn't the motherboard a B350? They work with APUs I think. I agree waiting for a future (2019 - 2020, 7nm higher-clocked) Ryzen ++ is the way to go. Lighter graphical tasks, like web browsing and watching video could be done more economically on the iGPU, leaving the RX580 for VR and gaming. Just my thoughts.

 

There are desktop B350 motherboards that also don't have APU video outputs. Always physically check motherboard connectors, or you might find you bought the wrong motherboard.

http://dlcdnet.asus.com/pub/ASUS/nb/GL702ZC/0409_E13295_GL702ZC_V2_A.pdf

Checking the GL702 manual, there is an HDMI port and a Displayport port, no other video outputs are listed.

 

Yes, but considering that the RX 580 in GL702ZC is soldered to the motherboard (was made to be a part of it), then basically, the video out going to the laptop screen is directed at the mobo itself.
I don't think there would be too much of a difference with the internal output that connects the screen to the mobo and how a general output on a desktop motherboard works.
Even desktop motherboards need to accommodate for Raven Ridge, and I suspect that the mobo would simply need to be coded to send the video signal through the video cable connecting the mobo and laptop screen.

My interest in a potential APU lies in the premise that a Ryzen2 equivalent of 1700 might have an IGP and higher core frequencies which would obviously improve battery life if an IGP was in use most of the time as opposed to the dGPU.

And besides, as it was mentioned, existing AM4 chipsets are compatible with APU's per AMD's statement... the only thing the mobos need are BIOS updates to accommodate APU's (and whether this happens is down to Asus) and future Ryzen CPU's.

Unless the Ryzen+ brings substantial boosts in clocks, I don't think we should bother with upgrading... unless we want a better binned Ryzen CPU that might allow us to undervolt better than existing 1700 with much higher frequencies (say... 1V at 4GhZ?).


But in case of laptops that have Intel CPU with and iGP and a dGPU, are there more than one video connectors leading from the mobo to the laptop screen, or two?

If its one, then I suspect it's a matter of just instructing the mobo to run the video signals through that cable.

 

Exactly, the RX 580 is a "discrete" GPU, and it's video output is the only one available on the HDMI and DisplayPort ports on the GL702ZC.

If there were going to be APU support, there would be disctinctly seperate HDMI, DVI, VGA ports also available on the GL702ZC, and there are none.

A B350 chipset motherboard with video connectors routes the APU GPU video through them:

A discrete GPU PCIE card has it's own video output HDMI, DVI, DisplayPort, etc connectors on the PCIE card.

So there will be no APU GPU video output through the Asus GL702ZC as it is made today.

The APU connectors on AMD motherboards have been this way for a long long time, they only support the IGP APU GPU. There is no "software" switching to direct APU GPU video out through the discrete GPU video ports, or to direct discrete video output through the B350 motherboard video outputs.

The GL702ZC was designed for RX580 discrete video output through it's video ports, so there is no way for APU GPU video to get out of the GL702ZC as made today.

Intel screws this all up by doing what you are suggesting routing all the video - discrete video and iGPU video through the iGPU to the internal display.

Even on Intel Optimus laptops the discrete video is what is pumped outside the laptop to external display's, there is no iGPU video output to external display's through the external video outputs. Very rarely there is one iGPU Optimus external video output, what a waste.

AMD was smart enough to avoid that mess.

The improvements will be in the new Ryzen+ CPU's, so you don't need to dream of cobbling together Ryzen APU's into the GL702ZC.

And, don't forget the Ryzen APU's have Thermal Interface Material under their Lid's, unlike the Ryzen, ThreadRipper, and Epyc CPU's which have soldered IHS "Lid's":

AMD confirms that Ryzen 2nd Generation will be soldered - Zen+ CPUs will not need to be delidded
http://forum.notebookreview.com/thr...ga-polaris-gpus.799348/page-408#post-10682997

 

Agree with all of that. I would **MUCH** prefer TB3 but the only desktop CPU with more then 4 cores in a laptop with TB3 is the 6 core. For encoding the loss of 2 cores (8 vs 6) is a big deal.

So go with 6 core CPU and process less frames per second but get the data on and off the laptop far far quicker..... OR go with an 8 core CPU and process more frames per second but get the data off and on the laptop a good deal slower. At the end of the day it takes far longer to encode then to move the data off and on the laptop.

The P751 having more onboard storage is a huge plus. Having those 2 x NVMe slots is a big deal to get the fast I/O (Raid 0 setup) - but the storage does nothing for the actual processing - the encoding itself is CPU bound. Nothing beats more cores (up to a point)

I do get my use case is a *niche* but its real to me. At least there is USB 3.1 Gen 2 on the laptop. Not the best but it could be worse.

 

If you talk about Ryzen 7 1700 I can't see the 2 extra cores will do much more vs 2 core less from 8700K
techpowerup.com/reviews/8700K - Core i7-8700K Reviewed by Lab501

 

For me, the reasons for my choice go deeper than just that...they go to the incredibly low ethical depths Intel has sunk to over a long, sustained period of time, as most recently represented by this:
https://www.techpowerup.com/240283/intel-released-coffee-lake-knowing-it-was-vulnerable-to-spectre-and-meltdown

 

My new Strix GL702ZC arrives tomorrow. It will take several days of setting up, copying over files, downloading others. Windows update, etc. Anyway, could anyone give me some pointers. I read somewhere that only the Threadripper version of Ryzen Master works. Are there any other things I should know. Like, will it be capable of writing email and web browsing? Just kidding. I plan on using it for VR. To fight pain - I am very encouraged by the advances made in this area. I am disabled. I suffer from a very painful condition called Complex Regional Pain Syndrome, Type 2, Stage 4. My left arm/hand is now a useless, contorted, withered appendage that does nothing but hurt. I live in a 'stress-position' 24 hours a day. Anyway, I've found gaming to be a great way of focusing away from the pain. I come to PC gaming late. I'm 49 years old now. When I was healthy and working I was far too busy to game. I also used computers in my work and did not want to relax in front of a computer. Now I spend 85% of my waking hours in front of my laptop. I am restricted to a laptops because my one good hand has to straddle the mouse pad and keyboard. I don't think I'll be able to game in VR due to the controller situation. For the most part I've mastered gaming on a screen. Between re-assigning keys and using AutoHotKey, etc. I can play and enjoy most games. I can even hold my own playing 64-player Battlefield 4.

Now I'll have a desktop IN a laptop; thank you Asus! I would also be open to suggestions regarding the best/wallet-friendly VR headsets. Thank you in advance to anyone who has any advice or suggestions for me. Have a great day everyone.

 

Those test results are from a time before Spectre and Meltdown, those tests need to be re-run.

There are successes in those tests on both AMD and Intel results, so it will depend on what your software needs for best results.

AVX type acceleration is one "advantage" for Intel, but as we have seen AVX needs to be disabled on Prime95 to avoid cooking the CPU, so you won't want to run it for encoding either.

Purchase Intel broken security CPU's is a bad idea, so I and many others will recommend refraining from new purchases until Intel releases new CPU's.

Once those new architecture Intel CPU's have been proven in the field, for what - 10 years? - that's how long it took to find these Meltdown / Spectre bugs, so that sounds about right.

I'll buy Intel again in 10 years

 

How old is Ryzen architecture? I wonder why AMD engineers wanted release throw out a new microarchitecture with the Spectre CPU flaws And from what you post.... More than 90% of all Gaming laptops - notebook workstations produced now and in the future (+10 years in time) is delivered with pure trash

 

Hey, I am posting what others have already concluded, I'm only sharing the good news.

Even the CERT official security response was, hey, if it's an Intel CPU you gotta "Replace the CPU", even now -> that's the only mitigation that has a chance of working 100%.

You bought a pig in a poke, and it's now matured to it's full 400lb's of dead weight.

Enjoy running that fat boy around the benchmark world, towing the full dead weight of Meltdown and Spectre around it's neck.

Albatross!! - "That Intel CPU around my neck is worse than an Albatross!!"

Remember Ryzen+ and Ryzen 2.0 are coming right along to ease your Intel induced suffering, and AMD doesn't even have to beat Intel performance, it's just gotta work right - Intel still can't do that... oh, well.

 

Fat or thin boy... +90% of all notebooks run Intel. I haven't the numbers, maybe you have? And I haven't counted in the lowest powered notebooks with Intel or AMD processors. From what I know... AMD wasn't a notebook option if you wanted more power (cpu-gpu) last year or before that.

 

Instead of defending Intel, continuing to recommend people buy broken Intel CPU's, you should be mad as hell, and signing up for a class action lawsuit, and demanding a refund.

Instead of bleating on about useless performance that it'll never have again, you should be investigating alternatives, and helping others to get away from the problem, not sending them deeper into it.

Wake up, Intel's over for now, AMD's the only available alternative, make it work - don't fight it, join in and move on.

CERT Vulnerability Note VU#584653
CPU hardware vulnerable to side-channel attacks
Original Release date: 03 Jan 2018 | Last revised: 22 Jan 2018
https://www.kb.cert.org/vuls/id/584653
...
Solution

Apply updates

"Operating system, CPU microcode updates, and some application updates mitigate these attacks. Note that in many cases, the software fixes for these vulnerabilities will have a negative affect on system performance. Also note that Microsoft Windows systems will no longer receive security updates via Windows Update if they are not running compliant anti-virus software. As with deploying any software updates, be sure to prioritize and test updates as necessary.

Consider CPU Options

Initial reports from the field indicate that overall system performance is impacted by many of the available patches for these vulnerabilities.

Depending on the software workflow and the CPU capabilities present, the performance impact of software mitigations may be non-trivial and therefore may become an ongoing operational concern for some organizations.

While we recognize that replacing existing CPUs in already deployed systems is not practical, organizations acquiring new systems should evaluate their CPU selection in light of the expected longevity of this vulnerability in available hardware as well as the performance impacts resulting from the various platform-specific software patches.

Deployment contexts and performance requirements vary widely, and must be balanced by informed evaluation of the associated security risks. Contact your system vendor to determine if the CPU and operating system combination will experience a performance penalty due to software mitigations for these vulnerabilities."

Intel's got a lot of work to do to come out with a high performing replacement that is secure, and my guess is the first one will be a dodgey punter, wait till 6 months or more after it releases for the reviews and customer reviews come out.

I'm estimating over 1 year from now before considering Intel again, and that's only if the new CPU is a winner. Otherwise, wait another 12-18 months for the real solution to come out and prove itself.

It's all AMD from now on brother's and sister's, at least for another 2+ years.

 

Why should we lower our standards just because AMD does not have an exploitable vulnerability that has been discovered (yet) and a big to do made out of it by the media? At this point, I am still not seeing their stuff as being worth buying until they can do something to improve their process enough to produce CPUs that are actually useful for overclocking. I am sincerely hoping they do so, but right now I don't think so. No point in wasting money on something that has a meltdown of its own sort (pun intended) at core clock speeds as pathetic and boring as belly-button 4.0-4.2GHz BGA turdbook quality. And, I have to wonder what's the answer going to be when AMD does have a serious latent vulnerability discovered? You know it's there, just waiting to be found... only a matter of when, not if. Same old, same old... just the world we live in. Do you reckon it will be as politicized when they do? Where you going to move on to when that happens? The computing technology realm has always been, and likely forever will be, a playground that is the domain of crooks and thieves, and the rain falls on the just and the unjust. We can all freak out and lose sleep over it, or just accept it for what it is and move on. Kind of like braving the crosswalk on a busy city street. Anyone that is overly risk adverse needs to stop using computers.

 

Yeah, just keep driving straight ahead, on the same course, it'll be just fine.

 

I agree. It will be just fine. But, you didn't answer the question. Wachagonnado if and when AMD CPUs get popular enough for the deadbeat hacks and losers to take time discover their vulnerabilities and exploit them? You're using the same lame argument that crApple fanboys do when they say Macs are more secure than PCs and the rest of us know the only reason that is even partially true when taken out of context is the hackers don't burn any calories on crap that holds a statistically irrelevant market share. Nothing is secure. AMD CPUs are not necessarily more secure just because they are less susceptible to a specific security exploit that has been popularized by recent media hype, and it seems irrational to pretend otherwise.

 

Keep buying broken Intel CPU's, I'm sure Intel will appreciate it.

 

I will. Definitely. Until Something better comes along. Then they will be treated like the gum stuck under the table at the dirty diner on the bad side of town. Still waiting for something better. Zen is not it, but I'm open to the possibility they might continue on the positive trendline and release something special that interests me at some point. For every one benchmark that AMD wins at, there are 4 or 5 that they lose to Intel. That has to change first, then I'll take them seriously.

 

I can't in good conscience advise people to buy broken security Intel CPU's, and they wouldn't expect me to either, I'm not going to gloss over the obvious, they aren't working as advertised.

If you go on buying broken security CPU's from Intel, knowingly buying broken security CPU's you loose your standing for those new broken security CPU's for claim's, and more than likely loose your claims against Intel for the previous purchases now too - as you knowingly purchased more broken security CPU's.

It's not a good idea to not think these things through when there is a lot of money on the line.

There will be contract delay's to account for this, and some will continue with refunds for previous purchases and discounts moving forward with replacement discounts when Intel finally offers fixed silicon.

But, that's all too big of a mess to get tangled up in if you can avoid it. And, most can and will.

Better to move on with alternatives and not repeat the same mistakes with Intel again.

 

You are talking about corporations with server farms and consumers as if they are the same niche. None of Intel's CPUs are broken and saying they are is a blatant distortion of fact. What is broken is the human race... or those that prey on the exploits of others, no matter what kind of exploits they are. This will never end. Pretending that AMD is a serious solution to that is burying your head in the sand. At any given point in time since the invention of personal computers there have been hacks and malware that present serious security risks to someone that stumbles into the wrong place at the wrong time. You are singling out two serious vulnerabilities on a point in time snapshot and making an isolated case to promote AMD for no reason other than they are less vulnerable for the moment. That is not due to careful planning, superior engineering, due diligence or anything else that AMD did to purposefully be less vulnerable in a politicized landscape. This logic will all come unraveled the moment a serious AMD vulnerability surfaces that shows they are more at risk than Intel. That won't make them any less desirable to those that prefer AMD... at least not to those that resist reacting to media hype, social media chaos and Facebook News Network. The same alarmist mentality is what produces climate change/global warming/treehugging Kool-Aid drinkers and overreacting anti-gun lobbyists. There is always a crisis for them and the sky is always falling. Our main enemy here is dishonest and evil human beings and as long as they exist (which will be forever) the notion of computer security is facetious.

 

I changed my post, it's not just applicable to large server farms, it's also for single use and fewer groupings.

It's clear Intel is going to have to include these mitigations as they develop them in new CPU's, it's going to stop being optional to have them enabled eventually, as Intel can't ship CPU's that expose them to ongoing liability, so those slowdowns won't be unavoidable.

There are less affected alternatives, so why buy new Intel CPU's that you know for certain are insecure, and are going to have unavoidable hobbled performance ?

There are enough "bad people" that will float millions of incursions daily if they can, and with unprotected Intel CPU's vulnerable to incursion you are "asking for it".

It may eventually be like running a Windows XP or 2000 system on the internet now, unprotected it's pwned in a short time.

I wouldn't waste money on Intel CPU's, and I recommend no one else does either.

 

Same question as before... What are you going to do when the next vulnerability is discovered that makes AMD broken? Where will you turn then? Or, do you actually think that is never going to happen?

I'm not going to recommend that anyone make buying decisions based on a volatile what if scenario that can change dramatically in the blink of an eye. People that are seriously worried about insecurity and infiltration just need to stay off the internet. That is the only way they will be less at risk. And, I think the world might end up being a safer and smarter place if they did.

 

I am happy sticking with the reality of what we have in front of us now, I don't need to posit what if's that don't exist.

If additional issues come up, then I'll deal with them. Like I've been doing on the internet since 1978.

You are skirting the problem, not facing it directly, and I understand, denial is a stage to go through.

It may take the realization that the new CPU's have the mitigations baked in the firmware, patches you can't not install, performance hits you can't disable.

You'll get there eventually.

 

Then we will all be in the same boat and I will find something else to enjoy. No point in owning a belly-button CPU that sucks at overclocking for no reason other than it is "safer" based on an isolated definition of safety. I can experience the equivalent of watching paint dry for less money doing something else.

 

Yeah, well OC'ing is a thing, but it's not the only thing, and for most people it's not even of any interest to them, especially a laptop.

You could learn to use the computer for other things? They do lots of stuff besides benchmarking and OC'ing, really they do.

 

I think overclocking will be even more popular than people think. Almost all the notebook OEM's try to push you towards unlocked mobile. And more and more of them offer OC tool in their main software.

 

Amen to that!

A more balanced, and realistic view of the situatioon.

 

Interesting....

So the 8700 matches the Ryzen 1700 in encoding.......

here I go again....endless reading and research and paralysis on which laptop to buy. In the end there is still a big difference in pricing between laptop classes though.

When is the next coffee lake coming ? IIRC there was something about this coffee lake version being a stop gap measure until the next coffee lake CPU comes out and that the next coffee lake was the real deal compared to this one.....anyone know about that ( i read it somewhere but cant remember where I read that)

 

I'm not sure, but I think its called Ice Lake (LGA). Coming this fall (late fall, I don't know). If you think about Coffee 6 core BGA... Maybe April or May.

 

If you plan to do any overclocking, 8700K beats it handily in most things with 2 cores less because Ryzen sucks at overclocking. So, if that matters there is nothing to stop and read about.

 

Even though it's all irrelevant now that the Meltdown / Spectre has been found, and all Intel CPU's aren't worth buying - until Intel releases a new architecture CPU in a couple of years, I'll let you know what I heard...

The story boils down to: z370 6 core Kabylake-Coffeelake vs z390 8 core Coffeelake 2.

That's about it

The first z370 came out to support the Kabylake 7700K + 2 more Kabylake Cores to make a 6 core Kabylake, that Intel decided to call the "Coffee Lake" 8700K.

It's not really Coffee Lake. The original Coffee lake was due out late in 2018 before Intel needed to come out with a new name for the 6 core Kabylake.

Then we heard that the z390 was required to support 8 core, and that it was going to be the real Coffee Lake and come out at the end of 2018.

Then we heard that Intel was going to release 8 Core Z390 earlier, as early as 1H 2018, with February / March as the rumored release.

IDK how much of any of those rumors are true, except @Eurocom Support made posts about the 8 core Coffee Lake and Z390 that they would come out in late 2018 as a new Eurocom product.

Of note, it was made clear that the z370 CPU's won't work on z270, and z370 CPU's won't work on Z390, and Z390 CPU's aren't backwards compatible to z370 / z270.

I don't see much about the Z390 since November, when it was mentioned as sampling:

Intel’s Z390 Motherboards Start Showing Up – Will Support Coffee Lake-S (Up To 8 Core) Processors, Arrival Due in 1H 2018
https://wccftech.com/intel-z390-motherboard-leak/

There were other outlets carrying the info too, but again it's all rumors.

Anyone have anything more recent / more solid as to the z390 / 8 Core "Coffee Lake"?

 

I just received my new Ryzen Strix laptop and I need to send it right back. Unfortunately, the left speaker is blown. A lot of nasty vibrations coming from the left side. If I put on earbuds it goes away. I was in the music business for years and the one thing I can not stand in bad/broken audio. So, now I'll probably have to wait another two weeks to finally enjoy my new computer. Other than the speaker situation, I really, really like this laptop.

 

I have a similar issue with mine... the speakers are effectively producing vibrations during high trebles or high bass tones... it's only if I place my hand on the lower part of the casing that the vibrations subside and sound is normal.
But I'm not sure if that's down to the speaker being blown... try placing your hand on the lower left side of the casing and lightly pressing it during playback to see if you still get the same issue... if you are, then it's probably just casing vibrations... and not a speaker issue.

 

How can you put in stone that Z390 CPU's (8 core) won't be backwards compatible to z370? What 100% proof have you for this? This is pure speculations on your side and not a proof. And this is pure BS due fanboyism. You know it, and We know that!!

 

Just like 7700K was not compatible with Z170 - myth busted - and we (as in this forum) are probably going to soon have proof that 8700K is also backward compatible with Z170 thanks to Brother @Prema. Oh, the joys of artificial incompatibilities and cancerous firmware... $$$ ...cha-ching. But, then again, nothing is backward or forward compatible when you divest yourself with a disposable dead-end BGA turdbook. AMD solutions for GPUs are still lackluster products.

 

100% claims/allegations should be followed up with 100% proof. Or just shut up posting svada. Nothing more than pure proof from Intel or MB manufactures can do that. Not from any person who post his own agenda (You should not buy any Intel processors for the first 10 years. All are broken/damaged/flawed).
None really expected that Intel would push 3 gen Intel on same MB socket. But people hoped. And this is two different things, bro Fox. But one thing is 100% put in stone... BGA or soldered and you are doomed. Even within same gen

 

I stated this is all based on rumors, pay attention, read for comprehension:

"Then we heard that Intel was going to release 8 Core Z390 earlier, as early as 1H 2018, with February / March as the rumored release.

IDK how much of any of those rumors are true, except @Eurocom Support made posts about the 8 core Coffee Lake and Z390 that they would come out in late 2018 as a new Eurocom product."
...
"There were other outlets carrying the info too, but again it's all rumors."

 

Twist with words. Several ways to come to Rome But
"Of note, it was made clear that the, will not work on Z390, are not backwards compatible" does not sound as rumors. I can blame on my english, but I should not do it in this case Oh'well, we can let it be with this.

 

Z170 compatibility for 7700K is different, if a motherboard vendor provided an updated BIOS you could do it, it was supported by Intel. Here's an example, check out the supported CPU chart:
https://www.asus.com/us/Motherboards/Z170-A/HelpDesk_CPU/

The Z370 / 8700K not being supported in z270/z170 is no myth, support is explicitly denied by Intel and motherboard vendors.

If a hack works then that's nice for whomever takes the time to make it work, but it's not supported by Intel or the motherboard vendors.

No, Coffee Lake Will Not Run In Z270 Motherboards (And Here’s Why)
by Paul Alcorn September 27, 2017 at 2:15 PM
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-coffee-lake-z270-z370-motherboard,35554.html

" But Intel isn't providing backward compatibility with either of the older LGA1151 motherboards (Z170 and Z270) and, curiously, your only upgrade path through the end of the year comes in the form of pricey Z370 motherboards—value-oriented B350 or H370 motherboards will not debut until next year.

Intel provided a few technical reasons for the lack of backward compatibility , with the requirement for an improved power delivery subsystem being one of the most important. We know that the existing Z270 motherboards can provide enough power to push quad-core processors, as we see now with the Coffee Lake Core i3 processors, but Intel noted that the additional two cores proffered on the i5 and i7 would require more power.

Although TDP isn't a direct measurement of power consumption, it is a decent indicator. The Coffee Lake i7-8700K weighs in with a TDP of 95W compared to Kaby Lake i7-7700K's 91W rating. A small increase, sure, but we could see larger deltas during overclocking. Intel says it improved the package power delivery to offset the increased overclocking power requirements for the six-core models, and we will certainly quantify the difference in package power draw during our review. The Coffee Lake processors also support per-core overclocking, a feature that wasn't included in the Kaby Lake era, but they still don't allow for fine-grained per-core voltage or P-State settings.

Intel noted that the Z370 motherboards have improved memory routing to support DDR4-2666, a slight increase over Kaby Lake's DDR4-2400. Existing Kaby Lake motherboards easily support memory overclocking well beyond DDR4-2666, as any overclocker can attest, but Intel also says it has baked other improvements into Coffee Lake processors. Intel expanded the memory multipliers to support up to 8400 MT/s and added a real-time memory latency control feature.

Whether the existing Z270 motherboards, many of which offer beefy power delivery, could potentially satisfy the needs of the Coffee Lake processors will be a hot-button debate for some time to come. We've requested additional details from Intel regarding the socket and pin-out, but we await further details.

The 300-series chipset doesn't offer any new features; even the TDP remains the same, which suggests the 300-series chipset is merely a Z270 refresh. Outside of new LED functionality or other third-party additions, there would be little reason to upgrade a Kaby Lake system to a newer motherboard, but the option would be nice. However, Kaby Lake processors will also not work on 300-series motherboards.

Intel indicated the decision to eliminate Kaby Lake compatibility was due, at least in part, to requests from motherboard vendors that the company make a "clean split."

For motherboard vendors, this removes the burden of adding support for Kaby Lake (and the requisite validation) during a time when most motherboard vendors are already stretched to their engineering resource limits due to rapid fire Intel and AMD launches."

So, facts from Intel, not myth's. Intel doesn't support Z270 / Z370 compatibility, so you couldn't plug your 7700K into a Z370 and your 8700K isn't supported in Z170 / Z270, you all have dead-end LGA laptops.

AMD provides 4 years of AM4 / TR4 socket support to allow owners to upgrade their CPU's, and migrate their CPU's between new motherboard chipset's using the same AM4 / TR4 socket.

Let's hope AMD / Asus make it possible to upgrade the CPU with the Asus GL702ZC

 

There have been situations like this where you can remove the back and tighten the screws on the speaker, or fluff in some bunting to shroud the rattle, but I'm glad you sent it back for a new one, that's the right thing to do - you paid a lot of money for it, it should work right out of the box.

 

Pay attention. I never said it would be supported by Intel. 7700K on Z170 is not supported by them, but it works flawlessly. If it works, their support (or lack of it) is not relevant for those that are willing to stop caring about their support. Not working and not supported are two different things. Most of the high speed XMP memory being used today is not supported by Intel, and it makes no difference to those that enjoy using it. All that means is you can't pin the blame on the manufacturer if it doesn't work. We're working on 8700K functioning on Z170 as well. Stay tuned. There is already evidence it can work when you don't accept being told it will not be supported.

Most of this "supported" or "not supported" stuff is just fabricated to generate wealth for the OEM/ODM. Just like Windows 7 is "not supported" by Kaby Lake, Coffee Lake and Ryzen... 100% baloney.

 

It is accurate that official support and actual functionality are not the same things... after all, Acer didn't 'officially support' 8GB of RAM in my previous laptop (the official support topped out at 4GB), but 8GB still worked flawlessly because the chipset (PM45 at the time) supported it.
Granted, this also depends on how the BIOS for the laptop is written. Sometimes, OEM's can intentionally limit RAM or CPU support even though hardware-wise there is no practical reason behind why it shouldn't work - Intel is no different.

That same PM45 chipset I had also wasn't compatible with C2Q CPU's, because my chipset revision at the time was an earlier one ... so, when Intel released C2Q CPU's, they used a modified PM45 chipset for them (but they also used same naming scheme and one couldn't directly differentiate between v1 and v2 PM45's without directly testing them), and no BIOS microcode update or 'hack' would have made a v1 PM45 compatible with C2Q because Intel altered the functionality of the pins and sockets apparently and how they deliver certain signals.

In how many cases did Intel's newer CPU's ended up being backward compatible on the same motherboard?
I would imagine the numbers would be few... or low enough to not matter for the general population... so they would have to upgrade the whole platform regardless, or continue using the older one for an extended period of time.