They're not going to sell you a hyperthreading + L3-capable CPU for a price less than other hyperthreading + L3-capable CPUs though; that wouldn't make business sense.nstead of replacing the physical CPU, they simply enable features with a code. So to me it's simply a cost saving measure (and also more convenient for customers because they can enable locked features immediately).
You paid for the advertised feature set. If you decided to buy, you were obviously satisfied with what was offered at the time. You didn't pay for the locked features.So they get to charge you a second time for the same features you already paid for the first time 'round.
As far as I know disabled parts can be completely shut off. But even if that wasn't the case, you still paid for a complete package with certain power characteristics, and you agreed with them when you bought the CPU.Besides, as pointed out in the comments to the Engadget story, the silicon features are just going to sit there on the die and burn power you have to pay for even if they're deactivated. So you paid for something you're being actively barred from using, and you're wasting electricity with nothing to show for it also.
Bollicks. Of course I did.You didn't pay for the locked features.
AMG! How did the PC market ever survive up until now with the old, super bad way of doing things?! I can't wrap my head around it!Most of all, though, it's still economically sound. It would cost far more to provide everyone with a tailor-made chip which had exactly the capabilities they needed and not more.
Bollicks. Of course I did.
What's the problem? You know, there was a story that someone bought a supercomputer and wanted to add more memory, so he called the vendor.
You pay for the advertised features. You'd have no basis to complain if the CPU you bought didn't have any hidden, locked features at all. Similarly, you have no basis to demand that the locked features be made available to you for free, as the manufacturer never promised you these features.Bollicks. Of course I did.
Huh? Disabling functionality is nothing new, it's been done for a long time. What's new here is a paid way to unlock those features.AMG! How did the PC market ever survive up until now with the old, super bad way of doing things?! I can't wrap my head around it!
I have no problem with this scenario in principle, assuming that a) your price is competitive, and b) the warranty and lifetime of the CPU is not affected.xmas
"Hey Dav I have one of those amd black cpu's it runs at 2.4ghz and I'd like to upgrade my pc to a 3.6 ghz"
Davros turns up at xmas's house enters the bios and changes the multiplyer
"xmas ive performed a cpu upgrade for you you now have a 3.6ghz cpu that'll be $200"
xmas
"thanks dav thats so good of you I couldnt be happier"
Would that senario be ok with you xmas ?
No it was a processor upgrade the vendor turned up flicked a switch and charged them for a processor upgrade, in other words a scumbag
xmas
"Hey Dav I have one of those amd black cpu's it runs at 2.4ghz and I'd like to upgrade my pc to a 3.6 ghz"
Davros turns up at xmas's house enters the bios and changes the multiplyer
"xmas ive performed a cpu upgrade for you you now have a 3.6ghz cpu that'll be $200"
xmas
"thanks dav thats so good of you I couldnt be happier"
Would that senario be ok with you xmas ?