Intel to capitalize on "unlocked" CPU features?

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. The vendor sent a technician with only a simple tool box. No huge chunks of memory blocks. The technician simply opened the machine and did some configuration and viola! more memory available.

It made perfect sense to do that because the cost of shipping large chunks of memory to a customer (who may be in a foreign country) could be much larger than the cost of the memory itself. Now Intel seems to be doing the same thing: instead 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).
 
It also helps to simplify the range of laptops. So rather than having X 1 / 2 / 3, Y 1 / 2 / 3, Z 1 / 2 / 3 feature levels they can simply have X Y Z and with the actual level of performance unlocked by spending more money.

I wonder if AMD are intending on doing the same thing? I.E. Ship large numbers of Ontario processors which will be soldered onto boards and then unlock the performance level depending on the SKU / power requirements and how much people are willing to pay.
 
You could say they've been doing this forever anyway. For example, charging more for CPUs with Hyperthreading or with more cache enabled. The support is already there and probably not defective, but they shut it off so they can sell you the $500 model instead of the $300 unit. AMD does it too, obviously.
 
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).
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.

So they get to charge you a second time for the same features you already paid for the first time 'round.

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.

Terrible idea, just terrible. There needs to be a law against shit like this.
 
So they get to charge you a second time for the same features you already paid for the first time 'round.
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.

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.
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.

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.
 
You didn't pay for the locked features.
Bollicks. Of course I did.

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.
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!
 
When I saw that on engadget it was geared up to make people think they were being cheated...

I can't quite work out why - we've all been buying multiplier locked CPU's for years and buying the same silicon as high end chips that are crippled a bit in either clock speed or features so they can be binned into the desired price brackets. I'm sure binning parts based on how many cores are actually working etc is still pretty common but on mature processes I've always assumed much of the binning as low end parts is just a commercial descision...

Being able to turn off these artificial limits if you want down the line seems like only a plus. :)

I guess the only real downsides would be if the unused logic had any power draw that wouldn't be there with a physical deactivation or if the unused regions of the chip weren't tested as fully at manufacture but I can't see Intel making that mistake.
 
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.

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
 
So let me get this straight, in the nearby future all the intel cpu's will have the multiplier/features(hyperthreading/cache, extensions?) locked, so a 300...hm lets up it up to 500$/€ cpu would have "features" locked? At such price i'd expect everything (with the exception of defective cpu's) to be unlocked!

It sure sounds good for AMD though.
 
Bollicks. Of course I did.
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.

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!
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.
 
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 ?
 
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 ?
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.

I would not be happy with the specific offer, though. I don't think b) is the case here, but even if it was and I had no idea how to overclock myself (in which case it's highly unlikely I would have bought a black edition anyway), $200 would simply be too much.
 
it's maybe stupid but if it bothers you then don't buy into it ; also I get a feeling this will be reserved for OEM.

note that AMD does allow free unlocking, i.e. turn a sempron into a X2, a phenom X2 into a X4, or a athlon X3 into a X4 (the less common phenom II with 4MB L3 can be unlocked into 6MB L3 as well). but for an unlocked multiplier you have to buy the top of the range.


if Intel at least doesn't disable virtualisation extensions anymore, then they're actually less evil than before as far I'm concerned. You even have the option to overclock the IGP, so those Pentium G-something potentially are bigger bang for the buck than i3 or i5 for some uses.

Though I wonder about the newer Atoms on that - dual atom is ideally suited for servers, so if VT is restricted yet again on mobos you can actually buy, then that absolutely sucks! and is an incentive for buying overpowered hardware wasting some kWh in the process. (note that it would be better even without the heinous restrictions preventing µATX atom boards with four card slots)
 
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

So Intel wans't a scumbag when they locked a feature without any possibility to enable that (as it is now), but a scumbag when they provide that possibility?
 
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 ?

Sounds a lot like my first computer from Dell. Bought an Dell XPS P100c with a 100 Mhz intel cpu. Changing the multiplier made it 133 Mhz. Comparing with friends 133 version, was same CPU, only I paid 1k less...
So it's not exactly new with OEMs in the consumer space. But for us enthusiasts we wouldn't experience this when buying components/doing proper research.
 
This may be relegated to such things as some additional cache or threads, which are transparently handled by the hardware.
Things like ISA support, IO, or hardware functionality may be harder to handle because it would be hard to know the software environment and hardware setup at the time of upgrade, and switching software exposed features on or off could cause problems.

It's a different kind of validation problem, depending on how flexibly these cards can be applied. When selling a non-upradable SKU, Intel knows that the OEM has validated its design for that featureset. An upgrade card could potentially uprate a chip for a hardware base it was not designed for.

I wonder if the reverse is true, where the chip could be downrated.
A sure way to implode a virtualized server setup would be to create malicious code that disabled virtualization extensions.
 
I'm wondering HOW is the unlocking done? As mentioned, of course intel shipped cpus with HT and parts of cache disabled for ages - but these parts were disabled with "real" fuses, hence it was impossible (pretty much) to get that working again. So what is this magic software doing? It seems a bit difficult to imagine it can't get hacked?
 
Back
Top