Intel offering downloadable hardware upgrades for low end chips.

[newtekie1]

It's IMPOSSIBLE to feed the people who want a $399 Dell enough information as to why it will most likely not be sufficient for what they want to do, as they simply do not understand what components make up a PC, what they do and how they affect performance.

I really have no answer for this, and because of this lack of information they will keep buying low performing systems because they are cheap.

This is what I hear all of the time ... "I just want a computer to surf the webz, read e-mail and play the latest games".
They have no idea the difference between a rig that will surf the web and play the latest games. (sigh)

I don't know that I can agree with this. I can see the "latest games" comment coming from younger kids, but even still most of those would rather have a console and have no understanding about how PC gaming can be better.

The people looking to seriously play PC games tend to be PC enthusiasts anyway, and they know enough to know that a $399 dell isn't going to fit the bill.

However, I would say the large majority of people looking at the $399 Dell will have their needs completely filled by it, because they are using it for surfing and email only. These are also the people that have no interest in learning anything about the PC.

 

[cheesy999]

mandetory car analogy coming...

so basically, as a consumer... you go into a showroom and buy a car, now they know your car is gonna struggle at high speeds so they lock the 5th gear to compound the issue....

then offer it back to you as an upgrade....

as far as i'm concearned this should be a free fix.... i missed a couple of pages of the thread...
i checked the intel site and missed where they had a price...
can someone clarify weather we know how much they intend to charge...???

intel have had it good for to long, come on amd give us some competition... we need a price war badly...

it's what this system could become that's good
it's the computer equivalent of being able to buy the 1.6l engined car, and then being able to upgrade to 3l Turbo without having to buy an entire new car, just the engine

 

[LordJummy]

it's what this system could become that's good
it's the computer equivalent of being able to buy the 1.6l engined car, and then being able to upgrade to 3l Turbo without having to buy an entire new car, just the engine

Wrong. You're not buying a new engine. It's like selling a 3L engine that's crippled, and then unlocking it to 3L when they pay more money. It's not very honest. If the engine is already there and functional, why would they need more money to unlock it? It's not like giving it to you fully unlocked in the first place cost them any more money. It's not like later down the road they are like "we just found out a new way to turn your 1.6l into a full 3.0!" It was already a 3.0l car that they purposely locked to make extra cash.

 

[Easy Rhino]

You make it sound like they HAVE to do this to survive. They do not. CPU's have been sold discretely for the last 20 years or so and they've never had "unlockable" performance before, yet Intel has done very well indeed. This is a crucial point.

if chip manufacturers do not diversify their products in this way there will be no consumer pc market. end of story. full stop. you will get 1 maybe 2 chips every year and they will cost a lot more than your average chip price. most people would not be able to afford computers, only the rich, and you certainly would not be able to upgrade every year. the technology would improve so slowly it would be like we were living back in the late 60s. intel has adopted a business strategy that matches the engineering strategy of developing chips and widening the market. but i guess some people want to go back to the 1960s.

 

[cheesy999]

Wrong. You're not buying a new engine. It's like selling a 3L engine that's crippled, and then unlocking it to 3L when they pay more money. It's not very honest. If the engine is already there and functional, why would they need more money to unlock it? It's not like giving it to you fully unlocked in the first place cost them any more money. It's not like later down the road they are like "we just found out a new way to turn your 1.6l into a full 3.0!" It was already a 3.0l car that they purposely locked to make extra cash.

no, it is like me buying 3l car and not wanting to pay for all 3l at the time so I buy it working at the power of the 1.6, I then pay for Intel to remap the ecu at a later time to give me the full power of the 3l engine.

edit:no idea what made me write that in the past tense the first time I wrote it, changed now

 

[newtekie1]

Wrong. You're not buying a new engine. It's like selling a 3L engine that's crippled, and then unlocking it to 3L when they pay more money. It's not very honest.

But they only paid for a 1.6L, so that is what they got. It would only be dishonest if they didn't charge less for the engine because it was crippled.

 

[yogurt_21]

But they only paid for a 1.6L, so that is what they got. It would only be dishonest if they didn't charge less for the engine because it was crippled.

see thats where I would agree, if they charge for a samller cpu, then give the option to upgrade the chip you have I'm all for it.

I mean just imaging all the dells and hp's out there sitting idle and slow and you being able to crack the unlock code and make a killing doing performance enhancing for jimmy bob and peggy sue. All the while they think you're amazing.

to me it's a non issue. Intel tries to make more profit by streamlinign manufacturing and purposefullyc ripling cpu's that still pass at the higher levels so they can sell to a lower market while leaving the option or upgrading open which would more than likely be put in place to cover the extra cost of manufacturing.

at any rate, if theirs an unlock code, people will crack it and this will all blow up in intel's face

 

[LordJummy]

no, it is like me buying 3l car and not wanting to pay for all 3l at the time so I buy it working at the power of the 1.6, I then pay for Intel to remap the ecu at a later time to give me the full power of the 3l engine.

edit:no idea what made me write that in the past tense the first time I wrote it, changed now

I see what you mean.

However, the fact is it still has a 3l engine in there. I would personally be a bit upset if I bought a car and later they told me I'm not getting all of its potential, and I have to pay more to unlock it when it could have been running 100% the whole time.

Also, the people who buy the CPU's have no idea there has a potential to be unlocked. That's my entire problem with this. They are buying a chip, and are later being told "oh yeah we crippled ur chipz, pay to unlock it!". Most people would feel cheated in that case.

If you knew before hand that the car was crippled, then it's your decision. Most CPU buyers had no idea before hand. That's a major difference to me. It's just my opinion though, and if you're okay with the idea then there's no problem with that either.

 

[LordJummy]

But they only paid for a 1.6L, so that is what they got. It would only be dishonest if they didn't charge less for the engine because it was crippled.

We just see it differently. I appreciate everyone's input. If you're okay with it, then that's cool too.

 

[cheesy999]

I see what you mean.

However, the fact is it still has a 3l engine in there. I would personally be a bit upset if I bought a car and later they told me I'm not getting all of its potential, and I have to pay more to unlock it when it could have been running 100% the whole time.

Also, the people who buy the CPU's have no idea there has a potential to be unlocked. That's my entire problem with this. They are buying a chip, and are later being told "oh yeah we crippled ur chipz, pay to unlock it!". Most people would feel cheated in that case.

If you knew before hand that the car was crippled, then it's your decision. Most CPU buyers had no idea before hand. That's a major difference to me. It's just my opinion though, and if you're okay with the idea then there's no problem with that either.

but that happens anyway, the 2.2ghz. i3 is no different from the 2.5 , it's just an artificial limit on the multiplier, the Phenom x2 is the same as a Phenom x4

all they are doing is allowing these limits to be bypassed by those who couldn't normally

this could be someone who knows nothing technical on their dell

or it could be a TPU user on they're laptop

either way it's a good thing in the end

 

[jsfitz54]

What's the difference between a pay as you go platform: all chips are top tier and you can pay for any level you want to unlock vs. the current way of lazering off layers to dumb down a chip to sell / widen the market place?

and yes I know all chips are not perfectly produced and top tier.

This is not cheating the customer but rather making new technology affordable. Waste not want not.

 

[Ahhzz]

if chip manufacturers do not diversify their products in this way there will be no consumer pc market. end of story. full stop. you will get 1 maybe 2 chips every year and they will cost a lot more than your average chip price.

Absolute statements are absolutely silly. Especially when referring to the future.

They've been doing business this way for years, and making money. My opin is that they want to see if they can make money doing things differently, and how much noise they get from doing it. Hopefully, they can't, and the noise levels are unacceptable. I want a continual flow of upgraded and updated processors that are unlocked, and capable of supporting whatever you throw at them until they break, like the Denmark I'm running. It wasn't a year's salary for me, and I don't expect them to start charging that in the future.

 

[Wile E]

This also isn't affecting me directly, as I don't buy the low end chips and most likely never will. However, if the educated buyers like ourselves don't inform other people then no one will. I just feel a responsibility to help people understand exactly what is going on. While it is not happening now, Intel could decide to start further crippling other chips if this is successful. It is irresponsible to not take action when you see that it is necessary.

(PS: People keep reiterating this, but I already know that many manufacturers have been crippling hardware for years. We all understand that it's nothing new.)

So you mean I could buy an SB-E 6c/12t cpu right now, then down the road when I have a little more cash, I could upgrade it to 8c/16t? If the price is right, sign me up.

 

[LordJummy]

So you mean I could buy an SB-E 6c/12t cpu right now, then down the road when I have a little more cash, I could upgrade it to 8c/16t? If the price is right, sign me up.

Nope. I actually talked to an Intel rep, and asked him specifically if they will do this with high end chips. For now they will only be doing it with entry level. No plans to pre-cripple any mid-high end chips more than they already are, and then charge you to unlock it (free to them) later. ;P

Here is his response to my question about which chips this will affect:


Hi,

Sure thing. For now we are pointing the Intel Upgrade Services to entry-level processor. Some of the Intel® Core™ i3 Desktop /mobile Processors are currently under this line:

Intel® Core™ i3-2102 Processor
Intel® Core™ i3-2312M Processor

I have a link that you can share with your customer. I’m sure you will find it useful as well:

https://retailupgrades.intel.com/FAQ.aspx

Any question let us know.

Regards

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Intel technical support.


If you want any other info from him I can paste it. In another quick chat he reassured me that they will only be doing this with low-mid for the foreseeable future

 

[Wile E]

What I am saying by my post is, that I do not mind this practice, as long as the price is right. So, in this theoretical situation, lets say a 6c/12t chip normally sells for $1000, but the 8c/16t chip sells for $1200.

If I buy the $1000 chip, and can later pay, say $225-250 to upgrade it to a 8c/16t chip, I think it's a great idea. I'd happily pay that small percentage extra to save myself the troubles. If, however, they wanted to charge me more than that, I would have a problem with it.

 

[newtekie1]

No plans to pre-cripple any mid-high end chips more than they already are, and then charge you to unlock it (free to them) later.

Yeah, they just pre-cripple them and then charge you way more than $50 to buy a completely new processor instead. How terrible software unlocking would be for the high end chips...:shadedshu

What I am saying by my post is, that I do not mind this practice, as long as the price is right. So, in this theoretical situation, lets say a 6c/12t chip normally sells for $1000, but the 8c/16t chip sells for $1200.

If I buy the $1000 chip, and can later pay, say $225-250 to upgrade it to a 8c/16t chip, I think it's a great idea. I'd happily pay that small percentage extra to save myself the troubles. If, however, they wanted to charge me more than that, I would have a problem with it.

Lets just look at it in current day. Someone goes on Dell to buy a pre-built computer. They get it with an i5 2310, because that is the base CPU Dell offers in the system you are looking at, clock frequency of 2.9GHz, 4c/4t. Now, the $50 seems to net about a 4 multiplier speed boost. So lets apply that to the 2310, suddenly it is running at 3.4GHz, or basically i7 2600 speed minus hyperthreading. The cost from dell just to upgrade to the i5 2500 is $140... So hell, even if they charged $100 for the higher end upgrades, and all they were was a multiplier unlock(it would be awesome if they unlocked Hyperthreading though), I'd be fine with it. Because the pre-built manufacturers are already charging out the ass for upgrades on CPUs that should be a lot cheaper. The actual price difference between a 2310 and a 2500 is $28, but dell charges $140 for the upgrade! I'd gladdly pay Intel $50, or even $100, for it instead.

 

[LordJummy]

What I am saying by my post is, that I do not mind this practice, as long as the price is right. So, in this theoretical situation, lets say a 6c/12t chip normally sells for $1000, but the 8c/16t chip sells for $1200.

If I buy the $1000 chip, and can later pay, say $225-250 to upgrade it to a 8c/16t chip, I think it's a great idea. I'd happily pay that small percentage extra to save myself the troubles. If, however, they wanted to charge me more than that, I would have a problem with it.

Okay, but that's not what they're doing. I can make up nice hypothetical situations for myself too, but there's no point.

 

[Easy Rhino]

if you dont like this legit business practice and strategy then don't buy the chips. simple as that. oh, and dont buy anything made my AMD or NVIDIA or VIA or Matrox either because they all bin chips and purposely cripple them to sell them to different markets. looks like you should just get out of electronics all together. oh, wait, what's that? you are going to continue buying electronics despite your strong disapproval of these business practices? say it aint so!

 

[newtekie1]

if you dont like this legit business practice and strategy then don't buy the chips. simple as that. oh, and dont buy anything made my AMD or NVIDIA or VIA or Matrox either because they all bin chips and purposely cripple them to sell them to different markets. looks like you should just get out of electronics all together. oh, wait, what's that? you are going to continue buying electronics despite your strong disapproval of these business practices? say it aint so!

Don't forget about not buying any software either. Windows is a definite no no, because they do the same thing. Games, yeah most are the same way anymore(with their pre-order and we'll unlock things for you stategy). Oh, and no Microsoft Office or adobe products either.

 

[Easy Rhino]

in fact newtekie, those people should probably never leave their bedroom. restaurants do the same thing. you pay $15 for a plate of food and they only fill up that plate so much. they then come back after you are finished to see if you want dessert! why couldn't they just include the dessert in the meal! my god!!!!!!!!

 

[purecain]

i bought a low end intel chip, its very slow but intel are offering my a patch to help....

what, i have to pay again????????

couldnt they have released this chip WITH this code.....

 

[Easy Rhino]

i bought a low end intel chip, its very slow but intel are offering my a patch to help....

what, i have to pay again????????

couldnt they have released this chip WITH this code.....

yes but then it would have been more expensive.

 

[purecain]

why would it cost more. i think this is the point. same silicon.nothing laser cut....

 

[qubit]

why would it cost more. i think this is the point. same silicon.nothing laser cut....

Because they can only price it according to the performance it delivers compared to the competition, not by how much it costs to make.

 

[newtekie1]

why would it cost more. i think this is the point. same silicon.nothing laser cut....

Because you get what you pay for, they sell lower products for people that can't afford or don't want to pay extra for performance they don't need. They sell more expensive models for those that do want the extra performance and they make more profit on those higher products to support their business. Would you prefer they just sell the higher end model and not give an option for anything lower and cheaper?