Intel's software-upgradeable processors will be available from all major server makers.
Intel Officially Introduces Pay-As-You-Go Chip Licensing : Read more
Intel Officially Introduces Pay-As-You-Go Chip Licensing : Read more
Outrageous greed and an obvious security risk.
I don't often say "this should be illegal", but this should absolutely be illegal. It spits in the face of our basic human right to own the property that we buy.
Imagine buying hundreds of cars and then renting them out for a profit, but now you don't have to buy dozens of different models of cars because you have magic dust that turns any car into a convertible, SUV, 4x4, or whatever people like to rent.Imagine buying a car that can disable your steering wheel whenever the car company arbitrarily decides they want more money.
Not a fan of this move. I feel like this is a questionable and potentially damaging (trust wise) buisiness model. My trust certainly feels eroded in Intel. I understand this is all server level silicon but what happens if/when this trickles down to mainstream CPUs? Are we going to own our CPUs in the future or we going to only own a small subset of it functions forced to pay to fully utilize the CPUs we already paid for. A sad day for silicon.
I wonder about CPU pricing. They're not going to get cheaper because you don't use some functions. In fact they might become more expensive, since each an every version will have a full subset of accelerators or whatever.
Pretty ignorant viewpoint there, fella.
A better way of looking at it is that you can now buy a i7-13200 and at any point in the future you could pay the differential to unlock the chip up to a i7-13900k or even into i9 territory. Or if you're a content creator that wants to use QuickSync (which is awesome) you can throw down $35 and unlock the GPU on your chip forever. This is a win-win-win scenario all the way around for everyone.
The only time you'd "lose" any type of functionality is if you did the "lease" option on your upgrades. . . and in which case you know exactly what you're getting into. Think of MasterCard's transaction database. It gets hammered with 10x the normal amount of transactions between black friday and christmas. I bet they'd love to be able to take out a 3 month lease on 2x the compute power in their servers.
Outrageous greed and an obvious security risk.
I don't often say "this should be illegal", but this should absolutely be illegal. It spits in the face of our basic human right to own the property that we buy.
Imagine buying a car that can disable your steering wheel whenever the car company arbitrarily decides they want more money.
The intel link is right in the article...the problem here is simply the word "subscription" it is not in this article but was in the teaser announcement a week or so ago.
so this is simply not "pay for what you need" and then move on. this is "pay over and over and over for what you need to run your business after paying a premium for the chip itself"
if it was buy it once, pay for the options needed and move on. most would prob not have a problem with it.
at this point it is only server/data center type stuff. but as seen in the past it has 0% chance of staying there. give it a year or 2 and it will trickle down to consumer cpu's.
let's see how you folks calling it a good thing will feel when you have to buy your intel cpu and then have to pay EVERY MONTH for more than the base pcie lanes, that extra m.2 slot not gonna work without it. how about that extra L2/L3 cache that makes such a huge difference in your game?? sure the base 20 mb works fine, but you want all 64?? that's an extra $10 a month or more. like streaming?? well that feature set of encoders is gonna cost you another $20 a month.......
and so on and so on. the folks getting upset by this are the ones who are not sitting securely on their own shoulders and can see what is coming.
only got to look at other industries to see how stupid it can get. BMW's monthly subscription for those heated seats anyone????
Perhaps my wording was bad. I am aware of how it works with defects and all. The problem with number of models Intel speaks about is their own doing so their point is not really valid.That's how it works anyways RIGHT NOW. There's a myriad of Intel processors, but very few actual production devices. On the consumer side, every model of I7 and I9 starts off as an I9-13900k with integrated GPU. Individual features are then disabled first if there's any yield issues, and then purposely to fill in the volume for the product stack. All your i7 and i9's physically house a Xe GPU, but they may be disabled to fit into a certain SKU.
Right now, that GPU is forever lost to you if you wanted to save money on a cheaper processor. But say you get big into streaming games, Intel QuickSync is the bee's knee's for encoding as it leaves your GPU completely untouched for running your games (and the quality is awesome). Right now in the current model you'd have to go out and buy an entirely new CPU to attain that functionality. With this new plan, you could simply pay Intel $50 or whatever and activate the one that's already in your system with a button click.
Maybe. But, how many businesses, and these CPUs are targeted for large business consumers, would risk the legal exposure?It will only be for a short period of time. users will eventually figure out the port that everything works on and disable it. them figure out how to "open" access to all cores. after that intel will shut it down.
But if you start selling upgradeable consumer CPUs, it starts to matter whether an individual, lower binned part was binned that way because of defects, or just to meet product segmentation demands. So would Intel start throwing away all products that have defects (seems unlikely), or would they start having multiple SKUs with the same operational specs, but some would have the option to upgrade (possible multiple tiers of upgrade potential), and some wouldn't? And would the upgradeable SKU(s) cost more, simply to have the option to upgrade in the future (for an additional cost of course)?That's how it works anyways RIGHT NOW. There's a myriad of Intel processors, but very few actual production devices. On the consumer side, every model of I7 an I9 starts off as an I9-13900k with integrated GPU. Individual features are then disabled first if there's any yield issues, and then purposely to fill in the volume for the product stack. All your i7 and i9's physically house a Xe GPU, but they may be disabled to fit into a certain SKU.
Right now, that GPU is forever lost to you if you wanted to save money on a cheaper processor. But say you get big into streaming games, Intel QuickSync is the bee's knee's for encoding as it leaves your GPU completely untouched for running your games (and the quality is awesome). Right now in the current model you'd have to go out and buy an entirely new CPU to attain that functionality. With this new plan, you could simply pay Intel $50 or whatever and activate the one that's already in your system with a button click.