Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Intels answer to tri cores?

Tags:
  • CPUs
  • Product
Last response: in CPUs
Share
September 18, 2010 11:04:04 PM

Is this Intels response to AMDs tri unlocking?
http://www.engadget.com/2010/09/18/intel-wants-to-charg...

More about : intels answer tri cores

a b à CPUs
September 18, 2010 11:50:15 PM

So Wait? It basically it turns a pentium G6951 to a slightly slower /slightly smaller L3 cache, core i3 and you have to buy a card that matches the computer maker company that you're going to "unlock" ? :heink: 

Very "cheesy"
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 18, 2010 11:50:52 PM

Merge this with eyefinities thread. And i think this is absolutely dumb. If they do this to other CPU's, like SB, they are going to get BLASTED. Like having to buy a $50 card just to enter the BIOS, or something like that. How do they expect this to be compeitive, or sell at all? People are either going to spend the extra $50 on a CPU that beats it, or see AMD lets you unlock cores for free! :lol: 
m
0
l
Related resources
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 12:07:01 AM

this doesn't make any sense at all
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 12:45:23 AM

You basically pay $50 for hyper threading and 1 mb of L3 cache. Considering this thing already costs $100+, what idiot wouldnt buy the i3 530??? If intel was selling this for $10, it would at LEAST make business sense, but this is one of the dumbest moves ive seen a company make in a while. Like Sprint and Nextel... :pfff: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 12:51:24 AM

Well AMD have their "free" lottery where you buy a CPU and hope you can unlock and use some cores that you didn't pay for and Intel now guarantee a performance so long as you shell out some cash, how long before it's hacked anyway?
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 12:58:08 AM

mosox said:
Whatever Intel does or doesn't do it's not affecting their market share and profits.

http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2010/09/intel-threaten...

Sony said something similar and to their credit managed to get a few people busted and a couple of bits of kit got confiscated, I can still get a USB flash drive that will unlock a PS3 though! :lol: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 1:29:58 AM

+1, once its there it can be hacked
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 2:23:00 AM

And once its hacked, they will find a way to stop it, then that will be hacked, and so on.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 2:24:59 AM

This is different than upgrading just the pentium clarksdale, the card sites a specific Gateway model. This particular computer probably has the i3 530 in there to begin with, with a special bios, that works with this unlock card. Probably a marketing test , that a powerful exec dreamed up. Like selling degradable dvd's (original divx)
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 2:32:58 AM

I thought the article said it was being tested on a small number of retail CPU's as a test, and it was using a G6951? Either way you look at it, the G6950 is a pretty poor value, compared to both the i3 and AMD CPU's under $100. So, if i get this right, you buy said gateway, use this card, and you just payed $150 for a CPU that is equal to or gets beat by a $115 CPU? I mean, the concept is ok at best, buying a card that guarantees an unlocked CPU when you feel you need an upgrade, but at this price, that is in no way value. I hope Intel doesnt do this to anything else, or AMD copies them :pfff:  It would be bad if SB required this, and a K edition to overclock, but i doubt it...wouldnt put it past them though. :( 
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 3:47:33 AM

A gaurantee is better than a chance, but ones free.
I hope this is frowned upon.

I dont begrudge AMDs tri cores, nor Intel if theyd do the same.
Lets hope market and sensibility wins this war on our wallets.
Im thinking Intel is implicit in this, regardless of Gateway or whomever, you still have to have permission to do this
I hope Intel stops it quickly
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
September 19, 2010 4:03:44 AM

Mousemonkey said:
Well AMD have their "free" lottery where you buy a CPU and hope you can unlock and use some cores that you didn't pay for and Intel now guarantee a performance so long as you shell out some cash, how long before it's hacked anyway?


Pretty much. AMD bins CPUs when they have a batch with a certain percent bad. But in the unlocking process thats free, its not guaranteed that it will work or that your hardware/software will live. In fact, I wouldn't be suprised if it doesn't void your warranty.

This is only for OEMs and is guranteed. You wont see this for a self build, but for Gateways, Dells and the such.

In fact its a cheaper upgrade for the people than buying and having someone install a new CPU that would probably cost 20% on top of the CPU and another 50 or so for install.

I still say it is stupid too but hey, this wont affect us at all. Just the non-tech savvy consumers. For them I could recommend this over a chance of unlocking a bad core and corrupting their Windows install (had one at work the other day as a matter of fact) even if it is rare.
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 4:19:57 AM

It depends on hpw high up the food chain it goes.
If this turns out to be a pilot program for the entire lineup, I can see some problems for us consumers.
And O'ceers too, as some cherry chips may end up as a never to see the light.
This could lead to clocks etc.
Im just thinking this could end up being a slippery slope if not marketed properly
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
September 19, 2010 4:24:22 AM

I think this will only end up as a low end OEM offering. Intel makes more money there than they do off of us anyways.

I can see why it gets to some people but I have seen very few people who go out and buy a Pentium CPU to OC instead of a Core 2 or Core i3/i5/i7.
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 4:28:14 AM

JAYDEEJOHN said:
If this turns out to be a pilot program for the entire lineup, I can see some problems for us consumers.


If Intel apply it to their entire lineup, AMD will have a lot of new customers...
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 4:29:29 AM

Yea, if its confined, it may have some usefullness.
But even and old pentium, if they had this, someone could "unlock" this, and make their rig last a while longer, or current gens now, in the future
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 5:49:36 AM

MarkG said:
If Intel apply it to their entire lineup, AMD will have a lot of new customers...


Dude, now you are just underestimating stupid, which I hasten to remind you is more abundant than hydrogen and way more dangerous.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 6:39:18 AM

Wait, wait, wait. Are some people actually defending this? This is NOT comparable to AMD's core unlocking. With AMD you may or may not get an unlockable core, it is never guaranteed. Core unlocking also requires a lot of no how that strictly falls under enthusiast terriroty. This move by Intel is PURPOSEFULLY limiting the speed and features of a product and then making you spend more for what they denied you in the first place. For these "cards" to unlock anything, the chip must be easily able to do it. The only market for this "feature" is the OEM crowd who don't know much about computers. It is FAR different than a BIOS tweak.

This is greedy, corrupted filth from Intel. There is no way to defend this or compare this to AMD core unlocking, at least not for rational people.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 6:42:38 AM

AMW1011 said:
Wait, wait, wait. Are some people actually defending this? This is NOT comparable to AMD's core unlocking. With AMD you may or may not get an unlockable core, it is never guaranteed. Core unlocking also requires a lot of no how that strictly falls under enthusiast terriroty. This move by Intel is PURPOSEFULLY limiting the speed and features of a product and then making you spend more for what they denied you in the first place. For these "cards" to unlock anything, the chip must be easily able to do it. The only market for this "feature" is the OEM crowd who don't know much about computers. It is FAR different than a BIOS tweak.

This is greedy, corrupted filth from Intel. There is no way to defend this or compare this to AMD core unlocking, at least not for rational people.

I don't recall anyone defending this move, comparing (in a twisted way perhaps) yes, but not defending. Well I wasn't anyway.
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
September 19, 2010 6:48:21 AM

AMW1011 said:
Wait, wait, wait. Are some people actually defending this? This is NOT comparable to AMD's core unlocking. With AMD you may or may not get an unlockable core, it is never guaranteed. Core unlocking also requires a lot of no how that strictly falls under enthusiast terriroty. This move by Intel is PURPOSEFULLY limiting the speed and features of a product and then making you spend more for what they denied you in the first place. For these "cards" to unlock anything, the chip must be easily able to do it. The only market for this "feature" is the OEM crowd who don't know much about computers. It is FAR different than a BIOS tweak.

This is greedy, corrupted filth from Intel. There is no way to defend this or compare this to AMD core unlocking, at least not for rational people.


Yes. Thats what we said. But its the same thing in a way. Remember, some of the dual/tri core CPUs AMD sell are really just locked quads that are fine. But this is a guranteed performance boost, while AMDs could result in a boost or nothing at all. Thats where its the same yet a bit different.

And yes, its only set for the OEM space. The CPU alone, Pentium G6951, is only available to OEMs such as Gateway. It could be seen as greed but will work great for people whos PCs I fix every day. And AMD allowing CPUs to unlock that can potentially corrupt an entire OS or even destroy hadrware I would think is not that great either. In fact I wonder if it could lead to a class action lawsuit since they didn't put proper protections against it in there for the actual bad CPUs.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 6:48:57 AM

Mousemonkey said:
I don't recall anyone defending this move, comparing (in a twisted way perhaps) yes, but not defending. Well I wasn't anyway.


I never pointed the finger at anyone, I actually agree with you with your posts. It just seems people are forgetting that all these chips are being artificially limited for more profit from the micro processor company that is as close to being a monopoly as you can without actually being one.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 6:52:46 AM

jimmysmitty said:
Yes. Thats what we said. But its the same thing in a way. Remember, some of the dual/tri core CPUs AMD sell are really just locked quads that are fine. But this is a guranteed performance boost, while AMDs could result in a boost or nothing at all. Thats where its the same yet a bit different.

And yes, its only set for the OEM space. The CPU alone, Pentium G6951, is only available to OEMs such as Gateway. It could be seen as greed but will work great for people whos PCs I fix every day. And AMD allowing CPUs to unlock that can potentially corrupt an entire OS or even destroy hadrware I would think is not that great either. In fact I wonder if it could lead to a class action lawsuit since they didn't put proper protections against it in there for the actual bad CPUs.


Your not getting it though. AMD core unlocking is for enthusiasts only. And your theory that they purposefully make some that do and some that don't is unproven, though not out of the realm of possibility. An enthusiast will know his chances when he purchases a Phenom II X2 and tries to make it an X4. The general populace who will buy these OEM Intel machines won't know the difference and would NEVER know about core unlocking. Also, the mere fact that Intel can do this to OEM builds is proof that all of the CPUs in these systems are artificially limited and are slower than they can be, but are limited for extra profit from Intel. It is guaranteed, AMD core unlocking is not and it is FREE.
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
September 19, 2010 6:53:57 AM

^AMDs core unlocking is not free. It comes with a risk. It can damage hardware, software and probably void warranties.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:02:31 AM

jimmysmitty said:
^AMDs core unlocking is not free. It comes with a risk. It can damage hardware, software and probably void warranties.


Right, but it doesn't directly net AMD more money. That is the difference.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:09:37 AM

AMW1011 said:
I never pointed the finger at anyone

Yeah I know, I just thought I'd clear it up for anyone else out there in Interwebland who might have been confused as I know they are out there, lurking.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:12:46 AM

Mousemonkey said:
Yeah I know, I just thought I'd clear it up for anyone else out there in Interwebland who might have been confused as I know they are out there, lurking.


Spys!

m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:21:28 AM

:lol: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 12:25:20 PM

Well i sure missed a lot. And whoever thinks this is better than the AMD version, IMO, is sorely mistaken. With AMD, you buy a dual core. Generally, it was a quad or triple that had cores unstable. Not intentionally. Most people buy it in the hopes it will unlock, but they are still buying a dual core. You go into the bios, and try to unlock it. You either suceed, partially suceed, or fail. Anybody who has damaged their CPU is extremely bad or lying, as i have never done that while unlocking, nor have i ever even seen anybody damage it. So YES, it is free. The intel way is this. They are going to sell you a computer, or eventually the cpu itself, with a purposely handicapped CPU. They then make you pay another $50, just to get a CPU that costs $150+, and cant even compete at $100. I mean, come on! Thats just dumb...
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 12:53:26 PM

I'll say this, number two tries harder, gives more, and this is a comparison in a way
For OEMs and clueless Joe, its not that bad, as long as it stays in that market
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 2:27:46 PM

I think this will backfire on Intel\OEM manufacturers in the long run - figure within a few weeks of them releasing this - you can go to the store and buy the low end version of a laptop for less $ and then go online and find the hacked upgrade code that will quickly be all over the place and upgrade your CPU to the upper end product for free !! -- just another way for the pirates to profit while legit users pay !! (either by using a gimped CPU using more power to run disabled parts of the hardware or paying additional $ to get the same performance boost the pirates get for free!)
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 4:08:57 PM

I wonder how this will effect used cpu sales from OEM machines?
How will they be marketed? The uninitiated may inappropriately sell it as the higher model, where (at this time) the buyer may not either to have access or ability for such an upgrade.
Looks like fun to me heheh
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:42:19 PM

AMW1011 said:
Right, but it doesn't directly net AMD more money. That is the difference.


It does when people on forums ask what CPU to get and people say a AMD dual/tri to unlock. There are a lot of people out there that are very new an believe almost anything some people say.



That is a win.

ares1214 said:
Well i sure missed a lot. And whoever thinks this is better than the AMD version, IMO, is sorely mistaken. With AMD, you buy a dual core. Generally, it was a quad or triple that had cores unstable. Not intentionally. Most people buy it in the hopes it will unlock, but they are still buying a dual core. You go into the bios, and try to unlock it. You either suceed, partially suceed, or fail. Anybody who has damaged their CPU is extremely bad or lying, as i have never done that while unlocking, nor have i ever even seen anybody damage it. So YES, it is free. The intel way is this. They are going to sell you a computer, or eventually the cpu itself, with a purposely handicapped CPU. They then make you pay another $50, just to get a CPU that costs $150+, and cant even compete at $100. I mean, come on! Thats just dumb...


With AMD it was always a quad that was cut to tri or dual. The Intel way is not a bad choice for OEM buyers. Trust me. Its a lot cheaper than going to Best Buy to have a newer/faster CPU installed.

JAYDEEJOHN said:
I wonder how this will effect used cpu sales from OEM machines?
How will they be marketed? The uninitiated may inappropriately sell it as the higher model, where (at this time) the buyer may not either to have access or ability for such an upgrade.
Looks like fun to me heheh


Probably wont that much. Most OEMs buy CPUs in such massive quantaties that they get the for so cheap they make money off everything.
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 7:46:10 PM

Theres plenty of people here than own OEMs wanting an upgrade, and many of those that eventually do also sell their old chips, thats what I mean
Craigs and others have large lists of such sellers
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:47:42 PM

Quote:
ares1214 wrote :

Well i sure missed a lot. And whoever thinks this is better than the AMD version, IMO, is sorely mistaken. With AMD, you buy a dual core. Generally, it was a quad or triple that had cores unstable. Not intentionally. Most people buy it in the hopes it will unlock, but they are still buying a dual core. You go into the bios, and try to unlock it. You either suceed, partially suceed, or fail. Anybody who has damaged their CPU is extremely bad or lying, as i have never done that while unlocking, nor have i ever even seen anybody damage it. So YES, it is free. The intel way is this. They are going to sell you a computer, or eventually the cpu itself, with a purposely handicapped CPU. They then make you pay another $50, just to get a CPU that costs $150+, and cant even compete at $100. I mean, come on! Thats just dumb...


With AMD it was always a quad that was cut to tri or dual. The Intel way is not a bad choice for OEM buyers. Trust me. Its a lot cheaper than going to Best Buy to have a newer/faster CPU installed.


It IS a bad choice! The G6950 sells for what, $100? Im assuming G6951 sells for same or $5 more. So you basically pay $150 for a i3 530, at a slower clock speed. The concept itself isnt TERRIBLE, definitely wasnt the best ive heard, but that price is outrageous! But bestbuy will still say "Hey, buy that overpriced Gateway! Guaranteed to last less than 3 years or less before you have blue smoke and viruses! Oh, and heres an overpriced card that might help you not notice all the adware loaded on that sucker with a small speed boost. Have a nice day!" :lol:  And people will still buy it... :pfff: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:52:12 PM

ares1214 said:
Merge this with eyefinities thread. And i think this is absolutely dumb. If they do this to other CPU's, like SB, they are going to get BLASTED. Like having to buy a $50 card just to enter the BIOS, or something like that. How do they expect this to be compeitive, or sell at all? People are either going to spend the extra $50 on a CPU that beats it, or see AMD lets you unlock cores for free! :lol: 

Sadly, Average Joe Idiot (read: majority of the OEM consumers) doesn't know about AMD CPUs....
m
0
l
a c 127 à CPUs
September 19, 2010 7:58:13 PM

ares1214 said:
Quote:
ares1214 wrote :

Well i sure missed a lot. And whoever thinks this is better than the AMD version, IMO, is sorely mistaken. With AMD, you buy a dual core. Generally, it was a quad or triple that had cores unstable. Not intentionally. Most people buy it in the hopes it will unlock, but they are still buying a dual core. You go into the bios, and try to unlock it. You either suceed, partially suceed, or fail. Anybody who has damaged their CPU is extremely bad or lying, as i have never done that while unlocking, nor have i ever even seen anybody damage it. So YES, it is free. The intel way is this. They are going to sell you a computer, or eventually the cpu itself, with a purposely handicapped CPU. They then make you pay another $50, just to get a CPU that costs $150+, and cant even compete at $100. I mean, come on! Thats just dumb...


With AMD it was always a quad that was cut to tri or dual. The Intel way is not a bad choice for OEM buyers. Trust me. Its a lot cheaper than going to Best Buy to have a newer/faster CPU installed.


It IS a bad choice! The G6950 sells for what, $100? Im assuming G6951 sells for same or $5 more. So you basically pay $150 for a i3 530, at a slower clock speed. The concept itself isnt TERRIBLE, definitely wasnt the best ive heard, but that price is outrageous! But bestbuy will still say "Hey, buy that overpriced Gateway! Guaranteed to last less than 3 years or less before you have blue smoke and viruses! Oh, and heres an overpriced card that might help you not notice all the adware loaded on that sucker with a small speed boost. Have a nice day!" :lol:  And people will still buy it... :pfff: 


But you cannot buy the G6951. Its not a consumer CPU like the G6950 is. Its a OEM CPU.

And Best Buy would sell a POS eMachine to anyone. I have had customers come in who paid $150 to have Best Buy create a restore disc. Sad thing is that it is a part of Windows 7 thats simple and free yet Best buy sells it. They also try to sell people Norton AV or a plethora of crap. Best Buy employees will sell anyone crap to make the store money. Even if that means getting them to buy a Mac. Ewww...

Shadow703793 said:
Sadly, Average Joe Idiot (read: majority of the OEM consumers) doesn't know about AMD CPUs....


They may not know about AMD but that doesn't mean they need to. Most consumers look at a alptop/desktop in price more than anything. t work we get a good mix of Intel/AMD in all the time.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 8:47:05 PM

Quote:

They may not know about AMD but that doesn't mean they need to. Most consumers look at a alptop/desktop in price more than anything. t work we get a good mix of Intel/AMD in all the time.

True, but the point I was trying to make was that there are spots on the CPU line up where AMD has very good price vs performance and usually, at a lower price than Intel. But people still decide to not get and AMD based system.
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 8:53:12 PM

That may change as the lower end, net top net book etc, becomes more an even playing field
With familiarity comes sales of higher end products as well, especially if people at BestBuy etc are willing to sell anything, and arent tilted one way or another.
Its a seeding, just like this attempt is
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 10:27:30 PM

^ Because 2 different people opened it? It's too much work to merge them imo.
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 10:36:41 PM

Maybe JDJ does not want to lose the points for starting the thread? :lol: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 10:39:15 PM

Quote:
Hey mods what the point in running 2 threads of same discussion.


You speak of eyefinities? Yeah, you clearly havent been over there in a while :lol:  Same topic, DIFFERENT thread...
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 10:46:11 PM

Mousemonkey said:
Maybe JDJ does not want to lose the points for starting the thread? :lol: 

:o  :o  :o  Who ME??? :o  :o  :o 
:D  :D  :sol: 
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 10:54:34 PM

:lol:  I was going to leave it to you to merge the threads here as you are in this forum a lot more than me.
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 11:08:13 PM

I tried and it didnt work
Methinks theres a current bug
m
0
l
a b à CPUs
September 19, 2010 11:19:48 PM

I didn't see that you had moved it to a different section.
m
0
l
September 19, 2010 11:25:27 PM

Yea, as it had drifted off topic That seemed to work OK, but the merge was taking forever, so I opted for the move
m
0
l
!