I would like to flip Intel the bird, a la Linus flipping off NVidia

[Eureka]

So.. you want to wage war against all of corporate America because they don't offer the packages you want?

Sorry, these packages are dictated by demand. And if there just isn't enough demand to manufacture, they're better off not doing it at all. AMD will sell you just about anything because they're relying on these sales... but I, for one, am not buying an AMD processor just because Intel doesn't have the same budget prices that AMD can offer. I'm not going to keep a sinking ship afloat just for the merit of competition, when Intel, overall, does a much better job with their processors.

 

[LurchFrinky]

I think the problem with some of these analogies is that many of us do not consider integrated graphics as a "premium feature". Let's face it, the more powerful our cpu is, the less likely we will use (or at least be satisfied with) the IGP.
Having some minimal level of integrated graphics on all chips makes sense for a backup/troubleshooting reason or if you have your comp set up for mainly cpu tasks like a server. But most of the people that really want good IGP are those aiming for a cheap or low-power build where games/movies/graphics are desired.

I personally think chips should come with 1 (maybe 2) IGPs for an entire cpu line.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I think the problem with some of these analogies is that many of us do not consider integrated graphics as a "premium feature". Let's face it, the more powerful our cpu is, the less likely we will use (or at least be satisfied with) the IGP.
Having some minimal level of integrated graphics on all chips makes sense for a backup/troubleshooting reason or if you have your comp set up for mainly cpu tasks like a server. But most of the people that really want good IGP are those aiming for a cheap or low-power build where games/movies/graphics are desired.

I personally think chips should come with 1 (maybe 2) IGPs for an entire cpu line.

The majority of users prefer IGPs. So its actually us that is the minority. Also we can actually get what we want if we wished. Its under the LGA20xx line. But most of us are not willing to put the $ down.

IGP also seems to be the future on the expense of discrete cards. Stacked DRAM on the package like the future nVidia Volta. Imagine that with a CPU.

 

[Sleepingforest]

Actually, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of users don't know what an iGPU is and don't select computers that way. The vast majority simply falls for marketing and gets whatever badly proportioned computer is available with their budget.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Actually, I'm pretty sure the vast majority of users don't know what an iGPU is and don't select computers that way. The vast majority simply falls for marketing and gets whatever badly proportioned computer is available with their budget.

You dont need a GTX680/HD7970GE to play farmville and watch youtube.

 

[frozentundra123456]

I think the problem with some of these analogies is that many of us do not consider integrated graphics as a "premium feature". Let's face it, the more powerful our cpu is, the less likely we will use (or at least be satisfied with) the IGP.
Having some minimal level of integrated graphics on all chips makes sense for a backup/troubleshooting reason or if you have your comp set up for mainly cpu tasks like a server. But most of the people that really want good IGP are those aiming for a cheap or low-power build where games/movies/graphics are desired.

I personally think chips should come with 1 (maybe 2) IGPs for an entire cpu line.

I agree. I dont really consider an igp a selling point at all. It is nice to have some minimal level of igp, but any intel or AMD igp is more than adequate for the vast majority of users. In a way the lineup of igps from intel in the desktop does not really make sense, putting the best igp in an processor that will be overclocked and used with a discrete card, but I dont get my shorts in a bunch over it like the OP. Actually, it would make sense to me like you said to just put the same igp, even the lower powered one in all desktops. If you want better, just add a discrete card.

 

[2timer]

Wow, I'm amazed that some of you guys aren't getting this. It's simple:

Give me more than one option for an IGP. Give me the option to choose. That is all.

 

[Blandge]

Wow, I'm amazed that some of you guys aren't getting this. It's simple:

Give me more than one option for an IGP. Give me the option to choose. That is all.

No you are the one that isn't getting it.

You don't always get what you want. There's nothing more at play here. I understand you wish Intel offered the perfect product for you, but they don't, and they aren't evil, greedy or a cheating because of this. Deal with it.

 

[2timer]

No you are the one that isn't getting it.

You don't always get what you want. There's nothing more at play here. I understand you wish Intel offered the perfect product for you, but they don't, and they aren't evil, greedy or a cheating because of this. Deal with it.

That's fine. I understand your position, you think that Intel doesn't have to offer choices on IGPs. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I still think it's ridiculous, an entire lineup of Pentium processors and not a single different IGP to choose from. Intel may make the best processors but if they don't want to please their customers then I guess that's their choice.

 

[Blandge]

That's fine. I understand your position, you think that Intel doesn't have to offer choices on IGPs. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. I still think it's ridiculous, an entire lineup of Pentium processors and not a single different IGP to choose from. Intel may make the best processors but if they don't want to please their customers then I guess that's their choice.

Yeah but you need to understand which types of customers buy most Celeron and Pentium processors. Most people who buy these products will purchase a system from an OEM like HP or Dell. Most of Intel's SKUs are created on the request of large OEMs who do research and request a set of SKUs that they think will sell best. Intel collects these requests from all of their OEMs and then creates SKUs based off of those requests. The SKUs that Intel makes are based off of market research from 20-30 major OEMs in different industries.

So yes, while Intel does want to protect their ASPs in the way you are suggesting, if there was enough demend for Pentiums and Celerons with HD 3000 graphics or higher they would make them, but the number of validation dollars spent on adding even 1 additional SKU is in the millions of dollars, and tens of millions if they have to spin new silicon, which they would if they introduced Pentiums and Celerons with 12+ EUs.

You are in the tiny subset of people who want a to play graphically intensive games, but don't want decent CPU performance. A market that is so small that Intel doesn't even market for it. But guess what, this is AMD's target market with Trinity! So I don't know why you're so mad at Intel for "forcing" you to buy their products when AMD offers a perfect solution for what you need.

 

[2timer]

Yeah but you need to understand which types of customers buy most Celeron and Pentium processors. Most people who buy these products will purchase a system from an OEM like HP or Dell. Most of Intel's SKUs are created on the request of large OEMs who do research and request a set of SKUs that they think will sell best. Intel collects these requests from all of their Obama Ms and then creates SKUs based off of those requests. The SKUs that Intel makes are based off of market research from 20-30 major OEMs in different industries.

So yes, while Intel does want to protect their ASPs in the way you are suggesting, if there was enough demend for Pentiums and Celerons with HD 3000 graphics or higher they would make them, but the number of validation dollars spent on adding even 1 additional SKU is in the millions of dollars, and tens of millions if they have to spin new silicon, which they would if they introduced Pentiums and Celerons with 12+ EUs.

You are in the tiny subset of people who want a to play graphically intensive games, but don't want decent CPU performance. A market that is so small that Intel doesn't even market for it. But guess what, this is AMD's target market with Trinity! So I don't know why you're so mad at Intel for "forcing" you to buy their products when AMD offers a perfect solution for what you need.

I suppose so. I never even thought about it that way before. I guess you're right because Intel can create 5 different Pentium SkUs just by raising the core multiplier.

If offering HD Graphics 3000 on a Pentium meant creating a new die then yeah you are right. In fact, I think that the additional shader units on 3000 may require that.

Hmm...