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

[Pilum]

To those saying they are ripping people off with the pentium line you are forgetting the fact that the pentium chips are just defective i5/i7 ships with core(s)/IGP disabled because it didnt make the QA checks to be fully funtional chips, they are just selling them as low end chips instead of taking a complete loss on them. AMD does the same thing why do you think you can unlock cores.

Actually the Pentiums have a special die, Ivy Bridge-M-2, with 6-EU GPU and 3MiB cache; see here. The (desktop) i3, i5 and i7 have other, distinct dies.

 

[Pilum]

But why would I as a casual gamer want to scale, when those games in medium settings run well enough? I don't play a whole lot of big studio games. I like smaller games and indie games. I like horror games and classic games that are about ambience and imagination as much as eye candy, and those games are just as enjoyable to me.

Basically, to a casual gamer the premise is pay $30 more and have to deal with the hassle of another discrete card, or save $30 bucks and get it all rolled into one package. That's my perspective on it.

*Edit* That's the reason why AMD's APUs are ideal for casual gamers.

But most of the casual games will run just as well on a Pentium which has superior single-threaded performance, better power efficiency, better SATA/USB controllers, etc. So you get the overall better platform for the same price... why even consider AMD then?

That's the problem with AMDs APUs: they are only attractive if you need lots of GPU performance, but if you do need lots of GPU performance, the APUs are usually not powerful enough. That's a nasty catch 22.

 

[colonelciller]

Under what circumstances is a Pentium underpowered for home media server usage? They are powerful enough for basic gaming and certainly won't choke on normal GUI/playback tasks.

I think you misinterpreted my post (and granted I didn't word it all that great)... but I was attempting to say that pentiums are overpowered for home server use.

I am skeptical however that a pentium-based system without a separate graphics card will have a smooth responsive interface... say when dragging an application window across the screen. I'd predict a jumping intolerably-slow-refreshing mess... useable but not nice. That's where the integrated graphics would come in handy.

but please do let me know if I'm underestimating the power of the Pentium to give a smooth user interface without having an accompanying graphics card.
I'm curious now.

 

[2timer]

If the performance of the APU is adequate for you, that is great. Personally I would not want to be that limited, but if you really dont want to play highly graphically intense games it should be adequate I guess.

The only thing I dont understand is why you think adding a discrete card to a desktop is such a "hassle". Despite playing a lot of games and being very interested in hardware, I am really not a "nuts and bolts" person, and even I can install a discrete card in just a few minutes.

It's not a huge hassle to install, I grant you that.

To me, the IGP is more the convenience of building a PC and having one less component to worry about spec'ing and upgrading. It would be fantastic for me as a PC enthusiast if the chipmakers offered a wider variety of IGPs in different price categories. That's the crux of my beef with Intel. It's so skewed when it comes to their desktop IGPs. I reiterate, lowest end Ivy Bridge HD Graphics all the way up to $120 i3. I don't need an i3 processing power. It's overkill for what I do. I would like to see a $99 Pentium with HD Graphics 3000. Is that too much to ask? No.

The other issue I have with discrete GPUs is the bulk. Honestly, the bulk of a GPU card has barely changed since 20 years ago, while everthing else is getting smaller and smaller. I live in a tiny, 650 sq. ft. duplex and having a computer tower with a bunch of cables coming out of it just ruins the whole feng shui of the place. I like the idea of the form of a computer being as small as possible, I'm trying to move away from huge terminals not towards them. I've looked at every possible configuration with most components and I could find on the market, and video cards are the one thing that significantly change the form factor of any SFF PC I plan, every time.

So am I niche? Definitely. A micro niche in what the current market is. But I've acknowledged that from the get-go. And Intel seems to grasp the niche is growing.

 

[2timer]

But most of the casual games will run just as well on a Pentium which has superior single-threaded performance, better power efficiency, better SATA/USB controllers, etc. So you get the overall better platform for the same price... why even consider AMD then?

Because I want an IGP.

 

[Dark Shroud]

But most of the casual games will run just as well on a Pentium which has superior single-threaded performance, better power efficiency, better SATA/USB controllers, etc. So you get the overall better platform for the same price... why even consider AMD then?

That's the problem with AMDs APUs: they are only attractive if you need lots of GPU performance, but if you do need lots of GPU performance, the APUs are usually not powerful enough. That's a nasty catch 22.

Can you link me to some of these bench marks that show how much more amazing the Pentiums are?

Also, the A10 destroys Minecraft. While any Intel CPU would need a stand alone card.

 

[Ayah]

It's a business, if you dominate the field, you can screw people hard and all they can do is take it.

If everyone boycotted Intel, they might be persuaded to change their stance, but they could probably still survive on compute-driven business.

Like me, the only Intel IGPs I have running are in my ultraportable notebook and in my pfSense rig.

 

[DominionSeraph]

Can you link me to some of these bench marks that show how much more amazing the Pentiums are?

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5541/amd-radeon-hd-7750-radeon-hd-7770-ghz-edition-review

 

[ShintaiDK]

It's not like AMD puts their best IGPs in their cheapest APUs either. The HD 7480D in the super cheap A4-5300 is substantially worse than the HD 7660D in the more expensive APUs, which start at $129 (on Newegg anyway).

Don't know why you're looking at Sandy Bridge-based CPUs either, Pentiums and Celerons switched to IB a while ago. Unfortunately since ark just says "HD Graphics" I don't know how it compares with HD 2500 or HD 4000 and no one really wants to review this. I'm struggling to find reviews for it, or even the lower end Trinity chips for that matter. Chances are neither Intel nor AMD send out review samples for these..

Bingo. But I doubt the OP knows this yet.

I also want a Ferrari for 10000$, but instead the same company sells me a Fiat.

 

[meloz]

Actually the Pentiums have a special die, Ivy Bridge-M-2, with 6-EU GPU and 3MiB cache; see here. The (desktop) i3, i5 and i7 have other, distinct dies.

Thanks Pilum, your post raises a good point and it got overlooked.

According to the cited document, there are many different die sizes depending on package and core count:

rPGA988B 2C/GT2 (G23867): 8.141mm X 14.505mm

rPGA988B 4C/GT2 (E95127) : 8.141mm X 19.631mm

BGA1023 2C/GT1 (G24405) : 7.656mm X 12.223mm

BGA1023 2C/GT2 (G23866): 8.141mm X 14.505mm

BGA1224 4C/GT2 (G26204): 8.141mm X 19.631mm

And to think that until now I used to live with the ignorance that an IVB die was of same size -desktop or mobile- irrespective of package!

This may or may not blow the theory we all accept at face value: Intel harvest 'defective' i3 or i5 for lesser lines.

I say 'may not' because surely Intel -being the cheapskates that they are- cannot possibly be designing dedicated dies for different packages and for different lines (like Pentiums and Celerons) even as they throw away all those i3 and i5 IVB with few dead iGPU execution units or some 'dead cache' on-board.

So these different die sizes might indicate that there is enough flexibility in the basic IVB chip design to physically cut it in various sizes and get different working products, they are not merely fusing off defective parts on a chip but in certain cases quiet literally chopping them off?

I dunno. My world view is shaken. I will go back to lurking and let the gurus explain this wizardry.

 

[Pilum]

I think you misinterpreted my post (and granted I didn't word it all that great)... but I was attempting to say that pentiums are overpowered for home server use.

Ah, yes I misunderstood. You mean the CPU performance... yes, that's kinda overkill. But you can get a Celeron then, weaker CPU but the same GPU.

I am skeptical however that a pentium-based system without a separate graphics card will have a smooth responsive interface... say when dragging an application window across the screen. I'd predict a jumping intolerably-slow-refreshing mess... useable but not nice. That's where the integrated graphics would come in handy.

but please do let me know if I'm underestimating the power of the Pentium to give a smooth user interface without having an accompanying graphics card.
I'm curious now.

The Ivy Bridge Pentiums are well capable of running an Aero desktop. My G2020 (secondary machine @girlfriends flat) doesn't feel much slower than my i5-3550/GTX660 system for desktop use (Chrome, Office 2010, WPF development in VS2010). There are occasional slight lags, but it's not annoying (and I get easily annoyed by slow computers).

I haven't had time to do much game testing, but Gratuitous Space Battles and Sins of a Solar Empire: Rebellion seem to run okay at medium settings @1080p (no extensive gaming done, so I can't say what happens late-game). I'm positively surprised at the performance, I had expected that I might need to use my spare 5770. But the Pentium seems okay for light gaming; but I have to do more extensive testing to be sure of that.

 

[Pilum]

Can you link me to some of these bench marks that show how much more amazing the Pentiums are?

I didn't say they are amazing. I said they are okay for indie gaming and old games - which they are. Of course AMD iGPUs are better at the respective price points ; but they aren't that much better that they would offer a whole different class of gaming experience.

And I'd love to show benchmarks for indie or older games, but these aren't usually included in reviews.

Also, the A10 destroys Minecraft. While any Intel CPU would need a stand alone card.

With the A10 you're in i3-3225 territory price-wise, which seems to run MC just fine.

 

[Pilum]

And to think that until now I used to live with the ignorance that an IVB die was of same size -desktop or mobile- irrespective of package!

Hehe, I know the feeling. While I knew there were different dies, I assumed it was just two, one for 2c and one for 4c. I think this was the case for Sandy Bridge.

I say 'may not' because surely Intel -being the cheapskates that they are- cannot possibly be designing dedicated dies for different packages and for different lines (like Pentiums and Celerons) even as they throw away all those i3 and i5 IVB with few dead iGPU execution units or some 'dead cache' on-board.

It can make sense economically, provided you're as big as Intel. While the fixed costs for design/validation of so many different dies/wafers is high, with Intels volumes the upfront investment will pay off over the lifetime of the CPUs.

What is decisive for Intel are the production costs per part, which are determined by die candidates per wafer and yields.

Looking at the two 2c dies, the 2c-6EU-3MiB die has only 80% of the die area of the 2c-16EU-4MiB die. This means there are 25% more die candidates per wafer, and the yield will also be higher. So maybe 30% more usable dies per wafer. With these ratios, and Intels famous good yields, it may be cheaper to just throw away the faulty big dies. The same goes for the 4c dies - there you have 20% more die candidates per wafer for the i5 compared to the i7.

But IANAProcessEngineer and can't say for sure. Idontcare, wanna help us out?

So these different die sizes might indicate that there is enough flexibility in the basic IVB chip design to physically cut it in various sizes and get different working products, they are not merely fusing off defective parts on a chip but in certain cases quiet literally chopping them off?

I don't think they can be physically cut off. But Intel is on record saying that the basic core layout is done to be able to "chop off" parts from the high-end core designs to get the die designs for the small cores, which helps with the design of many different dies.

 

[beginner99]

It's not like AMD puts their best IGPs in their cheapest APUs either. The HD 7480D in the super cheap A4-5300 is substantially worse than the HD 7660D in the more expensive APUs, which start at $129 (on Newegg anyway).

Exactly and especially in laptops low end intel chips still get HD3000 and are just as fast in grahpics as the low end APUs. The high end apus are in general pretty expensive...

And if you watn to play games go dedicated anyway. If not, HD200o is enough anyway so I don't get the fuzz about APUs as long as the GPU in it can only be used for graphics.

 

[Ajay]

America isn't full of Walmarts because we value customer satisfaction. It is full of Walmarts because we don't.

This explains why I never go to Walmart, unless my wife asks me to go with her. I will sometimes pay twice (or even more) for quality products and service rather than buying something cheap from some who doesn't care. If I can't afford it, I wait till I can.

 

[Blandge]

even as they throw away all those i3 and i5 IVB with few dead iGPU execution units or some 'dead cache' on-board.

You clearly underestimate Intel's process technology if you think their yields are so low that they manufacture enough defective chips to fill their pentium and celeron lines.

 

[GammaLaser]

Hehe, I know the feeling. While I knew there were different dies, I assumed it was just two, one for 2c and one for 4c. I think this was the case for Sandy Bridge.


It can make sense economically, provided you're as big as Intel. While the fixed costs for design/validation of so many different dies/wafers is high, with Intels volumes the upfront investment will pay off over the lifetime of the CPUs.

What is decisive for Intel are the production costs per part, which are determined by die candidates per wafer and yields.

Looking at the two 2c dies, the 2c-6EU-3MiB die has only 80% of the die area of the 2c-16EU-4MiB die. This means there are 25% more die candidates per wafer, and the yield will also be higher. So maybe 30% more usable dies per wafer. With these ratios, and Intels famous good yields, it may be cheaper to just throw away the faulty big dies. The same goes for the 4c dies - there you have 20% more die candidates per wafer for the i5 compared to the i7.

But IANAProcessEngineer and can't say for sure. Idontcare, wanna help us out?


I don't think they can be physically cut off. But Intel is on record saying that the basic core layout is done to be able to "chop off" parts from the high-end core designs to get the die designs for the small cores, which helps with the design of many different dies.

Yep you are right about the "die chop", for example described here for SNB:

Sandy Bridge's ring interconnect fabric connects all the elements of the chip, including the CPUs, the GPU, the L3 cache and the system agent. Because the ring interconnect is modular, the four-core die can easily be converted into a two-core die by "chopping" out two cores and two L3 cache modules, according to Knoll's presentation. The initial version of Sandy Bridge are available in two- or four-core variations.

"By simply 'chopping' two slices, we get to another level of die," Knoll said.

 

[Idontcare]

Hehe, I know the feeling. While I knew there were different dies, I assumed it was just two, one for 2c and one for 4c. I think this was the case for Sandy Bridge.


It can make sense economically, provided you're as big as Intel. While the fixed costs for design/validation of so many different dies/wafers is high, with Intels volumes the upfront investment will pay off over the lifetime of the CPUs.

What is decisive for Intel are the production costs per part, which are determined by die candidates per wafer and yields.

Looking at the two 2c dies, the 2c-6EU-3MiB die has only 80% of the die area of the 2c-16EU-4MiB die. This means there are 25% more die candidates per wafer, and the yield will also be higher. So maybe 30% more usable dies per wafer. With these ratios, and Intels famous good yields, it may be cheaper to just throw away the faulty big dies. The same goes for the 4c dies - there you have 20% more die candidates per wafer for the i5 compared to the i7.

But IANAProcessEngineer and can't say for sure. Idontcare, wanna help us out?


I don't think they can be physically cut off. But Intel is on record saying that the basic core layout is done to be able to "chop off" parts from the high-end core designs to get the die designs for the small cores, which helps with the design of many different dies.

You are right on the money :thumbsup:

 

[Smoblikat]

Seriously Intel, seriously? The market segmentation on your HD Graphics is appalling. For HD Graphics 3000, I have to spend $120, and that's just the beginning.

It's a shame that you can't even put mid level HD Graphics on a Pentium processor. And I can't think of any reason for that, except pure greed.

My guess is that, if past experience is any guide, with Haswell GT2 graphics will only be available at $125. And for that Intel, f*** you. AMD is getting my business from now on.

Dont forget how they disable HT on the I5's and charge you 100$ to have it turned on with the I7's................

 

[2timer]

Dont forget how they disable HT on the I5's and charge you 100$ to have it turned on with the I7's................

I actually don't have a problem with Intel charging you more for a CPU that has more processing power.

I have a problem with Intel forcing you to pay more for a CPU you don't need, just to get the midlevel IGP, a la Ivy Bridge. Because then you are paying for something you don't even use, just because Intel offers no variety in it's IGPs for Pentiums and Celerons.

Thus my rant against the market segmentation.

 

[bononos]

The problem is the consumers voted with their wallets and they voted that they prefer crappier customer service in exchange for slightly lower prices.
........

America isn't full of Walmarts because we value customer satisfaction. It is full of Walmarts because we don't.

The problem is that consumers have no way to see how shopping at walmart hurts them and their communities in the long run by outsourcing production to China and running off mom and pop stores. People want immediate gratification which is the always-low-prices. Much like gallon sized sodas and cigarettes.

 

[Shmee]

My only complaint with intel is that they should be more OC/Enthusiast friendly, I don't care about some IGPU.

 

[Blandge]

I actually don't have a problem with Intel charging you more for a CPU that has more processing power.

I have a problem with Intel forcing you to pay more for a CPU you don't need, just to get the midlevel IGP, a la Ivy Bridge. Because then you are paying for something you don't even use, just because Intel offers no variety in it's IGPs for Pentiums and Celerons.

Thus my rant against the market segmentation.

Intel isn't forcing you to pay for anything. If the performance and/or pricing of Intel's products does not meet your requirements you can refrain from purchasing anything.

I'm pissed off that Subaru doesn't offer a cheaper BRZ without a infotainment system, but I'm not gonna post on autotrader about how I'd like to flip Subaru the bird because they are forcing me to pay for an infotainment system that I don't need. Instead I'll purchase a Scion FRS with is essentially the same car, but the infotainment system does not come standard.

 

[2timer]

Intel isn't forcing you to pay for anything. If the performance and/or pricing of Intel's products does not meet your requirements you can refrain from purchasing anything.

I'm pissed off that Subaru doesn't offer a cheaper BRZ without a infotainment system, but I'm not gonna post on autotrader about how I'd like to flip Subaru the bird because they are forcing me to pay for an infotainment system that I don't need. Instead I'll purchase a Scion FRS with is essentially the same car, but the infotainment system does not come standard.

Actually dude, your car analogy really doesn't work at all. You can purchase additional options to car with the baseline engine with many manufacturers. Toyota doesn't say, "You can't have the performance audio system in the Scion with the non-turbo, 1.6L engine." Intel does.

Also, even if you could cite an example where this wasn't the case, you can still install an aftermarket stereo in your vehicle. The ability to customize the form factor is still there. With Intel, there is no customization of the IGP with the baseline.

Using the car analogy, Intel forces you to purchase the turbo-charged model just to get the premium factory stereo system. And that pisses me the f*** off.

 

[Idontcare]

The problem is that consumers have no way to see how shopping at walmart hurts them and their communities in the long run by outsourcing production to China and running off mom and pop stores. People want immediate gratification which is the always-low-prices. Much like gallon sized sodas and cigarettes.

I disagree, they all know it hurts them in the long run, the notion of "buy USA made" is not a foreign concept by any means.

But they really just don't care. They don't care that the politicians they vote into office are giving them social services that are unsustainable and can't be paid for, and they don't care if shopping at Walmart is unsustainable either.

I believe people do get that there are long-term ramifications to come from their personal short-term decisions, but I don't think they take them seriously. Not seriously enough to change their priorities unless forced to.

Look at how much we all value our children, but it took car-seat laws that penalized us financially as adults before we'd make it a priority to buy a carseat and strap our precious little ones into them.

When it takes laws and penalties just to compel people to be prudent with the things they already cherish most dearly, how can we really expect the same humans to learn to cherish something they clearly do not currently cherish and simultaneously compel them to do so without the threat of laws and fines?

It simply won't happen. It is not human to behave that way. We are way to overly self-absorbed and short-term thinking to have the good sense to contemplate our long term survival.

Actually dude, your car analogy really doesn't work at all. You can purchase additional options to car with the baseline engine with many manufacturers. Toyota doesn't say, "You can't have the performance audio system in the Scion with the non-turbo, 1.6L engine." Intel does.

Also, even if you could cite an example where this wasn't the case, you can still install an aftermarket stereo in your vehicle. The ability to customize the form factor is still there. With Intel, there is no customization of the IGP with the baseline.

Using the car analogy, Intel forces you to purchase the turbo-charged model just to get the premium factory stereo system. And that pisses me the f*** off.

Maybe I am just having a bad reading comprehension day but from what I am reading here I don't think you get how it works when you buy a new car.

When I bought my brand new Sienna van from a Toyota dealership my package options were very much limited and restricted based on the base model of the Sienna I was purchasing.

If I went with an LE (inexpensive base model) there were audio packages that I simply could not select as upgrades for the LE, but if I went with the XLE (premium base model) then I could elect to then pay even more to have those upgrades installed.

And even then the upgrades were tiered. If you wanted running boards then you had to buy the sunroof package too, etc.

I'll give you another real-world example, my Garmin Nuvi 1490T. I wanted the merge assist and traffic alert features, but those are premium features that cannot be bought without buying the absolute top-end model which must come with a bunch of other useless features I did not want.

My cable provider is the same way too. I can't just order up HBO without also ordering basic and the plus package. They don't let you do that. You have to tier your way into the features you actually want.

Now I'd totally understand if your general point of contention here is that you don't like when businesses do this, when they operate this way. I don't particularly care for it either. But you are wrong if you think this is an Intel-only issue or that Intel invented this business model.

They didn't invent anything here, they simply do business the way all business managers are taught to do business when they get their MBA's. And if they didn't do business this way then they'd lose their jobs, shareholders would demand it, and they'd be replaced with people who would run the business this way.