Should Intel release a Unlocked Multiplier dual core for Ivy Bridge, Haswell, etc

[cbn]

Cast your vote. Poll is Anonymous.

 

[inf64]

Yes

 

[Denithor]

Not going to happen.

However, have heard that they plan to unhook BCLK again in Haswell so we can go back to overclocking the good old way. At which point it won't matter anymore.

 

[Red Hawk]

Well...yes and no. From Intel's perspective, I can't see why they would not release a top-end unlocked dual core CPUs like they do with quad cores. They could sell it at a lower price than the unlocked quad cores, and rope in customers who don't want to pay for quad core unlocked CPUs and would probably have turned to AMD at that price range.

On the other hand, from the general industry perspective, I don't want it to happen, as it would be yet another blow to the floundering AMD, possible knocking them down for the count. And if AMD leaves the market then Intel would have a monopoly and the market would suffer for it.

 

[cbn]

I don't vote in my own polls, but if I did it would be option 3 (Yes, i3 and Pentium) or option 4 (Yes, i3, Pentium and Celeron).

These modern dual cores are quite impressive as far as IPC goes, unlike the Clarkdale i3 that really suffered in IPC compared to the quad core i5-750 at the time.

This makes an overclocked dual core a more attractive option than it used to be back in the Westmere era.

However, have heard that they plan to unhook BCLK again in Haswell so we can go back to overclocking the good old way. At which point it won't matter anymore.

Well, that would be even better. This way even the lowest end SKU could be overclocked (adding value).

 

[ShintaiDK]

Not enough people that want to buy it.

 

[cbn]

Not enough people that want to buy it.

Depends on the price.

Another thing to consider is die size:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5876/the-rest-of-the-ivy-bridge-die-sizes

Ivy Bridge HM-4 4 6MB GT1 7.656 x 17.349 mm 132.8mm2

Ivy Bridge M-2 2 3MB GT1 7.656 x 12.223 mm 93.6mm2

132.8mm2 for the GT1 Ivy bridge quad core vs. 93.6mm2 for the GT1 Ivy Bridge dual core.

Intel could certainly afford to sell the unlocked i3 (dual core/four thread) processors for a good deal less compared to some of the locked i5 (quad core/four thread) processors.

 

[tweakboy]

They will. 2 cores and 4 threads for dirt cheap and unlocked. maybe the M laptop version you cant unlock, at worst...... gl

 

[Zodiark1593]

Having a fast, budget dual core with a fully enabled Haswell GPU could very well deal a near-fatal blow to AMD's APUs.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Depends on the price.

Another thing to consider is die size:

http://www.anandtech.com/show/5876/the-rest-of-the-ivy-bridge-die-sizes





132.8mm2 for the GT1 Ivy bridge quad core vs. 93.6mm2 for the GT1 Ivy Bridge dual core.

Intel could certainly afford to sell the unlocked i3 (dual core/four thread) processors for a good deal less compared to some of the locked i5 (quad core/four thread) processors.

Price is easy to determine. It would have to be at or above the current top SKUs in the lines. That means an unlocked i3 would be 150$ or more.

Intel already tried the waters, and it just showed it wasnt viable.

The size difference cant be used to anything really. You can just as well ask why Intel just doesnt lower the price on the i5 when AMD can sell you a 315mm2 chip for less.

 

[Ferzerp]

It makes little business sense to release one. Not for the reasons claimed above (I'm sure they'd sell well), but more because the people who want unlocked multipliers seem to be willing to pay for the i5 and i7 parts. If I remember correctly, shortly after release, the Intel rep on here stated that the k parts were the highest selling individual retail skus. It would make little sense to make a cheaper alternative when the more expensive ones sell so well.

We would all like fast procs for $50 (or fast cars for cheap, or cheap food, or cheap houses), but that doesn't mean it makes sense (or is possible) to sell them to us at that price. Especially not after we've shown we are quite willing to spend more. This doesn't make the company evil. It makes the company smart.

 

[cbn]

Intel already tried the waters, and it just showed it wasnt viable.

Yes, but that was with clarkdale....and those clarkdales were just terrible compared to the quad core equivalent in terms of IPC.

By the time Sandy Bridge came along, the dual core IPC was near equivalent to the Quad core IPC. Unfortunately, for us, the dual core Sandy Bridge chips could not be overclocked. This left 2500k and 2600K as the only option for those seeking maximum single thread performance.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Yes, but that was with clarkdale....and those clarkdales were just terrible compared to the quad core equivalent in terms of IPC.

By the time Sandy Bridge came along, the dual core IPC was near equivalent to the Quad core IPC. Unfortunately, for us, the dual core Sandy Bridge chips could not be overclocked. This left 2500k and 2600K as the only option for those seeking maximum single thread performance.

It was also with Core 2. While you can say people could just OC the FSB instead there.

Its a niche segment, and simply not economic viable. There aint enough people willing to pay the premium. Almost everyone would rather buy an i5 or i7.

 

[Torn Mind]

Yes, even if they put bin limit lower than the i5s, i.e an i3 with a max bin of 40, it would sell well at the 150-165 price range.

 

[Torn Mind]

I know it is not feasible, but I personally would definitely like a G4xxK equivalent processor for Haswell just for proof of concept of excellent single-core performance.

 

[cbn]

Its a niche segment, and simply not economic viable. There aint enough people willing to pay the premium. Almost everyone would rather buy an i5 or i7.

At least three scenarios I can think of at the moment:

1. Unlocked i3 or Pentium will result in a shift of enthusiast sales away from the more expensive Intel processors like the i5 and i7. (This is bad for Intel)

2. Unlocked i3 or Pentium will result in a shift of sales from AMD to Intel. (This is good for Intel)

3. Unlocked i3 or Pentium will result in people satisfied with their old Core 2 duo processors.....and who would not have purchased any CPU otherwise.....to finally upgrade to the new unlocked i3 or Pentium. (This is good for Intel)

 

[Haserath]

I always wonder what die size costs... It usually seems like very little, and 160mm^2 quad Ivy compared to 100mm^2 dual Ivy wouldn't seem like much savings for them to sell it at a lower price than the 3570k or w/e.

As long as they keep unlocked quad core Haswells under $240, I'll be happy. I wouldn't go with anything less than a quad these days unless I was building a budget build, in which case I would undervolt it anyway.

 

[SPBHM]

they did release a lower end K CPU years ago, but it wasn't really that useful since you could OC with FSB
http://ark.intel.com/products/42806/Intel-Pentium-Processor-E6500K-2M-Cache-2_93-GHz-1066-MHz-FSB

now I would love to have a dual core ivy K, a fast hyper threaded dual core at 4.5GHz would pretty much be so good that it would turn away customers from the i5s and others, so that's probably why it's never going to happen.

It was also with Core 2. While you can say people could just OC the FSB instead there.

Its a niche segment, and simply not economic viable. There aint enough people willing to pay the premium. Almost everyone would rather buy an i5 or i7.

that's the difference, on lga 775 the appeal of the K version was minimal, also do you remember the 875k? I doubt it sold to well compared to the 860, 870 or whatever....
nowadays a K CPU is the only way, a reasonable priced K dual core would sell decently and have a positive impact for their brand I think.

 

[Haserath]

At least three scenarios I can think of at the moment:

1. Unlocked i3 or Pentium will result in a shift of enthusiast sales away from the more expensive Intel processors like the i5 and i7. (This is bad for Intel)

2. Unlocked i3 or Pentium will result in a shift of sales from AMD to Intel. (This is good for Intel)

3. Unlocked i3 or Pentium will result in people satisfied with their old Core 2 duo processors.....and who would not have purchased any CPU otherwise.....to finally upgrade to the new unlocked i3 or Pentium. (This is good for Intel)

1. Maybe... depends on margins. Also depends on how many lower i3 sales upgrade to the unlocked dual.

2. I've decided AMD isn't worth it in any builds anymore. Total system cost of an AMD cpu makes it a worse buy. It might convince others to switch though.

3. They'll upgrade eventually. Might as well wait until they buy a higher margin part.

 

[podspi]

I picked option 4. Not because I think it would be in their best interest, but it certainly would be in ours.

A well-banned unlocked dual core would be very interesting imho

 

[VirtualLarry]

A well-banned unlocked dual core would be very interesting imho

I name it... the TweakChip.

 

[Soulkeeper]

how about every chip being unlocked

 

[Puppies04]

I always wonder what die size costs... It usually seems like very little, and 160mm^2 quad Ivy compared to 100mm^2 dual Ivy wouldn't seem like much savings for them to sell it at a lower price than the 3570k or w/e.

Lets imagine a hypothetical 200000mm^2 wafer. You would make 2000 100mm^2 CPUs and 1250 160mm^2 CPUs. Or put another way more than 50% increased yield from the same production area.

 

[skipsneeky2]

Intel could have a lineup like with their i5 and i7 chips where particular models are unlocked,while others are locked.

A super energy efficient dual core that can hit 4.5ghz with ease with ht would def make it into a budget build,toss in a 7850 and its gonna be a super budget build for certain.

Most likely are only gonna have people coming from core 2 duo or older amd dual cores who will be looking at it,so those who are already on quad core might just not be interested in it for a build of their own.

 

[anikhtos]

Sure give lower end unlocked processors.
After all an i3 can not get into the way of an i5
while now days with the software we have an i5 vs i7 makes not that much of difference.
4 cores vs 4 cores with hyper threading making i7 30% faster in heavy multi threading environments.

Software is so slow behind even expensive professional one.
So gives us unlocked i3