Smart idea? <EDIT: OK yeah it's not a smart idea>

[FishTankX]

This is the silliest idea i've ever heard in a long time. No offense to you, sick beats. But think of this one pressing problem.

What would the hardware manufactuers do with all of the CPU's (At your specs, probably 80% plus) or GPU's that cannot hit the specs of the singular product?

If Intel has a CPU that won't make 3.2GHz but makes 3.0 by your logic and your business scheme they would just throw it out.

Thus making CPU's extremley costly to produce because 80% of your stock is getting thrown out anyways.

Also, if a CPU has broken cache you could just shut down that part of the cache and make it into another product. The cache is a huge part of the CPU and having one part of the cache fail means it cannot operate at it's intended cache amounts. But a flick of the switch, and it can.

Or the speed of the CPU with all of it's cache enabled could fall short of the minimum lines of your product line (Like an X800 pro that couldn't run at XT speeds with all of it's pipes) but it'll run fine at the targeted speeds of another (crippled, as you call them) line and thus is salvagable. A CPU or GPU that once would have turned no profit is now salable and probably even profitable.

If you had an R420 chip that had 2 broken pipelines, it certainley can't be an XT. So why not sell it as an X800 pro? Shut down the 2 pipelines and you're golden.

Also, these low end products allow overclockers to get tremondous bang for the buck by allowing us to run it at speeds it couldn't necescarily make at the test run. Sure, it might not make the intended speeds of the high end with lame ass cooling (Like the kind Dell typically uses) but in a well venthilated case with a good CPU fan and heatsink it can make even higher than the top CPU, easy.

Intel has to make sure all of it's CPU's work in the lame ass cooling conditions that the OEM's utilize. In conditions like malaysia and singapore where the average temperature during the summer might be 95+F with no air conditioning. Same for ATI and such. But most cases won't be that bad. Hell, it's probabyl alot lower than that. So those pipes that might not have worked under the stress test conditions might be fine under normal conditions, allowing us overclockers to pick up an XT for the price of an X800 pro.

Selling all high end CPU's would result in poor profits (due to having to throw out god knows how many cores that didn't make the high end spec) and result in severly crippled manufacutring capabilities for the same reasons. Supply would suck ass. And you'd be taking away choice from the consumer.

 

[Mr.IncrediblyBored]

Originally posted by: FishTankX
What would the hardware manufactuers do with all of the CPU's (At your specs, probably 80% plus) or GPU's that cannot hit the specs of the singular product?

If Intel has a CPU that won't make 3.2GHz but makes 3.0 by your logic and your business scheme they would just throw it out.

Not that I agree with SickBeast's idea, but I believe his thinking was that as volume ramps up for their single product line, yields should improve as the lines stabilize and defects are sorted out.

He is probably correct in some respect, but those first few months, prices would be extraordinarily high - especially if the manufacturer can't satisfy demand with the lower yields.

 

[rbV5]

Innovation and competition rule the market. Your idea = lowest common denominator = menothanx

 

[Megatomic]

Originally posted by: Wingznut

Originally posted by: randumb

Originally posted by: SickBeast
Yeah OK fine so you guys are right. I'm just irritated that these companies cripple perfectly good CPUs/GPUs due to their own greed. Greenpeace should look into these matters, especially the socket changes. If they did I'm sure they would propose an intel boycott.

Greenpeace+Computers?

I read in another thread that Intel clubs baby seals.

Teh horror!!

 

[KillaKilla]

Originally posted by: SickBeast

Originally posted by: jhurst
it costs more to produce a Pentium chip compared to a Celeron (R+D, marketing included)

How about without R+D included? The manufacturing cost is identical. The Celeron has no R+D budget, they simply disable most of the cache, how hard is that to figure out? Marketing probably costs the same for both.

I thought celerons were made seperately, atleast from P4s...

 

[Ages120]

Well theres a lot your missing.

#1 By doing this and getting all they can for thier cpus they have more money to pay egg heads to research new technologies and chip designs, as well as to start upgrading to better smaller production methods with higher yeilds which costs a bunch and a half. Also bunch of people with a god knows what degrees in electrical engineering, advanced mathematics, computer science get one hell of a big salary too.

#2 Yes they often cripple a card like in the X800 pro but for very very good reason like faulty pipelines. Thier original die desing was turning out cards with messed up piplelines and to turn them on to ship people faulty cards is ludicrous, not to mention they still might be working out bugs getting the pipelines to work correctly on every single X800XT they are trying to get going.

#3 They like I said have to make up money lost on upgrading the production methods often required for new cpus which often have lower yeilds and many more transitors then previous generations with less transistors with greater yeilds. So it makes sense new generations would cost more then previous ones.

They could go do like you said if the company wanted to go out with a bang but they would go out bussiness.

 

[Lonyo]

Screw the bloody company!

What about the customers who CANNOT AFFORD the extra cost that the single thing will entail.
Some people go with an $80 BECAUSE IT'S ALL THEY CAN AFFORD
Having a flat rate $95 WILL NOT HELP THEM.

So yes, it's a really stupid idea.

Plus, they don't cripple half the products for fun, it's speed binning because they cannot be used at the higher speeds.

 

[nitromullet]

I think that CPU's should come unlocked again. This would mean that if you buy a 3.0 GHz cpu, it is guaranteed to run at 3.0, but if you can and want to run at 3.4+, that is up to you... The same should be true for a X800 Pro card. The additonal pipes should be obtainable with a softmod. Maybe you get lucky and end up with 16 pipes, or you get one with 14... Having the parts run at the default specs for the average consumer lets the manufacturer have quality control over the majority of the market, while the ability to overclock and mod satisfies the enthusiast market. IMO, these companies are talking out of both sides of their mouths. On onehand, you have Overdrive from ATi and the very simple coolbits registry mod from nVidia, so they do 'support' overclocking. Then on the otherhand, ATi is physically cutting, apparently working, pipes from the core of the X800 Pro. AMD is no better with their overpriced unlocked FX series. By having an unlocked CPU, they can claim that they are supportive of the enthusiast, but at what pricepoint? Unlock the A64 3x00's and AXP's, damnit! Intel could do the same with the Northwoods. Will the few enthusiasts who manage to run their parts above spec really be cutting into their profits? I don't think so...

Of course I have heard the argument from Intel/AMD that they locked the cpu's because vendors were overclocking them and selling them as faster chips. So, hardwire an identification tag into the chip that the chipset reads at boot that displays the intended spec and the actual speed during boot. They could even make it so a warning is displayed that indicates that the cpu is OC'ed.

I realize that this isn't exactly what SickBeast is saying, but it is along the same lines.

 

[Sunbird]

I heard Intel makes Celerons from baby seals

Only kidding , of course

 

[Davegod]

Originally posted by: SickBeast
I would give them three choices:
-buy a high-end CPU for $90
-buy a high-end CPU for $90
-buy a high-end CPU for $90

It's alot better than today's choice for the high-end: buy a high-end CPU for $800.

And when back in planet reality the three choices might more likely be:
-buy a high-end CPU for $700
-buy a high-end CPU for $700
-buy a high-end CPU for $700

Sure, still better than today's choice for the high-end: buy a high-end CPU for $800, but erm what about the other 90% of people who want something to run IE and MS Office for about $300 to $500?. Oh and what if the reduction in competition means that $700 high end chip isnt even 3/4 as fast as they would be in reality market conditions? You think Greenpeace would be happer about them chucking out 50% of their very un-environmentally friendly produced chips just because they have a minor flaw in the cache that could otherwise be disabled for a perfectly well functioning lower spec CPU?

Isnt your problem that you want high end chips but cant afford them? I'd like a ferarri, but it'd be a tad silly to suggest all manufacturers should be producing only their highest quality handmade sportscars.

 

[FishTankX]

Originally posted by: nitromullet
I think that CPU's should come unlocked again. This would mean that if you buy a 3.0 GHz cpu, it is guaranteed to run at 3.0, but if you can and want to run at 3.4+, that is up to you... The same should be true for a X800 Pro card. The additonal pipes should be obtainable with a softmod. Maybe you get lucky and end up with 16 pipes, or you get one with 14... Having the parts run at the default specs for the average consumer lets the manufacturer have quality control over the majority of the market, while the ability to overclock and mod satisfies the enthusiast market. IMO, these companies are talking out of both sides of their mouths. On onehand, you have Overdrive from ATi and the very simple coolbits registry mod from nVidia, so they do 'support' overclocking. Then on the otherhand, ATi is physically cutting, apparently working, pipes from the core of the X800 Pro. AMD is no better with their overpriced unlocked FX series. By having an unlocked CPU, they can claim that they are supportive of the enthusiast, but at what pricepoint? Unlock the A64 3x00's and AXP's, damnit! Intel could do the same with the Northwoods. Will the few enthusiasts who manage to run their parts above spec really be cutting into their profits? I don't think so...

Of course I have heard the argument from Intel/AMD that they locked the cpu's because vendors were overclocking them and selling them as faster chips. So, hardwire an identification tag into the chip that the chipset reads at boot that displays the intended spec and the actual speed during boot. They could even make it so a warning is displayed that indicates that the cpu is OC'ed.

I realize that this isn't exactly what SickBeast is saying, but it is along the same lines.

No offense to you, but if you would have lived through the early P2 erra, you would see why companies lock their CPU's.

To put it bluntly, unlocked CPU's would allow unscrupulous vendors to market lower clocked CPU's as higher ones, and pocket the cash.

What would keep a company from taking Mobile Barton 2500+'s and marketing them as 3200+'s? Nothing.

You could make a whole industry from selling multiplier moded CPU's. And that would hurt the companies because there would be no incentive to buy the higher clocked CPU's. They'd be the same..

If multipliers were unlocked mom and pop shops could go and sell moded CPU's with impunity.

 

[EeyoreX]

No offense to you, but if you would have lived through the early P2 erra, you would see why companies lock their CPU's.

To put it bluntly, unlocked CPU's would allow unscrupulous vendors to market lower clocked CPU's as higher ones, and pocket the cash.

What would keep a company from taking Mobile Barton 2500+'s and marketing them as 3200+'s? Nothing.

You could make a whole industry from selling multiplier moded CPU's. And that would hurt the companies because there would be no incentive to buy the higher clocked CPU's. They'd be the same..

If multipliers were unlocked mom and pop shops could go and sell moded CPU's with impunity.

Did you actually read his entire post? He did a great job addressing this very issue. I direct you to the following statement:

So, hardwire an identification tag into the chip that the chipset reads at boot that displays the intended spec and the actual speed during boot. They could even make it so a warning is displayed that indicates that the cpu is OC'ed.

Implimenting a system like this would prevent this problem all together. If a warning, enabled at the hardware level, existed companies off shady dealings would not be able to rip off unsuspecting consumers.

\Dan

 

[SickBeast]

OK yeah I accept that it was NOT a smart idea. Not a single person here thought it was even remotely intelligent. Maybe I should be banned from the forums for posting outrageous statements and wasting valuable forum bandwidth. :brokenheart:

By the way, my name is "Sick Beast", not "sick beats". :roll:
Everyone always has a new name for me. The last time it was "Slick Beast". :|

I got some interesting feedback though which is what I was hoping for.

My original post was problematic in the sense that I proposed to eliminate speed binning, which is a ludicrous thought in retrospect. I stand by my anti-crippling Greenpeace position though.

 

[RockGuitarDude]

Someone needs to speak to an economist.

A good analogy to this is when Wendy's got rid of it's triple cheese burger due to low sales. Guess what happened? Their sales in double cheese burgers fell and they sold more single cheese burgers. The second they put the triple back on, it increased sales of doubles again.

For AMD for example, the triple cheese burger is their socket 939 line and their double cheese burger is the 754 line. I'm not sure where the Athlon XP's fall though as I don't think cheeseburgers overclock very well.

-Jay

 

[nitromullet]

Originally posted by: EeyoreX

Did you actually read his entire post? He did a great job addressing this very issue. I direct you to the following statement:

So, hardwire an identification tag into the chip that the chipset reads at boot that displays the intended spec and the actual speed during boot. They could even make it so a warning is displayed that indicates that the cpu is OC'ed.

Implimenting a system like this would prevent this problem all together. If a warning, enabled at the hardware level, existed companies off shady dealings would not be able to rip off unsuspecting consumers.

\Dan[/quote]

Thanks...