Why does intel gimp some of their CPU lines?

[bigboxes]

No, the analogy would be that the fog lights were installed but DISABLED.....

Either way you're not getting a feature unless you pay more. Comprende?

 

[Lepton87]

Yes you can. You just have to step up to LGA 2011. An enthusiast will have an i7 4960X.

Since when spending money extravagantly makes someone an enthusiast? The motion that the amount of money spent on a computer is the main criteria for being an enthusiast is silly.
Very few people buy Extreme CPUs, most enthusiast would rather opt to sacrifice 5% of CPU performance and pay half the price for the CPU, and in fact they do just that. The difference between 4960X and 4930K is minuscule yet one cost almost two times as much as the other.

 

[OCGuy]

Since when spending money extravagantly makes someone an enthusiast? The motion that the amount of money spent on a computer is the main criteria for being an enthusiast is silly.
Very few people buy Extreme CPUs, most enthusiast would rather opt to sacrifice 5% of CPU performance and pay half the price for the CPU, and in fact they do just that. The difference between 4960X and 4930K is minuscule yet one cost almost two times as much as the other.

You are missing the best part. Nobody is forcing anyone to buy anything. You select a choice based off of individual need.

If the market dictates there is enough demand for VT on OC parts (which there isn't), you can bet they will find a way to fill it.

 

[piasabird]

Intel has a lot of different CPU's for a lot of different uses. Just make sure to purchase the one with all the options you need for your use. Buyer beware. I mostly watch video so I purchased and i3 4330 3.5ghtz with 4 Meg Cache and HD 4600 graphics. Seems fast enough without a SSD. Of course I never used an SSD so I don't know what I am missing. I guess I am just cheap.

Since I don't game it works great for me.

 

[DrMrLordX]

I think disabling vt-d on the k-cpu's makes sense in Intel's market segmentation strategy if Intel doesn't want overclocked cpu's in servers which would affect sales of Xeon.

Has anyone been able to demonstrate how or why overclocked k chips would affect sales of Xeon processors? That just doesn't make sense to me. After all this time, are people really going to be duped into thinking an overclocked k chip is actually a Xeon? Given the price on the 4770k, would any shady OEM/builder actually make a profit by trying to remark the 4770k as a Xeon? Connect those dots and maybe Intel has an incentive to kill VT-d on k chips; however, I just don't see that being the case.

Yes you can. You just have to step up to LGA 2011. An enthusiast will have an i7 4960X.

I was wondering when someone would say that. Sorry, that's an Ivy Bridge-e chip, which means no AVX2 etc. Also, that is an x chip, not a k chip.

So, I have to pay an extra, what, $700 to gain VT-d and lose AVX2/TSX/etc? What if I want an unlocked multiplier, VT-d, AND AVX2? I guess Haswell-e is going to take care of that at a very high price point, eventually. That doesn't help anyone right now.

If the market dictates there is enough demand for VT on OC parts (which there isn't), you can bet they will find a way to fill it.

The real question people should be asking is: does the market dictate that Intel has any financial incentive to expend additional effort by crippling workstation-related instruction sets on k chips?

Intel has a lot of different CPU's for a lot of different uses. Just make sure to purchase the one with all the options you need for your use.

You can't buy a Haswell chip with an unlocked multiplier (k chip) plus VT-d, TSX, and whatever else is disabled arbitrarily on k chips.

edit: added quote/response

 

[ShintaiDK]

You can't buy a Haswell chip with an unlocked multiplier (k chip) plus VT-d, TSX, and whatever else is disabled arbitrarily on k chips.

You can soon. Its called Haswell-E.

 

[2is]

The real question people should be asking is: does the market dictate that Intel has any financial incentive to expend additional effort by crippling workstation-related instruction sets on k chips?

Without a competitor the market can buy form instead, not likely.

 

[Ferzerp]

I like how no one who has commented on it in this thread understands what VT-d is and how it isn't VT-x.

 

[Pheesh]

Has anyone been able to demonstrate how or why overclocked k chips would affect sales of Xeon processors? That just doesn't make sense to me. After all this time, are people really going to be duped into thinking an overclocked k chip is actually a Xeon? Given the price on the 4770k, would any shady OEM/builder actually make a profit by trying to remark the 4770k as a Xeon? Connect those dots and maybe Intel has an incentive to kill VT-d on k chips; however, I just don't see that being the case.

It's just market segmentation. If you're running important applications and want stability you really shouldn't be overclocking, but you may be using ecc memory and should be running at validated stock frequencies, so here's a chip that has been validated for x features and purposes. Now intel can target that specific market and optimize the price point for it.

Where consumer chips can affect sales of xeon processors is when shared features exist but the optimal price points in those markets differ...also it can muddy your data on what prices are working in each market. Even if OEM's may not actually use an unlocked part, they can use it's pricing as leverage in price negotiations.

 

[Phynaz]

I like how no one who has commented on it in this thread understands what VT-d is and how it isn't VT-x.

It doesn't matter, people get upset that they aren't getting feature, even if it's of no use to them.

It's easy to measure a feature list checkbox.

 

[coolpurplefan]

I like how no one who has commented on it in this thread understands what VT-d is and how it isn't VT-x.

I'm too lazy to look but there were threads like that.

 

[TripleThreatTLT]

The reason could be quite simple. Given the use case of the K parts most customers want a specific feature set. If you can pair down the features being tested then you can reduce your overall test time / expense.

If testing VT-d takes an additional say 1 minute / wafer, and intel is running X wafers a month at cost of say $150/hr in test time. Then that test time adds up very quickly to very real costs. So even though the feature does exist on the part, testing that it is functional requires additional expense.

 

[zir_blazer]

I like how no one who has commented on it in this thread understands what VT-d is and how it isn't VT-x.

Talk for yourself. I'm actively using VT-d to do passthrough of a Video Card to a Windows XP VM, so I can happily play games on it. And for that reason, I'm dissapointed than Intel forced me to choose between VT-d or overclocking.

If testing VT-d takes an additional say 1 minute / wafer, and intel is running X wafers a month at cost of say $150/hr in test time. Then that test time adds up very quickly to very real costs. So even though the feature does exist on the part, testing that it is functional requires additional expense.

That should be part of the binning process. And they should be fully tested before deciding what SKU they could be used for, anyways.

 

[ShintaiDK]

Talk for yourself. I'm actively using VT-d to do passthrough of a Video Card to a Windows XP VM, so I can happily play games on it. And for that reason, I'm dissapointed than Intel forced me to choose between VT-d or overclocking.

Last time I checked you could get VT-D and overclocking on the LGA2011 platform.

So isnt the issue the classic one again. Wanting but not willing to pay?

 

[OCGuy]

The real question people should be asking is: does the market dictate that Intel has any financial incentive to expend additional effort by crippling workstation-related instruction sets on k chips?

Apparently, it does. People with actual data and inside knowledge get paid to make these decisions, and obviously their segmentation system isn't an issue at this time.

 

[coolpurplefan]

You can soon. Its called Haswell-E.

Wow, I wonder if e-whining helped.

 

[TripleThreatTLT]

That should be part of the binning process. And they should be fully tested before deciding what SKU they could be used for, anyways.

Not necessarily always the case. As someone who has worked in Semiconductor Test I can say this from experience.

 

[zir_blazer]

Last time I checked you could get VT-D and overclocking on the LGA2011 platform.

So isnt the issue the classic one again. Wanting but not willing to pay?

I could pay 20-30 U$D price premium for the Unlocked Multiplier itself, which is what Intel currently charges you for going from a Core i7 4770 to 4770K. But having to spend MUCH more to get Motherboards with an ancient Chipset and previous generation Processors? Hell no.

 

[ShintaiDK]

I could pay 20-30 U$D price premium for the Unlocked Multiplier itself, which is what Intel currently charges you for going from a Core i7 4770 to 4770K. But having to spend MUCH more to get Motherboards with an ancient Chipset and previous generation Processors? Hell no.

Then buy Haswell-E when it comes. I cant see any problems.

 

[zir_blazer]

That Haswell was released halfway 2013 and Haswell-E is still months away doesn't mean anything for you? I can't get a Haswell with both VT-d and Unlocked Multiplier no matter if I was willing to pay for it. That's the issue about Intel strategy with market segmentation.

 

[ShintaiDK]

That Haswell was released halfway 2013 and Haswell-E is still months away doesn't mean anything for you? I can't get a Haswell with both VT-d and Unlocked Multiplier no matter if I was willing to pay for it. That's the issue about Intel strategy with market segmentation.

It doesnt mean anything for me no. And I still cant see the issue. The exact product with your exact demands just isnt on the market yet, but its coming.

 

[chrisjames61]

Either way you're not getting a feature unless you pay more. Comprende?

A feature that is baked into the chip but disabled. Comprende?

 

[OCGuy]

A feature that is baked into the chip but disabled. Comprende?

So vote with your wallet and buy a processor from a competitor.

 

[Ferzerp]

A feature that is baked into the chip but disabled. Comprende?

You're buying IP more than you're buying the physical device. You have to pay more for more features. This is very common in computing. Perhaps we should all get the highest end version of all software any time we license a cheaper edition. I mean it is already written, but it's just your license disabling it...

 

[ElFenix]

same reason airlines charge more if you're buying 10 minutes before the flight.