Is Intel Planning To Kill Enthusiast PCs? 1009
OceanMan7 writes "According to a story by Charlie Demerjian, a long-time hardware journalist, Intel's next generation of x86 CPUs, Broadwell, will not come in a package having pins. Hence manufacturers will have to solder it onto motherboards. That will likely seriously wound the enthusiast PC market. If Intel doesn't change their plans, the future pasture for enthusiasts looks like it will go to ARM chips or something from offshore manufacturers."
Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention that ARM chips use a different instruction set, so .... you can't go from x86 to ARM. If you're going anywhere you're going to go AMD.
Whoever wrote the summary needs a quick dose of clue-by-four.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Informative)
Why can't you go to ARM?
Lots of linux distros have ARM support.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Informative)
An "x86 app" is an app that someone has compiled for x86 and only given you the binary.
Open-source apps are not generally architecture specific. If you have source code and development tools, you can build it on whatever you like, and ARM is pretty mature in this regard. Several Linux distros have ARM ports already, including Debian and Arch, and probably Fedora, and there's a FreeBSD ARM project, also, if you're allergic to the GPL.
And there is Android, for which the OS is natively ARM, even if the app-land is Java.
This ability to mix and match software and hardware in ways not anticipated by the creators of the software or the hardware is exactly why open source is awesome.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
If in "90% of what everyone uses" you define "everyone" as "the few percent of desktop x86 enthusiasts who only run Linux".
But even notwithstanding that, unless you can point out an *ARM* platform with 6-8 3GHz 64 bit cores that supports 16GB+ RAM *and* a socketed motherboard for the CPU, it's irrelevant to his post, anyway.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Why would you need to run x86 apps? Just recompile and go.
Please tell me where I can obtain the source for Photoshop and MS Office so that I can recompile them.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Not to mention that ARM chips use a different instruction set, so .... you can't go from x86 to ARM. If you're going anywhere you're going to go AMD.
Whoever wrote the summary needs a quick dose of clue-by-four.
Yes, because tinkerers and enthusiasts are famous for their staunch reliance on a single architecture. I can picture them now, refusing to abandon Intel due to their reliance on Office 2007 and the native drivers for their Canon Pixma Pro.
It used to be that every other story on Slashdot was about how Linux would/could run on anything. And then I see comments like this and wonder how many of slashdot's users even remember back that far... Or were even alive then?
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
...there is nothing stopping the motherboard makers from soldering their own socket to the board, then soldering the chip to a carrier PCB that plugs into the new socket.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Came-on. Everybody do replace their entire servers already, nearly nobody upgrades.
Besides, Intel changes the sockets of their chips every generation anyway.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't believe soldered CPUs are a problem for businesses. We simply do not upgrade CPU on our boxes ever. We buy appropriate spec for workload - if need more CPU, split task onto multiple boxes.
The box is retired after 3-5 years, and the CPU/RAM/board/etc. is all replaced as a unit. I'm sure we're not alone.
Generally CPU upgrades suck anyhow. Bus speed increases, RAM speed increases, etc. all conspire against you. By the time the new CPU is out that gives a significant benefit, you'll get just as much or more benefit from upgrading the board anyway.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Interesting)
I have a question for the Slashdot audience. In fact it would make a great poll:
I have upgraded a CPU and kept my mother board:
10% or less of the time.
11-25% of the time.
26-50% of the time.
51%-75% of the time
76-100% of the time
For me it would be 10% of the time. Usually when I upgrade CPUs motherboards have improved so much as well that it makes sense to pick up a brand new one even if the socket is the same.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Never mind enthusiasts. There's still a large market for business machines both on the desktop and in the server room. Any thing that makes those machines less standardized and less modular is leaving a lot of money on the table.
Even in the heyday of proprietary RISC systems, they didn't pull nonsense like that. If anything, they were more modular rather than less allowing for hot swapped components.
This is about more than just whether or not hard core gamers can replace their CPU.
Re: (Score:3)
less modular is leaving a lot of money on the table.
Nope. Modular leads to alternative solutions. The last thing Intel wants is Modular. Look at some of the proprietary lock-in that goes on with riser cards, power supplies and form factors (Hi, Dell).
Even in the heyday of proprietary RISC systems
No, there was plenty of premium pricing for RISC based gear. A 400Mhz Sun Ultrasparc was well over $12k refurb back in the mid 90s. You could build a great (at the time) Pentium system for 1/10th the cost back then. That's a big difference. That's how Linux got in the server room.
Intel would love to have the de
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is just cheaper and more expedient to have a few spare ones and strip their parts.
Only once your office has reached a certain size. For many small businesses in tech fields, it doesn't work that way. Those small businesses are also more likely IME to be the ones getting a custom spec for each member of staff that takes into account their specific needs, as they won't qualify for volume purchasing deals. With a limited budget, it does make sense to spend a bit of time customising to make everyone as productive as possible with what you've got.
If this story is really true, it seems a very odd strategic move from Intel at a time when they're dominant in their markets. It's opening the door for people like gamers, geeks and small businesses to move to a competitor (AMD being the obvious candidate) in order to keep their flexibility, and the people I mentioned there are trend-setters for a very significant chunk of the desktop PC industry. And anyone who thinks desktop PCs are dead because everyone is using tablets, laptops, etc. these days just isn't paying attention.
I can only see this ending one of three ways: there's a huge deal with one or more major hardware manufacturers that we don't know about yet (for example to ship process/mobo combinations as a single unit but with significantly better price/performance as a baseline to make up for the loss of flexibility/upgradability), there's about to be an HP-esque sharp U-turn as soon as Otellini is out the door and his successor finds the plot again, or Intel are about to take a big hit with a resurgent AMD being the likely beneficiary.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Or a smart one.
Think about it for a few moments. AMD's in serious trouble. Without help, they run the real risk of going bankrupt. And without AMD, Intel's the "last one left" (other than minor bit players like Via and NatSemi). Which means the EU and US government will be seriously looking at Intel for possible anti-trust. And they've been found guilty before. Last thing Intel would want is to be forced to make several decisions to avoid issues like opening up the spec of their processors and such to compeitors, and forced licensing of patents to everyone and everyone (they aren't FRAND yet).
Plus having to ensure that every move they make won't be found to be anti-trust (think the compiler fiasco - they may be forced to ensure that everyone who makes a compatible chip gets the optimizations). As well, any business decisions they make will get scrutinized - if they want to acquire a company for some technology, for example.
By forcing the enthusiasts (who make up a tiny percent of the market) to AMD, it gives AMD the much needed injection they need, without giving up much of the market (Intel's sales to Dell, HP, Apple, etc. are far greater).
Desktop PCs aren't dying, but they're not exactly being replaced in huge quantities - even laptop sales are affected by smartphones and tablets. Businesses will buy desktop PCs (though they're increasingly buying laptops), but they're never upgraded so Intel is fine with that. The other buyer of desktops would be enthusiasts, who are likely to pay more and buy top tier stuff. And even then AMD isn't getting a lot - the high end AMD processors are always in short supply.
And hell, by giving AMD the entusiast market, they can point to all the negative Intel sentiment saying "these people have vowed not to buy Intel and they're buying our competitor's products, so we're not a monopoly".
Of course, the practical reason is sockets suck - impedance matching problems, bad connections (your PC depends on the working of nearly 1200 pieces of metal pressing against 1200 other pieces of metal. If one of those is slightly oxidized or doesn't exert enough pressure, your PC can crash), and plenty more other things. Solder joints are far more reliable.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
I've bult my own PCs for 20+ years, and I can't remeber ever really caring about moving the CPU from one motherboard to another. I shop for them as a matched pair, and assuming they work when I get them, I've alays replace both if problems developed later down the road (because a few years later, when you're on the far side of the failure "bathtub curve", you might as well replace both).
I don't see having to buy the CPU soldered to the motherboard as an impediment really - as long as I can swap out the heatsink and other components.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
I certainly agree with this. If the CPU/Mobo are a pair, it WILL make it a little bit more expensive to upgrade, but then again, that is what craigslist is for. Want a new processor, sell the old mobo/CPU pair for a good price and go ahead and upgrade. I only upgrade every couple of years. By the time I am ready for a new CPU, it already has a new socket associated with it.
This might hurt the guys who upgrade every 3 months. For the rest of us, not a big deal.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
My AMD systems from 2007 are Athlon64 and can still be upgraded to the latest PhenomII black editions fine after a bios update. So I do not know what you are talking about.
Both of you must be those Intel users I keep hearing about where different sockets and chipsets are made on purpose to limit compatiblity so you have to upgrade everything. Oh and boy Windows activation wont like that either. Better buy another copy of Windows for that board as well.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yes, this is technically true. AMD has done a fairly decent job of sticking with a socket longer than AMD.... BUT.... Most "enthusiasts" want the latest shinies: latest USB, lasest SATA, PCI flavor, etc. I suspect that the person who pops a new processor in a three-year-old MOBO are a tiny minority.
Also, soldering the CPU directly on the board saves the rather complicated (and I assume expensive) socket. I do not know what the cost difference is between LGA and BGA, though. I would suspect not much.
Re: (Score:3)
As for your AMD systems:
-you CAN upgrade, but you haven't. He wasn't saying that you can't, but that no one winds up doing so.
-Why would you do so while still running DDR2?
-the top phenom II will run in a degraded mode due to lack of power from an AM2+ motherboard
I've always built my own PCs, and had the intention of upgrading my processor later. I've never done so. Right now I have an i5 ~3ghz system I built 14 month ago. I got the i5 with plans in a year or so to upgrade it to an i7. I haven't done
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Interesting)
I've certainly done so a lot of times. Stick a newer more powerful CPU into a desktop or media PC and I get a chain upgrade of 2-4 other machines. 5 faster machines for the price of 1, hard to get a better deal.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:4, Funny)
Sure you can, but why would you?. I have no need in my hoe life to keep older hardware creaking along, taking up space, heat, and power. When a homebuilt box has a serious problem and it's "old", I'm starting over on the next build. Sure, salvalging a part here or there for the new build is nice, but it's just not that important really.
Well, sure, hoes have different priorities...
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Interesting)
The only problem is that when I buy a motherboard / CPU, there are usually a dozen or so variations on which CPU will work in a given motherboard. Right now it makes sense to mix & match to get exactly what you want, but if the CPU is attached to the motherboard at purchase time, you are stuck with one of the 2 - 3 choices that the motherboard manufacturer decides to sell.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Interesting)
You made an excellent point. It made me realize that economically tying the motherboard and the CPU will necessitate less choice.
Right now if there are X motherboards and Y CPUs compatible with those motherboards, a seller needs to stock X + Y items to provide buyers all possible combinations. In the new system if the same degree of flexibility is to be offered a seller would have to stock X * Y items.
There is no way that will happen. We will get less choice if this change becomes a reality unless as others point out someone offers CPU's soldered to something that's socketable that would then be put into a motherboard with a socket (assuming that this is possible and there aren't signal integrity reasons that are forcing Intel to solder the chip to the motherboard).
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Interesting)
Same bullshit as the GOP. Cater to the religious crowd. This is a marketing gimmick. It will make some otherwise reluctant people a little less reluctant to buy. "It's Christian!".
Personally, I refuse to do business with someone who uses religion to sell their product. Living in the deep south, I see it all the time. "Quality Christian roofing!". Chicken finger place with Jesus fish on everything, Bible quotes all over the walls. You name it.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Funny)
I faith healed a holy rollers PC once. (while reconnecting the cable as they were distracted)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Informative)
Not only that but CPU sockets usually only work for one CPU family and aren't interchangeable. You can't but AMD's chip into Intels motherboards.
So at best you can normally replace to an equaviant CPU maybe a couple of clock cycles faster but that's it.
If your upgrading you have to replace both
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:4, Insightful)
Not only that but CPU sockets usually only work for one CPU family and aren't interchangeable. You can't but AMD's chip into Intels motherboards.
So at best you can normally replace to an equaviant CPU maybe a couple of clock cycles faster but that's it.
If your upgrading you have to replace both
This is it exactly. Hell, the last time I even considered this approach (replacing just the CPU) the cost of a compatible CPU (since they were long past their prime) was more than the cost of a new, faster cpu+mobo. I dropped $40 for some ram (4x of what was in the old rig) and I was on my way. Why anyone but a MHz/GHz chaser would want to replace just a CPU is beyond me (and it's beyond Intel, too; this move is totally understandable and probably was predictable by anyone who really pays attention to such things). I can totally see "Enthusiasts" not really giving a crap about this for the most part; the ones that used to buy CPU after CPU just to stay on top of things are far more likely to just spend their money on GPUs these days, since the CPU wars are all but over.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
The real problem is not the upgrading.
The real problem will be getting what you want in the first place.
Life is good now. I can get exactly what I want. I do not have t over buy my CPU because I want RAID and dual gigabit NICs.
I can get a decent CPU and put money into a board that will give me good OC capabilities.
Once this becomes the norm you know and I know the number of choices is going to go WAY down.
You will have the Super Expensive, Top CPU and what MB they thick is best, a kinda nice duo, a normal can do almost everything in a not annoying way and a low power cost saving set.
Fuck that noise.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
While I have never upgraded one without upgrading the other, I do make a decision on which CPU/motherboard I buy.
What if I want a 4-core system, but the motherboard I want is only sold with more expensive 6-core CPUs? Or, vice-versa? Motherboard manufacturers are already selling to a bit of a niche market - will having to further reduce their selection by only pairing certain CPUs with certain motherboards push them over the edge into unprofitability?
Re: (Score:3)
The problem isn't really the consumer... (Score:5, Insightful)
The problem here is for the vendors, not the consumers. As a consumer, I, too have always purchased CPU/MB in a pair and I've never upgraded the CPU without upgrading the motherboard. A motherboard's meaningful market life is probably a year, while most upgrades occur at least 2 or 3 years apart. So that's moot.
But the problem is for smaller vendors. Once having been one myself, I'd usually keep a week's stock of motherboards on hand, and somewhat more CPUs on hand, confident that I could meet consumer demands simply by putting the appropriate CPU with the motherboard and hand them something useful.
By soldering CPUs directly to the main board, this modularity is compromised and the cost of delivering numerous options for CPU combos goes up considerably. Now, instead of 10 motherboards and 20 CPUs to offer up to 20 different CPU speeds, a vendor needs to increase inventory overhead in order to maintain a similar selection.
No, not the end of the world, but it may well result in an increase in the desirability of AMD inventory.
Not because of upgradeability.. (Score:3)
I never found the top end cpu part compelling myself, but I can easily see the implications for c
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
well what if the motherboard fails.. (Score:5, Insightful)
In 20+ years you never had a motherboard fail 1 or two years after your bought it? hell i had one fail at 5 or 6 months! so then I have to desolder the chip? uh no thanks..
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
Faster now then the 90s? Are you mad?
You can use a computer from 8 years ago today and still have something useful.That would be a very hot, but still useable P4. Check out the massive changes from 90 to 98. That would leave you using a 386 in world of P2s.
Re: (Score:3)
The only thing you could buy in the 90ies that'd last you a lifetime is a Soundblaster 16. Except the connectors are now obs
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
What kind of "enthusiast" are they talking about? I've been building my own PCs for 25 years and only changed one CPU, and that's because the fan went out and fried it. And guess what? The only CPU to fit in its socket was the same type of CPU that fried.
I agree, this story is BS. It doesn't matter to me if the CPU is socketed or soldered, and in fact I'd prefer soldered (as long as it had a good fan), since besides heat, the enemy of electronics is corrosion and bad connections.
Re: (Score:3)
What kind of "enthusiast" are they talking about?
Having just watched the Burning Man sting operation episode of Reno 911, I can say with certainty that they're talking about LSD enthusiasts.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
I agree, I've built PCs for ages and never upgraded a CPU, despite planning to.
The thing I can see this effecting, though, is diversity of price.
Right now you can spend $75-$350 on a motherboard, and $75-1000 on a processor. There are X motherboards, and Y compatible processors, for X * Y price/feature/etc points.
When USB3 came out is when I upgraded, so I got a low-to-mid spec motherboard (only cared about USB3, don't need dual video card capability etc) and then a mid-high spec processor (fastest i5 that wasn't the enthousiast factory unlocked ones).
With this change I won't have that choice. It'll be buy one of two models of this motherboard with processor A and B. OEMs won't make hundreds of combinations, and vendor's wouldn't stock them if they did.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
So far the most interesting argument I have seen against their new approach is that no manufacturer will want to make dozens of motherboard SKUs to support the ridiculous range of chips Intel always introduces to cover all price points, features, etc. You may not change the CPU, but you probably had to decide between a bunch of different models.
Not the point of the article, though (which is BS, I agree). But if Intel wants mobo manufacturers to sell boards with the chip soldered on, they better consolidate their offering a bit. According to this [wikipedia.org], Intel has released over 50 desktop models based on Sandy Bridge in the last 18 months.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:4, Insightful)
On the AMD side the sockets have stayed compatible for quite some time over the generations, and I can say that I've upgraded CPU's many, many times. Usually the server side has gotten to inherit CPU's from faster desktops, leading to multiple upgrades as servers then inherit eachother. Old socket AM2 boards that started out running cheap sempron CPU's end up running dualcore X2 chips.
You could, of course, move the whole MB instead or recommission a machine, but frankly there's a lot more specificity of purpose in the MB than in the CPU leading to bad fits and significant price differences to get something that will work well for any purpose. A whole lot of flexibility would be lost.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Insightful)
There are sockets for this package style (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:There are sockets for this package style (Score:4, Insightful)
All modern Intel and AMD CPUs don't have pins.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_grid_array [wikipedia.org]
Re:There are sockets for this package style (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:4, Interesting)
Not if they can't play Black Ops 2 on those "low power mobile devices".
There are a lot of reasons "enthusiasts" build their own machines. Music production, video production, gaming are three that come to mind. You can't do any of those on low power mobile devices.
The story is BS.
Re:Even if this was true... (Score:5, Funny)
Nope, the only true enthusiasts are those that play x86 binary games that require the latest developer release video card boards, whose machines are overclocked through the use of liquid helium. Which may explain their high squeaky voices.
AMD (Score:5, Interesting)
AMD is down, but not out yet. A boneheaded move like this for Intel could be a boon for AMD.
Re:AMD (Score:5, Insightful)
A plan when AMD goes out of business which should happen anyday now if rumors are true sadly.
Why should Intel care then? They have no competition anymore and can do whatever they want.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So I have features on my $599 special that only your xeon or Icore7 extreme has like hardware virtualization. This is a phenomII and the 10% - 15% performance deduction was well worth the price for my 6 core. It still has a ton of mips and can handle everything I throw at it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The article mentions that the CPUs will be sold attached to motherboards. Enthusiasts will be able to build PCs just fine, just not separate motherboard/CPU.
Re:AMD (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes, but what if the motherboard you want only comes sold with a CPU you don't want, or vice-versa? This bundling will in practice reduce choice, as I doubt every combination will be offered.
Re: (Score:3)
Like many electronics, you have the choice of going cheap/basic or expensive/fancy. Some mobo makers are better about providing lots of overclock options, sometimes down to the single MHz on the bus/etc. Not to mention various choices in onboard peripherals - some people don't mind onboard NICs and sound, or even video, while others want absolutely minimum on the board at all and go for high-power enthusiast options.
Re:AMD (Score:5, Informative)
Uh, yes. Want to overclock? Those chipsets cost more. Serial port? Do you want to spend extra to get the optical audio output, or is 2-channel analog OK? What about PCI slots, need any? How many 8 or 16x PCI-E slots do you want? Cause it costs more if you want 2 or more. Do you think you'll need 4 RAM slots or is 2 enough? Do you want to spend the extra dough to have 4 6 Gbps SATA ports or is 2 enough? Or do you want to save some more money and just have 3 Gbps ports? Do you want 8 USB 3.0 ports, or just 2? Or maybe none? All different cost structures. eSATA? RAID 5 built into the motherboard?
Yes, there's worth in shopping for a motherboard if you're an enthusiast. You're not. That's OK, but don't brush off everyone else just because we want things you don't care about.
Re:AMD (Score:5, Insightful)
From my varied experience of assembling machines, the motherboard has always been the most important choice around which everything else is based.
Re: (Score:3)
Seriously is there anything worth shopping for in a mobo?
Yes. Obviously it doesn't matter for a fileserver, but there are differences in terms of peripherals (does it have USB3? SATA3? how many of each?), chipsets, on-board graphics/sound performance, and aesthetics. You also get ATX vs. micro-ATX. Different brands and boards may be more prone to failure. For gamers, the number and arrangement of PCIx16 2.0/3.0 slots can be important. Manufacturers like to add their own power and performance tweaking into the BIOS, so that can be a factor. Some BIOSes are better
Re:AMD (Score:5, Insightful)
The reason why you haven't "seen a homemade PC in years" is because most people who build them are knowledgeable enough, and thanks to internet have enough advice on maintenance and fixing to never have to bring their PC to you.
Just as planned (Score:5, Insightful)
Been headed this way for while (Score:5, Insightful)
Between the increasing popularity of tablets and laptops, I suspect the days of building your own desktop PC have been numbered for a long time now.
Besides, how can you geeks be forced to upgrade your whole computer every few years if you keep stubbornly refusing to play ball by doing things one component at a time? Not to mention the fact that self-built PC's can't be locked down behind a software walled garden and saddled with god-knows-what mandatory crapware, spyware, advertisements, etc. Shit, I even hear some of you are installing other OS's besides Windows and OS X on some of those goddamn contraptions.
You geeks need to be taught to conform better, obviously.
Re:Been headed this way for while (Score:5, Informative)
Erm, am I missing something? I've seen plenty of CPUs that just had pads on them. The socket had the pins - the clasp pushed the CPU down onto them.
No pins, and still user-replacable.
Well (Score:5, Interesting)
Weren't all those slot-X processors pretty much just pinless processors soldered to a small PCB? Seems like it could be something of an opportunity to me.
Re:Well (Score:5, Interesting)
I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:5, Insightful)
WTF does sockets have to do with PC enthusiasm?
When was the last time you upgraded a CPU and didn't get a new motherboard? Never?
If a soldered on chip allows the bus to run faster, I for one am enthusiastic.
Re:I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:5, Insightful)
When was the last time you upgraded a CPU and didn't get a new motherboard? Never?
Always. I have never owned a PC in which I have not upgraded the CPU at least once.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:4, Informative)
Was it an Intel? AMD have always been much better, making their sockets last through a few generations. Intel seem to have a new one every time I look at CPUs, but I keep getting suckered in by their performance and AES acceleration instructions.
Re:I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:5, Interesting)
Always. I have never owned a PC in which I have not upgraded the CPU at least once.
Post-PC AT era, about the same here for my main machines. Side / secondary machines are not upgraded, treated as appliance. I'm guessing we do about the same upgrade protocol... and the average /.er is getting VERY confused how this works.
Example. Go back about a decade. My old P-2 or P-75 or whatever was feeling slow and AMD's mainline socket at the time was the 939. Not new, but not obsolete either. ... I don't remember but it was the strategy above, a decent mobo with the cheapest compatible CPU, years later to be upgraded to the fastest CPU in that socket ever made...
That year I buy a decent 939 mobo and the cheapest slowest POS 939 CPU that is available.
A couple years later, they release the 940 socket probably purely to segment the market or whatever. Anyway, 939 CPUs get CHEAP and I buy the fastest one ever made for like $100, which actually performs pretty well compared to a cheap 940.
A couple years later the Worlds Fastest 939 CPU was getting a tad slow, so
Yes, I have run into exciting problems like the mobo BIOS needs to be upgraded to the newest version to even recognize the "worlds fastest X" cpu which didn't even exist as a cpu revision number when the mobo was made. Been there, had to reinstall the old cpu, upgrade the bios, and re-re-install the new cpu.
No, you can't really afford to do this with cutting edge CPUs and always buy the most expensive one available every 3 months or whatever, that would be quite an expensive hobby, or at least a waste of time WRT optimization of fun per $. But if you pay attention to the market, you can maintain a spot above average for practically no money.
1) Never upgrade unless its slow. The CPU I mean, not the graphics card or whatever else.
2) Never buy a mobo with anything but the cheapest possible CPU
3) When that socket expires, wait until the fastest CPU for that socket ever made is about $99 then upgrade
4) Repeat for about 20 years (so far). I've been doing something like this since the 386 era.
Re:I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:4, Interesting)
Since you asked. :D
Intel 8086:
Intel 8086, ->NEC V33
(Intel 286, but kept standard cpu.)
Intel 386:
SX 25, ->DX50
Intel 486:
486 SX25 ->486 DX2/50
Socket7:
Pentium 66-> Pentium 150
Super socket7:
Pentium MMX 200-> AMD K6/2 300->AMD K6/2 500 (firmware patch)
Socket A:
Athlon 1200+ ->Athlon XP 2400+
(Skipped P4 generation. Used obsolete HW...)
(Now on an Intel i7, socket 1154)
Re:I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't have to upgrade my machine to benefit from modular standardized parts. I benefit from that as soon as I buy a machine as I can mix and match the components that meet my requirements. I can get as little or as much of something as I want and I can mix that with anything else that suits my fancy.
Lack of modular parts means lack of choice when building or buying systems.
It's like being stuck at the Apple Store.
Re:I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:4, Funny)
Are you one of those people who pines for the old days when you had to buy a separate coprocessor and cache memory along with your CPU and motherboard?
Re:I just can't live without a ZIF socket. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is what everybody seems to be missing. You're giving up options when you start bundling and don't allow mix/match.
Suppose I'm building a cluster, and I just need REALLY fast CPUs with good memory/LAN benchmarks, and I could care less whether it even has a PCIe slot in it at all. However, all the fast CPUs get bundled with expensive motherboard with 14 slots, 6 SATA ports, and so on. Or, suppose I'm building a data acquisition box that needs 6 PCI slots but not much CPU - again I'm stuck buying the i7 or whatever since that got classed as a high-end board.
That is what frustrates me about things like cell phones - I can't pick the CPU/RAM/flash combo I want, but only what some marketer decided I should have. So, getting the extra 1GB of RAM isn't an option - at most you might get some choice with flash.
Re: (Score:3)
WTF does sockets have to do with PC enthusiasm?
When was the last time you upgraded a CPU and didn't get a new motherboard? Never?
If a soldered on chip allows the bus to run faster, I for one am enthusiastic.
The last time I bought AMD. Keep sucking down that new Intel kool-aid each release of a new chip requiring a new motherboard.
Re: (Score:3)
Multiple times. And, more importantly - about 6 months ago, my motherboard decided to go south. Not wanting to spend the money to upgrade everything, I found a cheap new board, moved everything over, and called it a day. Had the CPU been soldered on, I'da had to buy both a new board and a new processor, along with the possibility of my RAM no longer being compatible with the new board. Big difference between a $50 board and several hundred dollars worth of new hardware.
Re: (Score:3)
Faster is always better. BTW this would be the Bus between the CPU and chipset. Hypertransport bus? I forget the term.
Sockets always slows signal and mismatches impedance. With processors operating in RF frequencies analog issues are important. Replacing solder, trace, solder, pin, socket, solder, trace with solder, trace is reasonably big deal. I bet they gain 100MHz.
We've come a long way sense Intel spent years trying to get their bus to clock faster with right angle turns on the bus traces. IIRC a a
ARM chips? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I don't think I have ever seen an ARM processor in a socket (discounting my old Archimedes, that is).
or run anything useful let alone anything useful to an "enthusiast" as they put it.
Charlies got a spotted history (Score:3)
He's got a spotted history of being right with previous work whilst rallying haters like no other tech journalist I've ever read. To the best of my knowledge he's never been sued successfully and he's pissed off some of the biggest names in the business. Here's hoping he's got this wrong or it's bad news for all of us....
even if true, enthusiast != pc market (Score:4, Insightful)
why this guy whines the PC would be dead by such a move? those that change CPU are a very very tiny niche and there is no money to be made pandering to them for any multi-billion dollar corporation. just a bunch of troublesome warranty voiders from Intel's point of view. The desktop PC is an appliance to most. soldering in the CPU cuts cost and makes for easier modular replacement with less troubleshooting if something goes wrong. I'm surprised its 2012 and this wasn't done a decade ago.
4004 (Score:5, Insightful)
There are many CPUs that are only available as a PC board with several chips. I can envision a day when the whole motherboard is the unit of replacement.
Betteridge's Law of Headlines (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Betteridge's Law of Headlines (Score:5, Insightful)
HEADLINE: "Can any headline which ends in a question mark be answered by the word no?"
Re:Betteridge's Law of Headlines (Score:4, Informative)
It's about cost, stupid! (Score:3)
Don't underestimate the cost of hanging all of that golden plated little pins under your costly chip. Not to mention the cost of the socket itself on the motherboard. My cheap Atom330 MB has the processor soldered in it.
It's a calculated move. They know they will loose some market to the competition, but they bet they will expand their business enough to compensate.
Since the current PC market are already reaching saturation, it appears to me that they also wants to reduce the current life span of the computers as well.
Fake nerds (Score:3)
Bah. Real enthusiasts use discrete transistors.
Move to ARM? GETTHEFUCKOUTTAHERE! (Score:3)
Why in the name of The Flying Spaghetti Monster would enthusiasts move to ARM?
Yeah. ARM is fine for mobile devices. And might be fine for small form-factor HTPC setups.
But for the power-gamers? They wouldn't deign to wipe their asses with an ARM chip.
This is what leads me to believe the author may be smoking something.
We already see systems with discrete CPUs and systems with soldered CPUs. The current LGA format allows for either.
So why would this change to solely soldered in the next generation?
Bad title (Score:5, Insightful)
Should be: Is Intel Planning To Kill Enthusiast Intel PCs?
From TFA: "Unfortunately Intel doesn’t care about the enthusiast, and unsurprisingly they have moved on." Can I getta Like Duh? "Like, Duh!"
I woudn't expect enthusiasts, whatever the author means by that, to be much of a percentage overall, but this does seem to be a business opportunity for someone.
A technical question to which I didn't see the answer in TFA: Even chips that are intended to be soldered to the board (probably some variation of current surface mount techniques) can be mounted in (sometimes specialized) sockets. This raises the question, is something in Intel's business agreements requiring MB manufacturers to solder the chips to the board?
And finally, I don't see where this makes much difference to the rank and file. Computer components have gotten cheap enough that it's fairly common to put the fastest or near-fastest currently available proc in the board to start with, as upgrade protection. And then, when you need more grunt, you'll increasingly find that no new procs were ever developed for that chipset, so you need to upgrade the motherboard again anyway. Besides, other than gamers and specialized applications (photo and video manipulation for instance) most people have more resources than they can really use even with the cheapest currently available motherboard/cpu combo.
Bad News for Repair Shops (Score:5, Insightful)
I will use, as an example, a recent proc-swap I did for a friend on his older Dell 1545:
Labor is about $30/hr.
Intel Core 2 Duo T4200 = ~$30, installed in an hour.
Inspiron 1545 motherboard = ~ $200 (used), installed in about 2 hours.
So, a $60 job now becomes a $300 job, enough to make most of my customers, with their older machines, say, "Fuck that, I'll just go to Wal-Marx and buy a new one for 100 bucks more!"
Thanks for doing your part to destroy small business, Intel.
I hope you fuckers rot.
I'm More concerned... (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm more concerned about this trend to solder RAM onto boards (Apple, I'm looking at you here.) -- RAM goes bad over time -- a shockingly short time. (google the papers (by google) about RAM failure rates, and what they do after 18 months). After a couple of years error rates go up -- way up. (ECC would very definitely be your friend here, but intel only makes it available on xeon series chips (the circuitry is there but fused off in consumer grade chips) )
My experience has been that after 24 months, you should just toss the ram dimms in the trash and start with new ones -- and you might as well max out the ram at that point. Otherwise the machine starts getting flaky as soft and uncorrected errors happen with increasing frequency.
Headline is misleading. (Score:5, Interesting)
I saw this rumor over here [xbitlabs.com].
The way I read it is that they are going to offer BGA packaging to satisfy the large OEMs (e.g, dell, lenovo, etc). Now that most desktop PC are commodities, offering chips in BGAs reduces motherboad cost by eliminating the cost of the socket, improving yield (can sell kits of chips that just barely work together rather than requiring every component to satisfy the maximum electrical margins), and maybe reduce power (better electrical interface to memory).
My guess is that they will probably still offer a socket for servers and high-end enthusiast PCs, etc, but that means that it will be only specific enthusiast PCs that will support upgrades (e.g, you will not be able to upgrade a commodity desktop PC). So instead of outright killing the enthusiast PCs, I'm guessing Intel is simply going to make dabbling in enthusiast PCs a very expensive hobby (like it was in the old days).
In the old days, basically Intel was "forcing" all the computer vendors to have this latent ability to upgrade which enabled a custom motherboard industry that didn't need to sell-through (buy/resell) expensive CPUs. With this new change, only high-end motherboard companies will remain, and the computer vendors will just JIT motherboards the same way they purchase CPUs and memory. Undoubtly this will force even more consolidation in smaller motherboard form factors (although ATX/BTX/ITX was pretty standard, you saw some variations in the mini-ITX area) and the jellybean components on them (e.g., audio, power-regulators, etc).
What this might do, however, is kill is the desktop motherboard repair small businesses (mom/pop computer repair shops), not the enthusiast PC business. They won't be able to afford to stock motherboards anymore (since they will have CPUs mounted on them). On the other hand, the car repair business evolved around similar issues, most auto repair shops need to same-day order most of the parts need to repair cars from centralized parts distributors (they couldn't afford to stock things), so maybe mom/pop computer repair shops could evolve too... Maybe...
Re:intel is... (Score:4, Informative)