Little Old Man
Member
Gaben, when we shout 'Save us!'
Don't whisper 'no'.
Don't whisper 'no'.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
SemiA: Intel to move to stop selling processors separately, only proc+mobo combos
- Thread starter markot
- Start date
Wouldn't a ValveCast machine be based on either this or AMD APU anyway? I mean if they were going to launch a Wine-like OS capable of playing Windows games. Dedicated hardware with GPU expansion(?) would be the most efficient.
Rebel Leader
THE POWER OF BUTTERSCOTCH BOTTOMS
This can only be positive if you don't like overclocking your CPU or upgrading it. Squeezing every last bit of performance out of your setup will be a thing of the past if this happens. There is nothing positive in this for gamers. Less choice is fucking awful.
Woo-Fu
Banned
One size doesn't fit all when it comes to motherboards.
If we ended up in a crazy world where this happened does anybody expect Intel to whip up custom motherboards for Shuttle whenever they want them? Might as well kiss the SFF market goodbye.
A lot of market segments that use Intel processors would have to switch platforms or cease to exist. Like I said before, if Intel has the "power" to do that they have the power to simply raise processor prices across the board and achieve similar end results without ruining a bunch of other businesses.
Before piracy became publisher's preferred boogeyman the problem with PC gaming was doing technical support on the hundreds of possible system configurations. Ostensibly less hardware diversity would make the PC platform more enticing to publishers, which would mean more games, which would be good for gamers.
Welp, AMD might actually get my money then.
I mean, I build a budget PC with a good MOBO/Case and then upgrade components when I can afford to do so. This basically takes that choice away.
It's still a more expensive and convoluted venture than consoles, so I don't see this as being an improvement to the platform for publishers. And even if I did, the vast majority of issues are software, not hardware.
I mean, I build a budget PC with a good MOBO/Case and then upgrade components when I can afford to do so. This basically takes that choice away.
It's still a more expensive and convoluted venture than consoles, so I don't see this as being an improvement to the platform for publishers. And even if I did, the vast majority of issues are software, not hardware.
lowrider007
Licorice-flavoured booze?
How this is this good news for overclockers? also mobo's have a much higher failure rate than cpu's, so I loose a good chip when my mobo dies?
This is terrible news imo.
Ironic. Is that Bill Hicks as your avatar? People hate change, give them less choices on what to change as the solution? That's some Hicks comedy right there.
Be like all tvs having builtin dvd/bluray, without the option to use a different model should the internal device break. Limiting options is mac hardware and consoles. This is pc.
Thinking about it some more, doesn't seem that extreme either.
He's saying the tock (new architecture) next year is socket based.
Then for the tick (die shrink), they're going intergrated.
Then he says for the next cycle or two, they're going back to socket. So at the very least, the second tock (new architecture) is going socketed again.
The ticks are never that impressive anyways. So if the ticks focus on really cheap integrated solutions that are super energy efficient, who gives a rip.
And even if they don't, I'm always a mainstream user anyways. I doubt it'll impact me at all (especially if they keep 3 year warranties... it'd be an upgrade over the sketchy mobo's on the market now).
I've been worried about the PC market, so this at least confirms the next two major architecture releases, at least, will be the PC in its current, glorious form.
Just Charlie over-sensationalizing things again for hits.
Woo-Fu
Banned
Publishers don't do support for hardware configurations, in my experience. I've never received any hardware support beyond "update your drivers".
Reducing the size of the motherboard variable doesn't make a meaningful reduction in the number of possible configurations. Even focusing solely upon cpu/mobo, you'd still have quite a few combinations.
Woo-Fu
Banned
That just means you don't know what you're buying.
For those of us who DO know what we're buying the Intel offerings are usually not best-of-breed.
Motherboards are not a commodity.
drkOne
Member
Why $1000? I'm betting it'll be between 3k and 4k.
Motherboard manufactured by Intel.
Oh god. That wouldn't be just the end of PC gaming, that would be the end of the PC market all together. Fuck paying $3000-$4000 for a computer. Paying $800-$900 is bad enough.
If this plan becomes reality, the number of motherboard + CPU combo's will become severely limited. Companies like Asus will not keep stock of every possible motherboard/CPU combo, they'll slim things down to a manageable number. Ultimately it will lead to far, far less choice than what we're enjoying now. It could even mean that only Intel will be left standing as the only motherboard/CPU supplier in town for enthusiasts.
No, but they surely won't have all permutations of mobo models and CPUs. Just like Apple forces you to buy the bigger screened iMac if you want a better GPU, you'll need to buy a more expensive CPU to get additional mobo features (like extra USB slots).
That's living in the past.
The sad reality is this: consoles and PC are both under heavy siege. The world has changed and the PC has truly gone portable. If the PC can't compete on price, it'll die. As I see it, if anything, this is an attempt to get things more streamlined.
Although even that's a questionable argument if Intel is truly going to have 3 of the next 4 releases be socketed.
Good job not clicking the links
I really hope this doesn't turn out to be true. With AMD on it's last leg it's already looking like Intel will be the only fish in town in the not so distant future (processor prices are going to spike!). The last thing we need is Intel having a monopoly on both processors and motherboards.
So, okay, what is the real issue here? You always have to buy a motherboard and a CPU together anyway, so the only problem I can see is that it makes CPU upgrades more difficult, since you'll have to get a new motherboard with your new CPU. For people who are used to putting computers together, it's a hassle, but it doesn't mean the PC is dead.
Subterranean
Member
Not liking what I am reading.
Tallshortman
Member
Hey you remember when monoplies were good? I don't. The fucking idiots who cheered on AMD's demise are happy now I'm guessing. I have an intel CPU but god damn some people are beyond moronic wanting one player in the market. I doubt this rumor is even true but this is the sort of stuff monopolies can do and nothing can been done besides a government anti-trust investigation.
EdwardTivrusky
Member
There will be much less choice available. This is bad as you will be forced to accept whatever combo of processor and motherboard they offer you. Whereas today i can get a motherboard with the features i want at the price i want to pay and the same with the CPU this may not be the case in the future with Intel.
Less choice is bad.
the only thing pushing mobile devices back is form factor. Keyboard and mouse are still more comfortable to deal with in the office environment (well, keyboard is needed at least) and sometimes you need a bigger monitor for Excel. So as soon as somebody makes some sort of docking station/device PCs will go mobile. It'll be a device with all functionality of PC and which can be connected to all range of output/input devices. I give traditional PCs 10 years, may be less.
I'll be sad when the era is be over. I think I'll keep my case forever.
I'll be sad when the era is be over. I think I'll keep my case forever.
I honestly don't remember anyone being a cheerleader. I know fanboy was thrown around to people who were objective to the realities, but I don't think there were too many who would be stupid enough to root for a monopoly (although I'm sure you could find one or two).
And this has nothing to do with AMD's demise. This is about Intel realizing if they don't change their model quickly, they'll disappear just like AMD. AMD better be their canary in the coal mine.
I've never overclocked a CPU (yet) and this upsets me. When getting a motherboard I'm not concerned about overclocking and whatnot. I do live streaming. I have a lot of shit plugged in. I need three PCI-E slots at least. Preferably four. I need USB 3.0, superspeed, not shitty USB 3.0 ports that don't actually run at max USB 3.0 speeds. I need tons of SATA ports because I've got 4 hard drives and am looking to add another.
What happens when I have to get a motherboard attached to my processor? Do I have to shop for a mobo and accept whatever processor I get? Do I have to shop for a processor and get whatever mobo I'm stuck with? Will there be options for tons of different motherboards to attach to whatever processor I want?
Worrying.
What happens when I have to get a motherboard attached to my processor? Do I have to shop for a mobo and accept whatever processor I get? Do I have to shop for a processor and get whatever mobo I'm stuck with? Will there be options for tons of different motherboards to attach to whatever processor I want?
Worrying.
yeah, this sort of shit is bad. You'll be overpaying for a CPU you don't need if an available configuration with four ports features a better CPU than you need.
This is a good argument. I see your point. This is a bad thing overall.
Tallshortman
Member
For items that require some technical know how in the first place I don't think this is a good move. Intel's problem right now is with ARM's emergence, unless I'm not getting something I don't see how doing this to people who build custom PC's is fighting against what happened to AMD. AMD simply took a wrong design path for their CPU's and got outcompeted in their CPU market with largely better Intel offerings (as well as being late to the mobile party), I'm not sure how this has got to do with that. If I'm missing something please do explain (I'm being serious).
You're right. Obviously AMD's first problem was poor design (or Intel simply recovering from their horrific design problems).
The main problem I'm talking about is the PC is under assault from mobiles and tablets. PC stood for personal computer. And those have truly become the personal computer.
So they're under assault from the mainstream abandoning the bulky PC. And then on the server side, huge costs (electricity and cooling) have also prompted people to look in ARM's direction. Intel simply cannot continue on as if nothing has changed and not face serious repercussions. They need to get costs down and TDPs down. If they fail to do that, they don't have a future.
That's not the most uplifting message, but it's the reality. And they have to deal with it.
zephervack
Member
Oh God, fuck everything about this, I actually need some niche things out of motherboards and im sure Intel will charge an arm and a leg for their boards with the stuff I need.
Also, good bye to changing CPUs between the same generation.
Why would they think they need to do this? How would not doing this make them irrelevant?, does not compute (pun intended)
Also, good bye to changing CPUs between the same generation.
Why would they think they need to do this? How would not doing this make them irrelevant?, does not compute (pun intended)
EdwardTivrusky
Member
I can only think that BGA is somehow better performing than LGA but i'm not an engineer so couldn't say for sure.
The Abominable Snowman
Member
The main takeaway I have from this is Intel thinks so little of AMD now that they feel they can change the market and prod the market a bit with something experimentary like this and still dominate.
Woo-Fu
Banned
you're replying to the wrong person and preaching to the choir.
Woo-Fu
Banned
The real issue here is that people don't want zero competition in the motherboard space.
At least a few of us are experienced enough to know how that works out for the consumer.
Read the end of the xbitlabs article for the likely scenario.
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di...hangeable_Desktop_Microprocessors_Report.html
Long term, the 'consumer-level' PC would be BGA. It will basically go the way of the tablet/cell phone. The pro is we'll see a reduction in pricing and better efficiency. The con is it won't be upgradable, and a failure means replacement of more of the system (or the entire system).
The high-end and specialty markets however will still be around with LGA offerings though. The question will be pricing and number of offerings. When you look at barebones systems or high-end MoBo's and CPU's on newegg and the like, I don't think they were typically selling to regular consumers and businesses anyway. Most people in that scenario typically get off the shelf or made-to-order PC's (or even lease computers).
So I think there will remain a market, and therefore offerings, for enthusiast and specialty builds. There will likely be some consolidation in the MoBo community (mostly due to no longer having contracts for consumer PC builds, and therefore getting out of the market since the enthusiast community isn't enough to make the endeavor worth it), but there should be a fair amount of choice left in the end. And while the higher-end socket MoBo's typically cost more ... since the lower-end ones will no longer be available, I expect MoBo designers will find ways to offer the new socket at a wide range of pricing by removing certain features, etc. So the main price determiner will be with Intel and their CPU's. The concern is they will only offer a few CPU's in the new socket ... potentially only high-end ... and therefore pricing could be of issue.
Overall, the way I see this playing out (after some initial chaos in the market for a year or two):
* For mainstream users, they'll actually see a reduction in pricing. The PC SoC will creep closer to tablet/phone SoC pricing ... so laptops, all-in-ones, slim/SFF PC's will get cheaper.
* If you mainly run a high-end rig, you're pricing will go up a bit.
* If you are an enthusiast who has a combination of the above, it will basically be a wash ... or will actually end up cheaper the more 'clients' you have versus higher-end units.
For me, and I suspect many other people on GAF ... we'll fall into that last group. I'll always have a high-end PC for development/gaming/recording/etc ... as well as a server. Those may cost a bit more. However, I'll also have a laptop/hybrid or two ... as well as some HTPC's. Those latter will end up being cheaper. So a wash, if not cheaper in the long-run.
[/LOGIC]
http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/cpu/di...hangeable_Desktop_Microprocessors_Report.html
Long term, the 'consumer-level' PC would be BGA. It will basically go the way of the tablet/cell phone. The pro is we'll see a reduction in pricing and better efficiency. The con is it won't be upgradable, and a failure means replacement of more of the system (or the entire system).
The high-end and specialty markets however will still be around with LGA offerings though. The question will be pricing and number of offerings. When you look at barebones systems or high-end MoBo's and CPU's on newegg and the like, I don't think they were typically selling to regular consumers and businesses anyway. Most people in that scenario typically get off the shelf or made-to-order PC's (or even lease computers).
So I think there will remain a market, and therefore offerings, for enthusiast and specialty builds. There will likely be some consolidation in the MoBo community (mostly due to no longer having contracts for consumer PC builds, and therefore getting out of the market since the enthusiast community isn't enough to make the endeavor worth it), but there should be a fair amount of choice left in the end. And while the higher-end socket MoBo's typically cost more ... since the lower-end ones will no longer be available, I expect MoBo designers will find ways to offer the new socket at a wide range of pricing by removing certain features, etc. So the main price determiner will be with Intel and their CPU's. The concern is they will only offer a few CPU's in the new socket ... potentially only high-end ... and therefore pricing could be of issue.
Overall, the way I see this playing out (after some initial chaos in the market for a year or two):
* For mainstream users, they'll actually see a reduction in pricing. The PC SoC will creep closer to tablet/phone SoC pricing ... so laptops, all-in-ones, slim/SFF PC's will get cheaper.
* If you mainly run a high-end rig, you're pricing will go up a bit.
* If you are an enthusiast who has a combination of the above, it will basically be a wash ... or will actually end up cheaper the more 'clients' you have versus higher-end units.
For me, and I suspect many other people on GAF ... we'll fall into that last group. I'll always have a high-end PC for development/gaming/recording/etc ... as well as a server. Those may cost a bit more. However, I'll also have a laptop/hybrid or two ... as well as some HTPC's. Those latter will end up being cheaper. So a wash, if not cheaper in the long-run.
[/LOGIC]
Intel is either incredibly smart or incredibly stupid.
They have either figured out that:
A) Their processors since the Bloomfields are not actually that great of a jump in tech.
B) By isolating their ecosystem, watch the "PAY $10 DOLLARS TO UNLOCK MOAR CORES!" go ape shit and Intel's SMG group will work overtime to spin this as "win-win-win" for all parties.
C) Consumers don't care and the hardcore PC enthusiasts actually make up less than 1% of total PC users.
D) Paul Otelleni saw that this was the future direction of Intel and said "F this noise, I'm out".
E) All of the above.
My guess is E.
They have either figured out that:
A) Their processors since the Bloomfields are not actually that great of a jump in tech.
B) By isolating their ecosystem, watch the "PAY $10 DOLLARS TO UNLOCK MOAR CORES!" go ape shit and Intel's SMG group will work overtime to spin this as "win-win-win" for all parties.
C) Consumers don't care and the hardcore PC enthusiasts actually make up less than 1% of total PC users.
D) Paul Otelleni saw that this was the future direction of Intel and said "F this noise, I'm out".
E) All of the above.
My guess is E.
The Dutch Slayer
Member
WTFFF INTEL WTF :O:O
Planning on putting my new pc together next year with the new chip, and want to select my own parts not pre-made pc crap/........
serious mistake if true.
Planning on putting my new pc together next year with the new chip, and want to select my own parts not pre-made pc crap/........
serious mistake if true.
1 company suppling all mobos...yeah I can see how this will end well for consumers.
no. I'll repeat myself: Intel used their market dominance to destroy AMD's revenue stream when AMD had the best processors around. If AMD would have been able to profit and gain market share when they were the best, things would be totally different today. As it is, the bad guys won.
AMD did not fuck up, they were fucked.