7 ms·
Intel 'preparing' to put an end to user-replaceable CPUs
- GFischer 14y agoOne point that should worry Intel is, if enthusiasts move to ARM, and begin to take their friends and family with them... I've never upgraded a chip, but I've built plenty of computers, and mixing and matching was important for me. I worry if we'll have less options down the road.
- guan 14y agoMost ARM chips are BGA.
- zxcdw 14y agoThough as far as I'm aware there's no inherent reason for this - apart from cost. One of the things which has made PC so awesome since the early 90's has been the vast array of hardware available - you can just plug something out, plug something else in and boom, it runs faster, better and it's easy. You don't have to wait 12 months for a "new version of The PC". It's an open platform, we all love open platforms, don't we?
- Spooky23 14y agoThe difference now is that consumers aren't driving PC sales -- Enterprises are. Consumers are buying tablets.
- bunderbunder 14y ago> Though as far as I'm aware there's no inherent reason for this - apart from cost. Cost and size. The bread-and-butter market for ARM is consumer electronic devices, where size really matters. Other chip packaging that's easier for hobbyists to work with would be a huge waste of space by comparison. There are some ARM chips available in DIP packages, but I suspect that selection will always be relatively limited, since demand will always be relatively limited.
- guan 14y agoThe ARM chips available in DIP packages are microcontrollers that you are more likely to see in a toy or gadget than a general purpose or multimedia computer. In embedded systems where they are used, you probably can't swap them out for another part anyway because of code changes needed, different pinouts, etc.
- bdcravens 14y agoWhen was the last time you upgraded a CPU on a laptop? Laptops already outsell desktops, and by 2015, tablets will outsell desktops. http://www.inquisitr.com/76157/tablets-to-overtake-desktop-sales-by-2015-laptops-will-still-reign/ http://www.inquisitr.com/76157/tablets-to-overtake-desktop-s... I can't see why Intel would continue to worry about an increasingly shrinking part of the industry.
- GFischer 14y agoI didn't know that, I was just parroting the linked article, which stated that: "Unfortunately Intel doesn’t care about the enthusiast, and unsurprisingly they have moved on. ARM chips are now the focus for that crowd, and they are taking the mainstream geeks with them. " http://semiaccurate.com/2012/11/26/intel-kills-off-the-desktop-pcs-go-with-it/ http://semiaccurate.com/2012/11/26/intel-kills-off-the-deskt... and it linked to: http://pocketnow.com/android/droid-overclocking-reaches-30ghz-video http://pocketnow.com/android/droid-overclocking-reaches-30gh... Taking that article at face value, I speculated that it would indeed drive people off.
- lurker14 14y agoWho upgrades a CPU without upgrading their motherboard too? The benefits are neglible, as next-gen RAM, next-gen peripheral bus, etc, all require a next-gen motherboard. More of a concern is custom-built shopping, where it is harder for a small vendor to stock a batch of mobos and a variety of chips, and some chips go obsolete before sale (and so their mobos would be lost too...) But hardware is really, really good these days (as the article notes). Runs cooler, less stress, less failure, far overpowered for most use-cases, less need to upgrade. Enjoy our modern bounty and pay a bit extra for a new mobo every few years.
- dendory 14y agoThe problem is that when you pick a motherboard, you also pick the CPU you want. Now, motherboard makers are unlikely to carry such a wide array of upgrade choices. For example, when they introduce a new cheap motherboard, they will offer a low performance CPU for it. A high end motherboard will offer a high end CPU, and so on. You might have one or two CPU choices for the motherboard you want to buy, as opposed to every possible choice like now.
- bunderbunder 14y agoI think I can live with that. I like building my own PCs, but choosing a motherboard is perhaps my least favorite part of the process. There are just too many choices out there, and the number of variables to consider is downright unholy. I might welcome anything that helps me cut down the list of options more quickly, including being able to toss out every model that doesn't have a CPU I'm interested in. Alternatively, if there's serious demand for it I'm sure the market will come up with a solution. Motherboards with BGA-compatible sockets, perhaps. Or PGA sockets designed to accept adapters you can solder a BGA CPU into.
- darklajid 14y agoHmm.. We seem to differ. MB choice today seems to be rather simple for me: What _socket_ do I care for, plus what kind of slots and ports do I need (memory, pci-e, random ideas about the minimum required numbers of USB ports, whatever). But for me the socket came always first. I upgraded my CPU quite often and would like to keep that option in the future. In the past there was no need to throw away your board for a faster (clock speed) CPU and it made sense to me that way.
- mindcrime 14y agoWell, what's AMD's stance on this? Hopefully they - at least - will continue to make CPUs that the "modder" community can take advantage of. If not, that would be a real shame. I've been an AMD fan since my 386DX/40, and would love another reason to continue supporting them. Otherwise, one has to feel that this is just another battle in the "War on General Purpose Computing". Sure, PCs will - for now - remain "general purpose" computing devices, but you have to consider this one more step down the path of locking them down, and making them less accessible and hackable.
- knowaveragejoe 14y agoCame here to say something along these lines - if Intel steps out of the ring then it's basically handing AMD a monopoly on CPUs for the modding/custom-built community is it not?
- deleted 14y ago[deleted]
- michaelt 14y agoIf Intel's offering holds the performance crown (and/or the performance-per-$ crown) I'd have thought they'd hold onto a lot of the enthusiast market. A lot of modding, after all, is oriented towards getting performance.
- astrodust 14y agoWho's to say that modding is dead if you just have to buy your motherboard with the CPU welded on to it?
- wmf 14y agoLooking at AMD's history, I would guess they will copy Intel a year or two later. (Remember Slot A?)
- daeken 14y ago> A switch to BGA would mean that the processor could no longer be fitted into socket where it could be removed or replaced, and instead would be soldered to the motherboard much like processors for notebooks and tablets are nowadays. This is completely incorrect. They could solder all the CPUs, but you can absolutely socket BGA chips. Are there any indications that they're going non-upgradable outside of the switch to BGA?
- wmf 14y agoBGA sockets are only used for prototyping; they're expensive compared to other kinds of sockets.
- daeken 14y agoAre they expensive because of some inherent property, or because they're only used for prototyping and are thus done in small runs? Having spent several hundred dollars on a little plastic BGA socket that could be made for pennies, I'm inclined to say that it's the insanely small production runs right now.
- CamperBob2 14y agoBGA balls are made of solder, and they'll cold-flow under pressure. So any socket meant for durable use in production equipment (as opposed to prototype or test purposes) is going to require a lot of small, delicate, and expensive spring contacts that provide a secure connection with very little force. Also, sockets in general are perennial problem areas for signal integrity and EMC. It is probably best to think of the motherboard as a monolithic hunk of material, going forward. Too many reasons for the trend to go in that direction.
- iyulaev 14y agoyou can absolutely socket BGA chips Eh, not really. Well, you can, but it's ugly, expensive, and usually only done for test fixtures and such.
- 14y ago
- debacle 14y agoThis was pretty thoroughly debunked as an issue on Slashdot last week.
- bcoates 14y agoI skimmed it at +5 and didn't see anything like that, care to be more specific?
- bcoates 14y agoThis just seems like a crazy decision from Intel's point of view. Won't it make them incredibly beholden to motherboard makers? The explanation that they're jealous of, and trying to take over, a low-markup commodity market strikes me as weird. Right now, most computer users grab the cheapest motherboard that will work for them, and one of the places they spend extra cash is splurging on more CPU than they need. Now, motherboard makers will be able to pair the faster-stepping CPUs with 'markup' motherboards and capture a lot of that windfall to themselves, no? Doesn't this price-insensitive enthusiast market send a lot of cash Intel's way? Maybe Intel is worried about the health of x64 white box component makers and is intentionally sending them a windfall?
- Tuna-Fish 14y agoIntel has methodically integrated more of the system on the CPU package. With the memory controllers, integrated gpu and pci-e controllers already on the CPU, and VRM and rest of the north bridge following in Haswell, there will be nothing of value left on the motherboard. Broadwell-era motherboards will be dumb connector boards worth $50 at most. That's why they can be sold integrated.
- bcoates 14y agoOh, that's not nearly as big a deal then. Still, it's kind of an annoyance just because the form factor of the computer is still so closely tied to the motherboard, even if the board itself is trivial. Are they going to get a ton smaller and just be CPU+RAM with cable ports for PCIe/USB busses?
- Tuna-Fish 14y agoYou cannot really do full-speed PCIe buses on cable ports. I expect that Intel will do what AMD and Nvidia are doing presently with GPUs, and what they used to do with their chipsets: Sell the CPUs into the various motherboard manufacturers, and let them sell the complete package to the consumer. They can implement any form factors they like. Of course with a sufficiently punitive contract that Intel retains control of everything.
- hfs 14y ago>People wanting cheap PCs win. Bullshit. People wanting cheap PCs don't buy Intel systems in the first place.
- johnward 14y ago"As far as the PC OEMs are concerned, killing off the PC upgrade market would be a good thing because it would push people to buy new PCs rather than upgrade their existing hardware. The PC industry is currently stagnant, partly because consumers and enterprise are making existing hardware last longer." Maybe the market is stagnant because there really is no need to upgrade. I have a 2009 macbook pro and it's fine. In the late 90's early 2000's I wouldn't go more than 1-2 yeara without an upgrade. I still use an AMD Phenom in my desktop, though I may build a new machine just because of gaming. Nothing is really pushing the limits of modern hardware. Most software is moving to the web and doesn't require the latest processor to run.
- rogerbinns 14y agoIf the stated claim is true (killing off upgrades) then their assumption that people will buy new PCs needs to be substantiated. For example when having to upgrade many will consider going for a tablet or similar form factor instead which won't come from the PC OEM, and when it does will be a far lower margin item. As one example my parents upgraded from their Windows PC to an iPad.
- jugglinmike 14y agoTwo points that I haven't seen covered yet: 1. Waste. If some component on your motherboard goes, you're on the hook for a new CPU (and vice versa). This seems tremendously wasteful. Maybe bigger repair shops will support mail-in refurbishing? Will people take advantage of that? Or just buy new for convenience? 2. Competition. Smaller motherboard vendors won't be able to sell direct anymore. I'm wondering if anyone can comment on how bad of a thing this is.
- bcoates 14y agoI don't think I understand #2, wouldn't the small vendor just build and sell their boards pre-populated with an intel CPU part? They'd have to carry more inventory but not a crazy amount more.
- jugglinmike 14y agoYeah, that's a good point. This introduces a new inventory consideration, namely CPU model demands (they'll have to determine the best distribution of proc models across each product). Probably not too big a deal
- marshray 14y agoIsn't this going to introduce lag into Intel's sales pipeline? In this new model, Intel will be unable to simply new ship chips to distributors to go to system builders. They'll have to ship all their CPUs to "the land where things are soldered" (Asia, presumably) and ship everything back again. I think AMD may have just been given a gift of 6 weeks.
- Jgrubb 14y agoThis whole thing has a faint whiff of DOJ anti-trust investigation on it. Maybe it's wishful thinking.
- bdcravens 14y agoHow? There's nothing anti-competitive here. Just because we've been able to swap CPUs for years doesn't make it a legal obligation. After all, I can't upgrade the processor in my phone, tablet, or graphics card.
- smacktoward 14y agoAs a build-your-own-box type guy myself, this doesn't particularly bother me, for two reasons. First, it's extremely rare (in my experience, anyway) to want to upgrade the CPU of an existing machine without also upgrading the motherboard. Usually by the time CPUs have advanced far enough to justify upgrading, there's also new connectors, faster memory interfaces, etc. out as well that would require a new mobo to take advantage of. If you skip the mobo upgrade and just buy the CPU, you risk just moving the system's performance bottleneck around. Second, installing the CPU onto the motherboard is easily the trickiest, most delicate part of building your own PC. In an age when everything else plugs together with idiot-proof plugs and sockets, CPUs still have a forest of fragile pins on the bottom that can easily be bent or broken. You also have to manually add thermal protections like fans, heat sinks, thermal paste, etc., which all require selection and installation; if the CPU came pre-installed on the mobo, you could skip all that hassle completely.
- bitteralmond 14y agoA-yup, couldn't agree more. It's already common practice to buy bundled CPUs and boards. We might as well be buying them as one solid piece.
- hornd 14y agoIt will, however, make hardware debugging harder. Being able to swap the CPU into another motherboard comes in handy.
- turbojerry 14y agoAnd if you want to add more CPUs to your 2, 4 or 8 socket motherboard?
- ansible 14y agoMulti-socket mobos and CPUs command a significant price premium. I, personally, when building a new system will probably just build a 6-core single socket system, rather than buy a two socket mobo that can take two quad-core processors. Maybe spend the money saved on more memory, faster hard drive, etc.
- agumonkey 14y agoThe whole desktop/atx ecosystem is about to drown isn't it ?
- charonn0 14y agoMoving to non-replaceable CPUs seems unnecessarily hostile to Intel's biggest fans.