# Intel introduces DLC for your CPU



## Runefox (Sep 19, 2010)

Engadget is reporting that Intel's now offering a software upgrade for their CPU's called Intel Upgrade Service. What does this do? For $50, the new _Intel Pentium G6951_ processor can have Hyperthreading and extended cache on the CPU die enabled. These features, physically present on the CPU, are _disabled until activation of that $50 card_.

In effect, Intel is now offering *DLC for your hardware*.

What will the success of this programme mean for Intel and its consumers? For one, it means that Intel, if they so choose, can fabricate a single processor in each of the desktop, laptop and netbook markets, and use that for their entire range. This means that instead of buying an Intel Core i7 930, you'll buy an entry-level Intel Core and then buy the appropriate upgrade. Chips not matching the Core level of performance become Pentiums, and chips not matching that level become Celerons. This means that the current unintelligible CPU SKU's could be done away with and replaced with single options in each performance bracket, with upgrade options instead of the myriad of different chips available today. For Intel, fabricating only one chip and using binning like this could amount to a huge amount of savings.

Of course, for anyone who's a power user, this is an outrage. Disabled hardware has been done in the past, but normally due to binned/failed QC parts that partially work (like AMD's triple core Phenoms being identical hardware-wise to their quad core counterparts, but with one bad core). This represents a move towards a market where fully-capable hardware is released to the consumer, and held at ransom in an entirely virtual manner - Only a software key is required to unlock the full potential of the hardware. It has interesting implications.


----------



## Aden (Sep 19, 2010)

And then you'll be able to get a processor for the price of a Celeron and download a crack that'll give you an i7 Quad.

I'm for it.


----------



## Lapdog (Sep 19, 2010)

This will never catch-on, and I'll bet that at some point someone is going to create some kind of patch that enables all of the features of the CPU. I also think that they need to wait a while, so that the more advanced CPU's with hyper-threading become cheaper to manufacture with higher clock speeds, and higher value multipliers, for the CPU's to come as-standard in an every-day NetBook or something...


----------



## Vo (Sep 19, 2010)

Maybe they'll do it with memory too so "downloading more RAM" won't be a tired joke anymore.


----------



## Ames (Sep 19, 2010)

This is silly.

That is all.


----------



## CaptainCool (Sep 19, 2010)

well, i think thats a pretty good idea in some cases...
for example, you need to get a new pc but you are short on money. this way you can save a lot on the CPU for now and later on you can just buy the unlock for the full potential. all in all you are saving money that way because you dont have to buy an all new CPU AND you dont have to install it on the mainboard which might even be a problem for most users.
however, the idea of selling something and making the consumer buy a license to actually use the whole product is simply retarded...


----------



## ArielMT (Sep 20, 2010)

But you have to be using Microsoft Windows in order to unlock your own hardware.  If you've upgraded to another OS, you're apparently screwed.

This is stupid for Intel, and it's stupid for the consumer.


----------



## ilobmirt (Sep 20, 2010)

This idea feels like a huge step backwards >:|


----------



## net-cat (Sep 21, 2010)

This is a terrible idea. So bad, I can't quite shake the feeling that it's fake.

Why, oh WHY would intel open themselves up to what would be rampant piracy?


----------



## Runefox (Sep 21, 2010)

net-cat said:


> This is a terrible idea. So bad, I can't quite shake the feeling that it's fake.


Oh, it's quite real.



> Why, oh WHY would intel open themselves up to what would be rampant piracy?


Who knows? They probably figure they can fab fewer different processors this way and streamline production.


----------



## ToeClaws (Sep 21, 2010)

Wow... what a money-grab idea.  But you know, this is the same bullshit the vendors are pulling with various products from load-balancers, too rate-shapers, to IDPs.  You buy the base product at what seems a fair price, but then have to shell out money money to "enable" features or bandwidth capabilities, even though you already own the hardware 100% capable of doing so.  Nothing but a money-grabbing scam.


----------



## net-cat (Sep 21, 2010)

I'm interested to see how this is actually implemented.

Efuses, probably.

Since they're not actually providing any "specialty" hardware to make the change, anyone can do it.

This opens up an interesting counterfeiting market, too:

1. Buy Genuine Intel Processor
2. Unlock using crack.
3. ???
4. Profit.


----------



## CyberFoxx (Sep 21, 2010)

net-cat said:


> I'm interested to see how this is actually implemented.
> 
> Efuses, probably.


 
Actually, from the sounds of it, it's just a simple microcode update and has to be run on every startup.
So, in theory, if somebody can extract the microcode from that Windows app, one might be able to use the microcode module and microcode updater under Linux. And I guess if somebody gets bored enough, they might be able to get it working with the Windows microcode updater too.


----------



## AshleyAshes (Sep 21, 2010)

I wonder if Intel is sitting on a surplus of CPUs that passed the Medium end testing, thusly creating a shortage of CPUs that are only good to sell as low end products.  They -need- to sell a low end product, they can't just have a shortage while they pump huge numbers into the medium end market.  They could just cripple some of those medium end CPUs to sell them as low end CPUs, so maybe they're just like 'Well, let's let them upgrade to a medium end CPU later if they want.'

Obviously Intel isn't going to lower their prices on medium end CPUs if they have a glut and a shortage of low ends would hurt them.  The alternative is to just sell purposefully crippled CPUs which can't be 'unlocked' at all because they cut a connection with a laser or something.


----------



## Vo (Sep 21, 2010)

Relevant: http://daeken.com/the-hardware-hacker-manifesto


----------



## Takun (Sep 21, 2010)

If they could streamline production into one type of scalable CPU they could hopefully lower consumer cost.  I say hopefully, because I don't see them lowering the cost at all.  They should be able to, but I doubt they will.  In fact I predict that they'll not drop it to "recoup" pirating costs.  In the end they sell more, pirates look worse, and the general consumer doesn't give a fuck: the tech world circle of life.


----------



## Runefox (Sep 21, 2010)

This kind of thing is exactly why I'm against the idea of either Intel or AMD "winning" the CPU war. Intel's already sat on its laurels once before with the Netburst architecture, cranking up the frequency while charging an arm and a leg for the performance point AMD was selling for half the cost. If not for AMD's competition in its introduction of 64-bit architectures and multi-core CPU's at comparatively low price points, Intel probably wouldn't have had any reason to rethink the Netburst architecture and come up with the Core designs.

Unfortunately, fanboyism rarely favours logic. Both sides have a rabid fanbase, and so do AMD/NVidia in the graphics market. Little do people realize that competition is what keeps things like this, and another Netburst, at bay. A lack of competition in technology means that technology advances at a snail's pace, reaching instead into the realm of cost-efficiency rather than in innovation.


----------



## Hyena (Sep 21, 2010)

Personally I think it's a really bad idea. But I also really don't like hyper threading and wish intel would just ditch on that as well. I think Intel really needs to work on their CPUs and come out with a better product. like a 6 core non hyperthreaded CPU for ~$500 would be nice, but we probably aren't going to see that anytime soon.


----------



## Azure (Sep 21, 2010)

Purchasing a physical object that doesn't possess it's full capability is stupid. It'd be like buying a car but having to pay a fee to go over 65 MPH. Fuck this idea.


----------



## Aden (Sep 21, 2010)

AzurePhoenix said:


> Purchasing a physical object that doesn't possess it's full capability is stupid. It'd be like buying a car but having to pay a fee to go over 65 MPH. Fuck this idea.


 
On the other hand, say you purchase one of these that has 3GHz dual-core unlocked for the price of an average 3GHz dual-core processor. But then you want to upgrade to a quad a year down the line. This way you wouldn't have to buy and install a whole new processor for those extra two cores - you could just pay the cheaper upgrade fee and be done with it.

Or you could download the inevitable crack to get the quad for the price of the dual-core, that's cool too


----------



## Azure (Sep 21, 2010)

Aden said:


> On the other hand, say you purchase one of these that has 3GHz dual-core unlocked for the price of an average 3GHz dual-core processor. But then you want to upgrade to a quad a year down the line. This way you wouldn't have to buy and install a whole new processor for those extra two cores - you could just pay the cheaper upgrade fee and be done with it.
> 
> Or you could download the inevitable crack to get the quad for the price of the dual-core, that's cool too


 It's application is so limited though, most people just buy what they want, not everyone is a starving college student with a desperate need for rendering power :V. That, and the idea that I don't own every part of what I BOUGHT is too much to deal with.


----------



## Bobskunk (Sep 21, 2010)

The CPU war will never end until something happens which would necessarily be a bigger deal, so there's no 'winning' it.  It being the war, that is.  The battles can absolutely be seen as going in favor of either side, with upsets possible with every new line.

You really just have to go with whatever company suits your needs for the right price at your current point in time.  Only a complete asshole has a history of parts from one company they're superloyal to.


----------

