Intel 'preparing' to put an end to user-replaceable CPUs

[DeaconFrost]

That's exactly what I meant. I have a 2100 running in my server, and then I see all of these various other 21xx revisions coming out afterwards. I certainly get the point of the i3, i5, and i7 line, but maybe we really don't need all of the various individual processors within those lines. As you said, most of the time, they are slight clock boost, which in the end, matters very little.

 

[DeaconFrost]

I think a lot of people are missing the point with this. There are way too many processors on the market. For example, look at the i3 line, and just how many 2xxx versions there are. If the number of processors are shrinking down, but we still have the spectrum from budget to high-end, who cares? It just simplifies the building process even more. When you run an Intel proc, you are likely using an Intel chipset, so what would really change?

As long as the other manufacturers, such as Asus, Gigabyte, etc are still allowed to build with their own options...such as memory slots, SLI, etc, then again, who cares?

This all-in-one chip and board approach is already on the market in the mini-ITX HTPC segment, and that's not causing any issues.

 

[Joan Archer]

My notebook has the Intel but according to the booklet that came with it it could have had the AMD because it gives you the pictures showing the main parts depending on whether you have the Intel or AMD model, it's an Asus.

 

[eburnettscd]

You mean I wont be burning out motherboards anymore?

 

[x BlueRobot]

My notebook has the Intel but according to the booklet that came with it it could have had the AMD because it gives you the pictures showing the main parts depending on whether you have the Intel or AMD model, it's an Asus.

That reminds me, what did I do with my manual which came with my notebook? :shock:

 

[alphanumeric]

My notebook has the Intel but according to the booklet that came with it it could have had the AMD because it gives you the pictures showing the main parts depending on whether you have the Intel or AMD model, it's an Asus.

That reminds me, what did I do with my manual which came with my notebook? :shock:

You mean what did I do with the CD, that has the PDF file, of the paper manual that never came with my notebook.

 

[x BlueRobot]

My notebook has the Intel but according to the booklet that came with it it could have had the AMD because it gives you the pictures showing the main parts depending on whether you have the Intel or AMD model, it's an Asus.

That reminds me, what did I do with my manual which came with my notebook? :shock:

You mean what did I do with the CD, that has the PDF file, of the paper manual that never came with my notebook.

I haven't got a CD-drive

 

[alphanumeric]

lol, you got me there.

 

[paulstung]

I'm sure i read somewhere that AMD is bowing out of the cpu market,to concentrate on future tech,to give them a leg up?i maybe wrong..

 

[Phone Man]

From what I have read, it seems that Intel is going after the mobile market with these new SOC chips. Just like MS with Win 8. The desktop is playing 2nd fiddle.

Jim

 

[eburnettscd]

All this on manuals - has anyone actually ever read one?

One day every installation CD will just point to a YouTube link

 

[bigmck]

I'm sure i read somewhere that AMD is bowing out of the cpu market,to concentrate on future tech,to give them a leg up?i maybe wrong..

You are so right. They are going to concentrate on mobile. Is AMD Set To Leave The High End CPU Market ? - Trubritar Forums - Absolutely Phenomenal!

 

[bdstx4]

It is not surprising to read that CPU's will soon be soldered to motherboards. Part of the miniaturization, combining major function chips and lower power consumption trend in all electronics.

 

[ionbasa]

I for one believe that for low powered SoC for cell phones/tablets and maybe even ultrabooks this may be a smart move, in terms of other SoC ARM CPUs almost all of them are BGA, even consoles such as the PS3 use BGA to mont the CPU to the main-board.

If they decide to do this to the desktop market Intel would be stabbing themselves in terms of profit, unless they Want AMD to gain some progress due to market competition, although this is highly unlikely.

 

[King Arthur]

Some people are taking this way to seriously. First, Intel is not killing their desktop line. Second Broadwell is way off in the future release after Ivy-Bridge-E, Haswell, both of which will have desktop versions and use sockets. Not to mention we just got Sandy-Bridge-E, we will be well taken care of on the desktop side of things well beyond the release of Broadwell.

All of you are buying into this bulls* and panicing like all the doom sayers want. All you have to do is step back and analyze the situation logically and rationally to realize all of you are over reacting.

Again, we will have three current generation desktop processors well before and after the release of Broadwell. Sandy-Bridge-E, Ivy-Bridge-E, and Haswell.

And what happens when and after Broadwell finally comes around? The articles suggest that Intel won't be going back to modular CPUs for the long-term.

I think a lot of people are missing the point with this. There are way too many processors on the market. For example, look at the i3 line, and just how many 2xxx versions there are. If the number of processors are shrinking down, but we still have the spectrum from budget to high-end, who cares? It just simplifies the building process even more. When you run an Intel proc, you are likely using an Intel chipset, so what would really change?

As long as the other manufacturers, such as Asus, Gigabyte, etc are still allowed to build with their own options...such as memory slots, SLI, etc, then again, who cares?

This all-in-one chip and board approach is already on the market in the mini-ITX HTPC segment, and that's not causing any issues.

The difference between the acceptance of non-modular CPUs in the console, mobile, and miniature markets and the refusal in the desktop market is that the former are primarily non-user-servicable while the latter has always been user-servicable. One of the key selling points of a desktop PC has always been that the user can easily add, remove, replace, or upgrade almost any component that the user wishes. It is also one of the key reasons why old desktop hardware can last so long, we can upgrade just the components that need upgrading rather than replacing the desktop wholesale; this also means cost-savings for the user as well. A CPU that is non-modular and mated to a specific motherboard runs counter to this philosophy and removes choice and options from the user and encourages higher prices across the board (pardon the pun).

I also welcome having a huge selection of CPUs to choose from. Having a huge selection benefits both the users and the manufacturers because it gives users the opportunity to get the CPU that fits their needs and budget exactly while the manufacturers get to sell CPUs that didn't meet minimum QC for a higher bin as a lower binned CPU. The users get more merchandise to choose from and manufacturers run less unsellable merchandise meaning prices on average should be lower, win win for both.

Maybe we really are just overreacting, but there are legitimate reasons why we're so upset about this. (屮゜Д゜)屮

 

[bdstx4]

Bus card items will never go away. For people with special needs and people who want better things. (Video adapter, etc.). Cpu's being soldered will allow higher speeds and lower power draw. Mfg just needs to get precise enough to not
mis build a motherboard to make it go to the scrap pile. The CPU is the highest cost chip on the board. I have been in this business 30 years. I have seen many chip functions be combined and go to surface mount. I used to component
level repair this stuff back when it was only a double side circuit board. Now 10+ layers with embedded components like
chip capaciitors. Not even the factory can fix or jumper around those. When you see someone today that component level repair something. At most all they are doing is reflowing a cold solder joint. Most times something more basic like fixing a broken wire. Laptop fixes are great for this. If they are damn good, they can identify and replace the few
Electrolytic Capacitors left on devices.

Overall all this hard solder by Intel for CPU's will be good for consumers. Whether Intel is confidant enough in themselves and manufacturers to proceed with this time will tell. Because once you do this if the board does not test out it is scrap. Intel will surprise you how fast they get all this worked out.

Very, very few people ever upgrade a computers CPU. By the time they think about that the computer should be replaced.

 

[logicearth]

And what happens when and after Broadwell finally comes around? The articles suggest that Intel won't be going back to modular CPUs for the long-term.

What the article suggest is pure speculation. Panicking over what might be is unhealthy. And no Intel will never fully abandon the desktop or sockets. The server/workstation market for example still needs CPUs.

 

[Lady Fitzgerald]

All this on manuals - has anyone actually ever read one?...

I do; I need all the help I can get. I frequently download and read manuals (when I can find them) before buying products to help me decide if I want to buy the product.

 

[Lebon14]

I don't know if anybody thought about this...

If they ever do that, i.e. non-replaceable CPUs, mobo vendors such as Asus could very well sell a lot of the same motherboard except with different on-board CPUs.

Of course, this will give Intel an hand-on of the motherboard vendors strategiies which can never be good...

 

[King Arthur]

I don't know if anybody thought about this...

If they ever do that, i.e. non-replaceable CPUs, mobo vendors such as Asus could very well sell a lot of the same motherboard except with different on-board CPUs.

What I expect to see is (for example!) 3 motherboards, all identical, except one features the i3, another the i5, and another the i7. Somewhat satisfies CPU/mobo combinations, I guess, but it's still extremely limited in many ways compared to simply having separate CPUs and mobos like we do now.

There's also the problem of CPU/mobo combos very possibly not matching a customer's requirements. I'd likely have to compromise and prioritize either the mobo or CPU aspect or pay up for a CPU/mobo combination where I don't need some of its capabilities. Contrast to right now where I can go out and get a CPU and mobo separately, both satisfying my requirements without compromise or unnecessary expenses.

Alternatively, I guess manufacturers and distributors could take direct orders from consumers for specific combinations, but that'll likely cost lots. ;x