Intel to charge you for processor "upgrades"

VenomIreland

https://retailupgrades.intel.com/Page.aspx?Name=Upgrade

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2010/09/9-18-10-intel600.jpg


Found on the STEAM Powered User Forums.

Something tells me the saps who buy from the likes of PCWorld, Currys and Maplins will love this.

Solitaire

This has already had an outing on the Hardware thread. Suffice to say this is pretty decent and doesn't harm any of us; the problem stems from the fact that it could be a harbinger of far worse to come in the upcoming (and increasingly controversial) Sandy Bridge lineup.

LevelSpirit

Whats the betting this is cracked already.
Free upgrades woo-hoo

VenomIreland

Free Upgrades have existed for years in the forms of Overclocking (although you would need a decent cooler so they're not necessarily free )

LevelSpirit

VenomIreland wrote: »

Free Upgrades have existed for years in the forms of Overclocking (although you would need a decent cooler so they're not necessarily free )

I was being sarcastic. Pointing out the stupidity of Intels new money spinner.

Unregistered.

I suppose the upside to it is if, say, you want a processor with hyperthreading, but can only afford the one without hyperthreading. This would suit in the mean-time.

Solitaire

The problems only start when they want end-users to buy or even rent their OC. And so Intel once more set off on their FailBoat... :pac:

Icyseanfitz

i really hope amd is smart enough not to follow suit :rolleyes:

Unregistered.

Solitaire wrote: »

The problems only start when they want end-users to buy or even rent their OC.

Only if they choose not to reduce the up-front price for these processes. Example: Processors A and B. Same specs except for A is locked but can be upgraded (long or short term) and B is unlocked ("k series". As long there is still the k series, then I think it could work for the rest of us. Albeit the premium would be much higher up-front.

Tea_Bag

misleading thread title tbh, upgrades should be replaced with OC'ing.

Unregistered. wrote: »

I suppose the upside to it is if, say, you want a processor with hyperthreading, but can only afford the one without hyperthreading. This would suit in the mean-time.

i think you've hit it on the nail there. this could potentially be a good (read: technophobe) thing.
when you've got a limited budget, buy a processor that can be "unlocked" later when you have money to spend again, instead of replacing the whole processor and binning the old one. of course, this only works if the "locked" processor is comparatively cheap as chips.

Solitaire

AFAIK the Ks won't be fully unlocked on Sandy - they'll have a "few bins worth" of OC and if my predictions come true will have more "options" purchaseable than the cheaper no-OC chips, including bigger OCs :rolleyes: Only the EE series will be fully unlocked - so you'd still be able to OC an Intel CPU so long as you had a grand laying around to drop on a 32nm version of what we already have available :mad:

Unregistered.

On the face of it, it doesn't seem like a worthwhile idea - it's locked down by software and requires a pin-code which I'd imagine will see a few workarounds. The other thing is that it's only available to Windows 7 users, i.e. "new pc's" (targeted at those sold from retailers?).

Solitaire

Precisely, because its the only way Intel can track the "deactivated" i3s and keep them seperate from the "properly borked" i3s that were cut down to Pentium-G-hood for a reason.