Man I don't get you at all, you always seem to favour defending a company.
Because I see their side, and am not just a greedy customer that wants something I didn't pay for, and if I don't get it I scream ripped off.
What's not to get.
AMD. Disable a broken part of a piece of silicon/ charge you less due to that / has a chance to unlock for FREE
At this point, AMD is not disabling anything broken, they are disabling completely functional pieces of silicon just like Intel, and they are doing it to fill the lower markets that have higher demand.
AMD is not offering the ability to unlock for free, that is a motherboard manufacturer thing. AMD might be rolling with it since it is good marketting for them, but they certainly aren't offering that ability officially.
Intel new scheme.
Processor has no flaws what so ever, didly squat!
Processors sell for cheap initially ( yet being able to sell them this way shows that they are in-fact making profit before adding extra, I.E the chip is already paid for, your getting what you pay for.
Intel charges for something that should already exist in the first place.
MASSIVE difference to what goes on else where.
This isn't a new scheme at all as I've already pointed out. The only part that is new here is that Intel is actually giving the ability to use the parts that are disabled if you want to pay for them. The alternative is the same old scheme that has been used for years, you didn't pay for it, so you don't get it.
How you could even remotely misconstrue this as a good idea or similar to what goes on already and confuses me a great deal, got stocks in Intel or something?
How you could not see this as what has already been going on for years I don't understand.
Only INTEL benefit from this, they are ALREADY making money from the initial sale, they are making MORE money for FREE ( I.E the upgrade costs them NOTHING)
I know, it is so unthinkable that a company would try to increase their profits. How horrible of them. Maybe one day unicef will get in the CPU making business.
Only benefits Intel? I don't think so. Look at it from the average consumer standpoint, not an enthusiast that knows how to change out their processor. How much is an average consumer going to spend to upgrade a processor in a computer? Well geek squad charges a minimum of $50 in labor, you might get a local shop to do it cheaper, but probably not a whole lot(my shop charges $35 or $55 if it is one of those really tiny computers that is a pain to take apart). Then there is the price of the processor, a new better one costing maybe another $100 or more and that is just to go about the same step up as the $50 upgrade would net you. Yes, you can try to resell the old processor, usually on ebay, but most average consumers again would not even know where to start with this. So how is Intel offering a $50 software upgrade that the average consumer can install themselves without voiding any warrantees only benefitting Intel?
If you support this then you support intel charging you for nothing at all.
Intel is not charging you for the features that are disabled, that is why the processor is cheaper than the same processor with the features enabled. That is why the G6950 is $100 and the i3-530 is $120. Buying initially those features are with $20, if you don't want/need them, then you don't pay for them and save $20. If you decide you need them later, you pay to get them.
I fail to see how you see this as Intel charing for nothing, do you just not understand that these processors are cheaper for a reason?
And silicon always has defects, 0% failure my ass, you can even see the difference in performance chip to chip ( over-clocking potential, heat out-put, voltage requirements)
Obviously Intel has perfected their manufacturing process to the point that they have enough silicon laying around that they can guarantee that these processor won't have defects.
Of course the alternative explanation is that they are taking these processor from the next higher bin, in which case you are already getting better silicon than what you paid for, and Intel is selling a $120 processor for $100 initially with an upgrade option if you choose.
ow this is not an attack at you one bit, but you seem to completely miss the point here.
The extra $50 is for NOTHING
No, you miss the point. The $50 is for features that you haven't paid for initially, yes they are there, but you haven't paid to use them, that is why the processor was so cheap to begine with.
