Intel Testing Unlockable Processor Upgrade Cards
Intel announced a new program late last week that allows users to upgrade to a more powerful processor with a $50 unlockable code sold for $50.
The Intel Upgrade Service as it is being called is only available on one system and one processor currently, the Gateway SX2801-01e from Best Buy with an Intel Pentium G6951 processor that can be upgraded to a Core i3 processor with more cache and hyperthreading.
Users who purchase these cards can upgrade their processor by downloading a small program from Intel and using an unlock code purchased on a scratch off card. Intel calls this upgrade a “down-the wire” upgrade, and it allows consumers to gain performance that will come in handy for editing video or photos without the need to open their desktop.
Hot Hardware has a look at the performance gains from unlocking the extra power on this processor in case you want to see what consumers who upgrade can expect.
Selling a processor that has been locked to run at a specific speed isn’t new, it’s known as binning in the industry; though binned chips are usually locked at a certain speed due to a portion of silicon going bad during printing.
Even though the program is young, there has already been some noise about the selling of an intentionally scaled down chip, comparing it to the trend of selling video games with locked content built-in that can be paid for and unlocked later.
Selling these upgrades on desktops is an interesting start since desktops can usually be upgraded by opening up that system and installing a new processor. Notebooks and laptops, it would seem, would be a more logical choice for offering “down-the-wire” upgrades.
Ultimately it will take some time to see how the average consumer feels about the ability to unlock more power down the road. It would be nice to see a clock speed boost as well as the addition of hyperthreading, but so long as the upgrade program is used as a tool to extend the life of a system or meet new user demands it could be successful. If it becomes part of an aggressive in store sales pitch when the computer is first being sold that’s a different
Image credit Engadget
Category: News
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
This makes total sense. Think about it from Intel’s side:
The cost of producing these as two separate processors is undoubtedly higher than producing a single chip with different software versions. Why force lower-end machines (which are the most price competitive) to pay for more processing power than they need?
Instead, they can offer this as an upgrade down the line, rather than
The difference is price vs. value. There’s a value difference between the processors. The cost, however, is basically the same. Intel is not a cost-plus pricing model, they price products based on the perceived value. Optional upgrades increase value.
Calciphus, I think you are missing the point here. The download carts include no hardware. Just a code to make the CPU run faster. The cost has already been payed by the OEM, and they are asking for more money to make already existing hardware run at it’s full speed which is one of the stupidest ideas I’ve heard in a while.
Imagine buying a new BMW with a 450HP V8 engine, but right off of the lot it only has the performance of a 200HP V6… you don’t get the full power until you pay your dealership $5000 for a code that you enter into your car. Doesn’t that sound incredibly ridiculous?
No, you’re missing the point here. You’re confusing price, cost, and value, and using them interchangeably. It’s an easy mistake to make. Intel isn’t pricing based on their cost, they’re pricing based on the value their customers place on various levels of performance. When you pay for the cheaper chip, the price you pay is in line with other, similarly spec’d chips, historic pricing trends and the cost model of the manufacturers that are going to be putting those chips into computers. The ability to later improve that (through software or a dongle or a little add-on card, doesn’t really matter how) means that Intel is fronting the cost of a potential future upgrade against the fact that most users won’t take it.
Looking at your metaphor, try it differently. These are low end processors, right? Assuming all other things are equal, would you rather buy a 200HP V6 from Kia, or a 200HP V6 from Chevy that has the option to later be upgraded for a few grand to a 450HP V8? If it costs Chevy the same to manufacture the two, they’ll try to extract a higher price out of the one that has more value. All the research that went into creating that low-cost, high-performance V8 may not be reflected in the manufacturing cost, but it’s a sunk cost nonetheless, and it certainly has VALUE. They’re not going to start selling all their big mighty engine at rock bottom prices just because it costs less to manufacture. By being able to disable some of the HP and two of the valves, they open the door for an upgrade, rather than an outright replacement (where you might go to a competitor instead) further down the road.
This has happened for years in computing, just never in the consumer processor space. Cisco sells optical switches for basically nothing but requires you to buy lasers from them, putting the cost of each additional port in the laser price. Heck, even Creative sold sound cards with many of the features disabled in the “included” version, to sell an upgrades “Sound Blaster SX Experience”. Many people happily paid it.
Sure, it would be great if we could pay for a low-end processor and have it perform like a midrange one. This is just another way to move money around the page and make it easier on the consumer to purchase and upgrade their system.
Plus you have to figure getting $50 late in the cycle (or half, assuming the store gets the other half) beats getting $2 more from the computer manufacturers early in the cycle.
Good deal for us anyways, us computer savvy people would know how to pirate the extra power instead of shelling out $50, while the ignorant can pay more than they have to. Intel knows this and that’s why the higher up ones don’t do that.