• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

Intel cpu upgrade "scratch cards"

That's actually really stupid in my opinion, haha. It just seems unfair that you don't get full performance at first. But I'm sure that eventually people will work out a way to do it without the code..
 
If this report is right.... This is wrong, this is depriving the consumer after paying for the product in good faith

It is one thing to underclock a CPU (for technical or sales reasons) that can then be clocked back up by the consumer at their own risk (if possible), but to charge for this suggests that they have only done this to gain further money from the customer (for VERY little outlay as their profit was made in the initial sale), this is wrong!!!

If the consumer was not aware of this at the point of sale this is clearly deception!
(this is like them selling everyone an IvyBridge as SandyBridges over the past year (at the same price and not telling you) and when the release date is due then informing you that you have already brought it once, but for a further fee you can buy your own CPU again!!!!).

US law would probably allow for this but in the UK consumer laws are much stronger and i bet some smart Solicitor will spot this (hope their is one in this forum.....) and all will get their upgarde for free :)

This has to be stopped or manufacturers will come out with more and more of this.
i.e. Unlock your 580's hidden GPU to a 590 for a fee, or enter this code to allow you to overclock your CPU, or monthly payments to increase your GPU core speed.
They will just release 12 core CPUs that are locked to 4 cores and then charge you every year if you would like to unlock another core.

I am not in any CPU camp, but if this is true it will be a good reason to go AMD.
Come on hackers, this is a worthy cause, crack the codes!!!!!
 
@certain people in this thread: The processors are cheaper to buy because of the lock downs. and it's not like intel are selling gimped chips without their knowledge. If anything they're offering essentially processors on credit.

"Oh crap, I cant afford an awesome performer right now"

So they buy the gimped processor, that performs adequate, with the knowledge they can spend so essentially upgrade the processor when they have extra cash.

To be honest I do hope it doesnt become more main stream though :p
 
It's for average Joe who decides they want some more speed later and can have the "convenience" of a simple software made change, to him it's probably pretty damn awesome.

Let's be realistic here, what enthusiasts will be touching any of the chips targeted by this anyway? From the 3 chips mentioned thus far in that article, none.
 
Intel did a similar thing before with the older chips. Personally I think its a good idea. As said above, it isn't designed for enthusiasts and allows Joe Public to upgrade their computer more easily. I can't remember which site I was reading yesterday about this, but they were all going ballistic over it! They completed missed the point.
 
jonny512379 said:
If this report is right.... This is wrong, this is depriving the consumer after paying for the product in good faith
Click to expand...

How so? They buy a certain processor and they get that processor, if anything Intel are doing them a favour by allowing them to upgrade that processor a lot more easily than having to replace the chip.

That's like saying that the GTX570 is depriving the customer because more than likely there's nothing wrong with the chip and it should have been a GTX580.
 
I'm not a big fan on this idea - It's like buying a car that could do 150mph but you have to pay extra to remove a limit of 100mph. If the potential is there, they should offer it for free.

This whole thing just seems like Intel trying to squeeze extra money out of the regular consumer. I can see people with computers clogged up with junk going into a store and thinking "ooh, this will make it faster" and parting with their cash when the problem isn't CPU related.

The upgrades buy you an undisclosed increase in clock speeds
Click to expand...
Couldn't you overclock the chip or are they going to charge for that as well? :p
 
camerongray said:
I'm not a big fan on this idea - It's like buying a car that could do 150mph but you have to pay extra to remove a limit of 100mph. If the potential is there, they should offer it for free.

This whole thing just seems like Intel trying to squeeze extra money out of the regular consumer. I can see people with computers clogged up with junk going into a store and thinking "ooh, this will make it faster" and parting with their cash when the problem isn't CPU related.


Couldn't you overclock the chip or are they going to charge for that as well? :p
Click to expand...

but if your car that could do 100mph cost you £1000 and the 150mph cost £1500, and the upgrade for your 100mph ones, that comes out 6-12 months later gives you 150mph but costs <£500, then where is the problem? Technically due to inflation on that price scale youd have saved money.
 
camerongray said:
I'm not a big fan on this idea - It's like buying a car that could do 150mph but you have to pay extra to remove a limit of 100mph. If the potential is there, they should offer it for free.
Click to expand...

You do realise that the low and mid range chips are just crippled, so the only chips they should sell are the top end i5 and i7 ones?
 
Duke said:
You do realise that the low and mid range chips are just crippled, so the only chips they should sell are the top end i5 and i7 ones?
Click to expand...

Never thought of it that way! I do, however think that people might spend money on the upgrade cards thinking that they will magically make their system instantly faster without any knowledge of what it will actually change and whether it will solve the slow down that they are experiencing.

To me it seems a bit like Intel holding parts of the chips to ransom.
 
I really like this idea for a few reasons - one it's not like Intel have sold CPUs in a good faith saying you have 6mb cache and 3.6Ghz, no they have sold them, at the correct price as a 2mb cache, 3Ghz CPU (or whatever), you pay for whatever you got originally... then you decide to upgrade and realise there is more available in your CPU than you first thought - NICE!

It's especially nice if you have an OEM machine, like a Dell or something and upgrading the CPU would invalidate the warranty.

The only issue I have here is price, if it's a £50 CPU + a £50 upgrade card, I think you'd be hard pushed to think it was a good deal.

What I would like is a "hyperthreading" upgrade card for my i5, or a turbo boost card for an i3, rather than very specific model number upgrades.

Best thing about these cards though, you can just ignore them if you dont want them, it hasn't changed the original value of your CPU or harmed you in anyway!
 
Yeah, time-honoured tradition selling gimped gear, especially in the technology industry where it's known as "crippleware". Technically there's nothing illegal about selling stuff with features disabled to satisfy demand for a lower price point. There could be valid reasons, eg they haven't set up enough manufacturing capacity for the lower-specced product yet, and obviously you can't sell the higher-specced gear at the lower price with all features enabled as then nobody would buy the premium products. That's perfectly reasonable as a business practice and a savvy consumer can even benefit from that. Remember all those Geforce 6600LEs that could be unlocked to 6600s or even GTs (showing my age here aren't I)? Or those AMD tri-cores that were quads with one core disabled?

But when you start charging for the "upgrade" then you're on slippery ground legally. There's no law against it per se but I know there's a case against Apple going on in America, and it might be against consumer protection laws over here. Might!

I suppose Intel are still providing a service to the consumer by charging to unlock the CPU. They could argue it's the OEM who wanted to buy a processor rated at that particular speed, but we're providing the option to the consumer directly to unlock the extra speed which the OEM chose not to pay for. However, in that case the cost of the "service" would have to be proportionate and reasonable, and $50 is completely off the wall for the ~10% or so increase they're offering! (If it is $50) Especially since OEM prices for those processors will be around $40-70! The price they're asking is also completely disproportionate to the cost of their generating a stupid little code, and smacks of pure profiteering. Very dodgy, very hard to defend if some tech-savvy lawyer tried to bring a case against them, or if consumers decided to protest en masse.

The upside (for the consumer), is that getting a code from piratebay or elsewhere would NOT actually be illegal! Intel are not selling you an extra product in the form of that codecard. They're just selling you a service, ie. the time it takes them to reconfigure your CPU to run at a higher frequency. They don't own the extra 200MHz you can get out of it - you do, and if you don't use Intel's time to get it unlocked you're not stealing from them. It might invalidate your warranty of course, but big deal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom