• 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.

Why can't we buy ASUS / MSI / EVGA CPUs?

almoststew1990

almoststew1990

almoststew1990

Soldato
Joined
12 May 2011
Posts
6,281
Location
Southampton
These companies release GPUs with minor tweaks to Nvidia \ AMD's designs so how come we can't buy a ASUS CPU with a tweaked Intel design (like better TIM or different voltage control or something) and guaranteed minor overclocks like some GPUs have?
 
Because an ASUS CPU would be the same as an Intel CPU but 30% more expensive :)

Good point you have raised though - never thought about it.
 
the GPU at the core of a graphics card is identical - its not the GPU that they can modify its the board, so the comparison to a CPU and the board it sits in would be... the motherboard, which Asus MSI EVGA etc. do produce

these companies produce PCB's, they don't have licence to go out to TSMC and get a custom GPU core made based on an Nvidia/AMD design, a CPU doesn't have a PCB that they could modify or produce so there's nothing for them to add to the process... shipping a complete CPU core to a 3rd party just for them to badge and sell would still add cost though (or cut in to Intel's profit margin) so there's no reason for anyone involved to want to do it
 
Last edited:
Good reply Andy.

What they possibly could have done would be is licence the architecture of x86 and make their own versions of CPUs but loads of issues like cost, fab usage, new sockets potentially which would make asus etc not inclined to make Intel or amd ones anymore etc. Plus would Asus and MSI etc have the funds amd or Intel have which enables them to do what amd/intel do like research and development etc?
 
Last edited:
That kind of makes sense really.

I think Intel originally licences the x86 architecture to AMD many many years ago and they probably regretted that 10 years later!
 
Orcvader is right, we do also not modify the GPU chip we get from NVIDIA we do modify the PCB and cooling arround it which is with the CPU the motherboard. There you can then add more layer of PCB, more and better power phases, better controller and it is also about the engeneering of the board like lenght of lanes, where which component is placed a s o. If you compare the performance of a 50EUR motherboard with a 300EUR motherboard the more expensive one will also get a better performance out of the same CPU and overclock better.
 
I call rubbish on that about motherboard prices. I always get cheap ones but ones that ppl recommend for ocing and i generally do well on overclocks and have great performance. A £300 mb wouldnt do squat more to performance. Just look nicer maybe and have more sata ports etc.
 
Of course there are also boards out with a great price performance value that do also overclock well but more power phases of a high quality and more PCB layer are not just marketing fluff, there is really an advantage. If you have one CPU and one kit of RAM testing this in a bunch of different motherboards some will show better performance then others and you might get some higher overclock or can run the same overclock with less voltage. Don't get me wrong, I do not want to say a board for a reasonable price is rubbish but one that do cost much more and is considered as an overclocking version or similar is usually a bit better then the one for a reasonable price.
 
almoststew1990 said:
That kind of makes sense really.

I think Intel originally licences the x86 architecture to AMD many many years ago and they probably regretted that 10 years later!
Click to expand...

They probably licensed it to avoid complaints they were abusing there monopoly which may have led to their breakup by the US government. Besides AMD license's x86-64 back to Intel so all's fair.

You can't buy Asus or EVGA CPU's because they don't have access to 14nm factories that can produce Intel CPU's.
 
Last edited:
almoststew1990 said:
These companies release GPUs with minor tweaks to Nvidia \ AMD's designs
Click to expand...

You have got the actual silicon chip, which is the GPU.

And youve got the graphics card which is the whole lot.

What ASUS / MSI / EVGA do is to modify what components/coolers they put on the graphics card, not change the actual silicon chip (GPU).

So it wouldnt be possible for them to change the GPU because all that tech belongs to Nvidia \ AMD.

In a world where Nvidia \ AMD sold the schematics to make the chips for ASUS / MSI / EVGA to modify/make, ASUS / MSI / EVGA would need a fab plant to make the silicone anyway.
 
If you want a real world scenario of this, look at ARM. They license out their chip designs, or have chip designs built upon by others. All the "big three" x86 manufacturers are, or were, ARM licensed at one point. AMD is still working with ARM for their Opteron A Series, VIA as far as I know is still producing ARM based systems, though the actual silicon is made by Freescale, who are a Motorola company. Intel were also an ARM licensee, but I'm not sure if they still are or if they've completely abandoned it. They designed XScale around the ARM architecture. They sold that part of the business to Marvell. The chips are still "ARM" chips. They're just manufactured or designed by different people and companies on occasion. Like Jim Keller going to Apple and working on the ARM (A4 and A5) designs there.

I'm really looking forward to the Opteron A Series coming to market to have a play around with. Probably be expensive a hell though.
 
Last edited:
I presume even in aftermarket gpu's the core itself is still manufactured by amd/nvidia, a graphics card is basically a small computer in its own right (insofar as it has a core, ram, a 'motherboard' and a cooler) albeit one that's been finely honed to a specific set of tasks.

Inguess the equal question could be raised why dont they do just gpu cores in a socket, with gddr5 sticks plugging into the board, although that question is answered by the need for speed meaning socket bottlenecks are avoided.

I guess if they start making integrated cpu mobo's a thing it'll end up the same, and be the death of customisation and tayloring a build to your needs
 
They tend to just make the PCB and the cooler for the graphics cards, the actually silicon vendors tend to make the actual processors for the units
 
SkeeterUK said:
I call rubbish on that about motherboard prices. I always get cheap ones but ones that ppl recommend for ocing and i generally do well on overclocks and have great performance. A £300 mb wouldnt do squat more to performance. Just look nicer maybe and have more sata ports etc.
Click to expand...

You've obviously never compared say a Gigabyte 990FX UD3 board with an Asus ROG board. Different league altogether in terms of power phases, overclocking features, cooling, sound, network capabilities etc. I'd pay the £70/80 extra for the ROG any day of the week instead of the UD3 which is a complete POS but still over £100.
 
SkeeterUK said:
I call rubbish on that about motherboard prices. I always get cheap ones but ones that ppl recommend for ocing and i generally do well on overclocks and have great performance. A £300 mb wouldnt do squat more to performance. Just look nicer maybe and have more sata ports etc.
Click to expand...

While you can expect fairly close performance between boards for Intel chips, AMD CPUs are far more reliant on having a quality motherboard with decent components.

You couldn't even use the 8350 on a lot of the lower-end AM3+ boards, and the highly-binned ones released as 9590 need a high-end board still.

With Intel CPUs you can get away with a lower-end motherboard because the CPU performance is limited in other ways (*cough* "NGPTIM").
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom