intel to stick it to "build it yourself" computer users

[jman98]

I do not agree that amd is better than intel at supporting the 'enthusiast' market. At all.

Many linux users will never buy an amd powered computer again. They've almost totally dissolved their linux development team.

Your definition of "enthusiast" is quite a bit different from what everyone else here uses the term to mean. I make my living support Linux boxes and among home users, Linux is a blip on a chart. AMD is hurting financially and they do what they have to do to survive. If home Linux users get all pissy about that and leap into Intel's embrace, that is their choice. But I doubt that a monopolistic market would be in their best interest. And I know that there aren't enough home Linux users to make much difference in what AMD and Intel decide to do.

[jagabo]

Intel reaffirms socketed CPU support for the forseeable future

http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2012/12/intel-reaffirms-support-for-socketed-cpus-for-t...eeable-future/
http://www.maximumpc.com/article/news/intel_says_company_committed_sockets2012

[4your:only]

For the majority of Desktops and Notebooks sold it makes no sense to swap the original CPU with a (newer, faster or whatever) one, because of the board limitations. And for 90% of CPU updates the price of the update does not match with the speed update you get.
But why solder the CPU on board ? The only positive effect is a flat board design, without the additional socket. No way to really save money.
For the "build yourself" market you may need 3 versions of the same board with a soldered low, mid and high end cpu. No chance to win the battle custom made with ready to use factory made computers.
For the big manufacturers of business desktops and notebooks it could be a warranty nightmare, they have to store replacement boards with different CPU´s, and to swap this onsite. They have to save, test and reuse the returned CPU's or the price of a warranty replacement will be much higher (and the price of the commonly used 3 year onsite warranty in business). No sense for them to use these.

This is the highway down to increase factory made Desktop and Notebook sales, because it makes every (board involving) repair just nonsense for each piece of Computer with a soldered CPU.

My two cent

[pandy]

But why solder the CPU on board ? The only positive effect is a flat board design, without the additional socket. No way to really save money.

Why not? There is high chance that anyway customer change motherboard with CPU at the same time, no socket means lower cost - just check cost for ZIF sockets - at least 10 - 20$ for 40 pin ZIF thus for precise ZIF with 900 pins it will be 40$ - of course this is single piece price but in real life socket is approx 2 - 3$ at least, multiplied by millions it give nice additional profit.

Most of people buying MOBO with CPU and if they change CPU they usually change CPU with MOBO at the same time.

[rcubed]

For the majority of Desktops and Notebooks sold it makes no sense to swap the original CPU with a (newer, faster or whatever) one, because of the board limitations. And for 90% of CPU updates the price of the update does not match with the speed update you get.
But why solder the CPU on board ? The only positive effect is a flat board design, without the additional socket. No way to really save money.
For the "build yourself" market you may need 3 versions of the same board with a soldered low, mid and high end cpu. No chance to win the battle custom made with ready to use factory made computers.
For the big manufacturers of business desktops and notebooks it could be a warranty nightmare, they have to store replacement boards with different CPU´s, and to swap this onsite. They have to save, test and reuse the returned CPU's or the price of a warranty replacement will be much higher (and the price of the commonly used 3 year onsite warranty in business). No sense for them to use these.

This is the highway down to increase factory made Desktop and Notebook sales, because it makes every (board involving) repair just nonsense for each piece of Computer with a soldered CPU.

My two cent

I agree the mobo manufactures would have to in effect produce an offering of multiple different versions of the same board with soldered processor chips, probably cost more in the end that using a socket. Also prices would probably go up due to additional work, or stocking costs for the manufactures and the retail mobo sellers. On more that one occasion I have updated simply the processor rather than buy a new board. If you had a CPU failure I doubt you would find anyone willing to do remove and replace a soldered processor chip. I think in that case the board becomes a throw away item.

rcubed

[wulf109]

Intel uses a new socket with each new CPU,so having the CPU soldered,as bad as that might be,would change little. Intel forces you to buy a new motherboard with each new CPU anyway. The inventory for soldered CPU's would be enormous. I doubt motherbaord makers or retailers would support this idea.

[4your:only]

But why solder the CPU on board ? The only positive effect is a flat board design, without the additional socket. No way to really save money.

Why not? There is high chance that anyway customer change motherboard with CPU at the same time, no socket means lower cost - just check cost for ZIF sockets - at least 10 - 20$ for 40 pin ZIF thus for precise ZIF with 900 pins it will be 40$ - of course this is single piece price but in real life socket is approx 2 - 3$ at least, multiplied by millions it give nice additional profit.

Most of people buying MOBO with CPU and if they change CPU they usually change CPU with MOBO at the same time.

You missed the point. Most Users do not build their Computers, they buy them ready to use. They swap the complete system for upgrade, not a mobo or CPU.

This makes it a problem for the builder (warranty, storage etc), not for 90+% of the typical user.

[pandy]

You missed the point. Most Users do not build their Computers, they buy them ready to use. They swap the complete system for upgrade, not a mobo or CPU.

This makes it a problem for the builder (warranty, storage etc), not for 90+% of the typical user.

Yes, however we talking about hose that buy components and many of them anyway changing MOBO with CPU (or because this is anyway forced by introducing new socket or because new chipset offer some additional functionality).

[wulf109]

Actually soldering the CPU to MB is not a new idea. I'm old enough to remember 386SX CPU's. Most were soldered to the MB,386DX were socketed but no ZIF socket. But isn't Intel now saying it's not true,they will use sockets for the forseable future.

[4your:only]

You missed the point. Most Users do not build their Computers, they buy them ready to use. They swap the complete system for upgrade, not a mobo or CPU.

This makes it a problem for the builder (warranty, storage etc), not for 90+% of the typical user.

Yes, however we talking about hose that buy components and many of them anyway changing MOBO with CPU (or because this is anyway forced by introducing new socket or because new chipset offer some additional functionality).

My conclusion is, that the few "home builders" will bypass such mobos, use amd or server mobos.

Designing parts unchangeable and unrepairable forces the throw away culture, instead of protecting our environment by extending the live of electronic components, but this is sadly a common practice.

[Cunhambebe]

Moviegeek wrote this: "The average buyer today just needs a device to listen to music, check-in to Facebook and watch Netflix."

Hm, this is so true.