Re:Intel Officially Introduces Pay-as-You-Go Chip Licensing
by rolenthedeep on Thursday November 24, 2022 @07:15PM
(#33737635)
I'd argue it's less resource efficient.
Presently, chips are individually tested and "binned" into performance groups. The chips that aren't stable at high clocks, or have a bad chunk of cache are binned and sold as a lower performance model. If not for this process, a significant amount of chips would go into the trash before even being packaged.
If instead every chip must be capable of performing at top specs just in case the user upgrades the license. You can't bin partially defective chips as lower performance models, because there is no lower performance model. The entire line needs to meet the top spec, or a license upgrade could cause physical damage to the system.
The binning model is fine. It lets manufacturers sell the vast majority of their chips, and consumers get a deal by buying the lower performance models. Some users still decide to unlock the chips by various means, with completely unpredictable results.
The proposed license scheme doesn't solve any problems, and it doesn't benefit consumers. It creates more waste and passes the cost of that waste to the consumer.
Presently, chips are individually tested and "binned" into performance groups. The chips that aren't stable at high clocks, or have a bad chunk of cache are binned and sold as a lower performance model. If not for this process, a significant amount of chips would go into the trash before even being packaged.
If instead every chip must be capable of performing at top specs just in case the user upgrades the license. You can't bin partially defective chips as lower performance models, because there is no lower performance model. The entire line needs to meet the top spec, or a license upgrade could cause physical damage to the system.
The binning model is fine. It lets manufacturers sell the vast majority of their chips, and consumers get a deal by buying the lower performance models. Some users still decide to unlock the chips by various means, with completely unpredictable results.
The proposed license scheme doesn't solve any problems, and it doesn't benefit consumers. It creates more waste and passes the cost of that waste to the consumer.