Intel prepares feature to allow software-based processor upgrades

[Daniel Sims]

In context: A patch was discovered this week that indicates Intel is preparing a new feature that can lock features of silicon behind software-based activation. It doesn't seem to be rolling out to the majority of Intel hardware mainstream consumers use right now, however.

The patch notes refer to the new feature as "Intel Software Defined Silicon" (SDSi). It should allow for additional features of a piece of silicon to be enabled after it has already been manufactured. It's entirely software-based, working through the activation of a license that the user might purchase. Additional documentation, including information about its operating system interface, is available on GitHub.

The patch notes don't mention what specific features SDSi may add. However, it is currently limited to Linux systems. According to Phoronix, which discovered the patch, Intel only intends to implement SDSi in its Xeon processors for now.

Phoronix compares this to a feature Intel tried to introduce to its Core processors around 2010 called Intel Upgrade Service. However, that didn't last long and never made it to Linux. Tom's Hardware compares the new feature to the more recent Intel Virtual RAID on CPU (VROC), which uses an Intel CPU's Volume Management Device (VMD) and is activated with a hardware-based key.

SDSi could be an effort by Intel to sell processors more cheaply by withholding features some users don't need. Then, if users find they do need the extras, they might pay for a software license to get them without having to buy a whole new processor.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/91494-intel-prepares-feature-allowing-software-based-processor-upgrades.html

 

[yRaz]

You know, or we could buy old, cheap CPUs and pay the unlock fee

 

[VitalyT]

A "feature" that stales progress. Bravo, Intel, you just don't learn!

 

[wiyosaya]

Sounds just like sIntel. sIntel, the gift that just keeps taking.

 

[Dimitriid]

I see intel is extremely interested in seeing the Epyc chips continue to raise in popularity on the server world

 

[hahahanoobs]

Would Intel lose money if not enough people upgrade? I might look more into this.

 

[brucek]

This works in software, where the value of the distribution medium (I.e., the blank CD in the old days) is near nothing compared to the value of what's placed on it.

But is it really the same dynamic with CPUs and silicon/wafers?

If it is, maybe one day Intel will pull an AOL and start sending an unending stream of unwanted CPUs to mailboxes throughout the world...

 

[Crinkles]

I see intel is extremely interested in seeing the Epyc chips continue to raise in popularity on the server world

They might have found a way to sell cheaper server cpu's that don't need pricey extensions this year, but require them in the future. Upgrade in place could be a much needed/wanted feature, who needs AVX512?

 

[psycros]

If US companies keep nickel and diming everyone to death the only ones who profit will be Chinese alternatives. Every stupid initiative like this just gives Cheap China Charlie more time to close the gap.

 

[MrCus976]

Maybe subscription based features? If you need a feature then pay for it... and then stop paying when you don't. But if you always need it then keep paying and paying and paying for the CPU that you already "own".

 

[yRaz]

I dont see what people are so mad about, this is great news for the used market. It's cheaper for the enterprise market to replace hardware and get the tax write-off that it is to run less efficient hardware. This means we can pick these up used, unlock them and have high-end CPUs for a fraction of the price.

 

[Nathan Joly]

"SDSi could be an effort by Intel to sell processors more cheaply by withholding features some users don't need. Then, if users find they do need the extras, they might pay for a software license to get them without having to buy a whole new processor"

Oh, the naive writer.
Intel will sell them full price and then charge more on top of that.

 

[TheBigFatClown]

So, if Intel thinks you're spreading "misinformation" just shut down the CPU in the name of public safety?

No one has even mentioned the security risk here from hackers and cyber criminals. Sure Intel is evil but there are way more little guys who could do much with this also. I'm guessing it would only be a matter of time.

 

[yRaz]

So, if Intel thinks you're spreading "misinformation" just shut down the CPU in the name of public safety?

No one has even mentioned the security risk here from hackers and cyber criminals. Sure Intel is evil but there are way more little guys who could do much with this also. I'm guessing it would only be a matter of time.

If I was a betting man I'd say Intel thinks the performance will become obsolete by the time hackers Crack it.

 

[wiak]

Want more security? thats a paid for DLC Activation for you Intel CPU, want SMT? also paid DLC

 

[bandit8623]

They will fab 1 silicon and then u get more cores based on what you unlock.

edit
ibm did this with their p-series and z-series line

 

[wiak]

I knew I had read this in the past so here it is

Intel wants to charge $50 to unlock stuff your CPU can already do

Hold onto your hyperthreaded horses, because this is liable to whip up an angry mob -- Intel's asking customers to pay extra if they want the full power of their store-bought silicon. An eagle-eyed Engadget reader was surfing the Best Buy shelves when he noticed this $50 card -- and sure enough...

www.engadget.com

 

[Irata]

They might have found a way to sell cheaper server cpu's that don't need pricey extensions this year, but require them in the future. Upgrade in place could be a much needed/wanted feature, who needs AVX512?

Thing is this does not make the CPU cheaper to manufacture if the features are already there in hardware - it‘s just a fee to unlock them but R&D and manufacturing wise, this may even make processors slightly more expensive to produce.

They will fab 1 silicon and then u get more cores based on what you unlock.

edit
ibm did this with their p-series and z-series line

That‘s pretty much what they do already, just that instead of physically fusing off / deactivating hardware features they do it in software. You already have this for Xeon where additional memory support and other features that are already there in hardware cost extra if you want to use them.

Just instead of having to live with the decision you made at the time of purchase, you can change your mind later on - for a fee. Selling the CPU with all features unlocked would be a much more customer friendly alternative.

The 10400 ? It‘s a 10C die with four deactivated / defective cores.

 

[Irata]

"SDSi could be an effort by Intel to sell processors more cheaply by withholding features some users don't need. Then, if users find they do need the extras, they might pay for a software license to get them without having to buy a whole new processor"

Oh, the naive writer.
Intel will sell them full price and then charge more on top of that.

‚Naive‘ is putting it very nicely as this does not make the CPU cheaper to manufacture. It‘s the same hardware, just with artificially restricted features / performance.

 

[winjer]

Hardware with paid DLC.
Intel is really pushing innovation..........

 

[Wrinkle]

"SDSi could be an effort by Intel to sell processors more cheaply by withholding features some users don't need. Then, if users find they do need the extras, they might pay for a software license to get them without having to buy a whole new processor"

Oh, the naive writer.
Intel will sell them full price and then charge more on top of that.

Of course they won't. Large customers like Amazon, Google or Dell won't pay retail prices. As per an Anandtech article Intel also sells hardware bundles (cpu's, nics, optane, etc) that are supposed to be good value. Pricing mostly is flexible.

 

[Theinsanegamer]

Anyone who thinks this will make anything "cheaper" is so blindingly stupid I'm surprised you can eat breakfast without choking.

Show me a single industry that has introduced "software activated DLC" that has lowered prices.

The next logical step from this is CPU subscriptions.

So, if Intel thinks you're spreading "misinformation" just shut down the CPU in the name of public safety?

No one has even mentioned the security risk here from hackers and cyber criminals. Sure Intel is evil but there are way more little guys who could do much with this also. I'm guessing it would only be a matter of time.

They can already do that through payment processors, shutting individuals out of banking institutions.

 

[wiyosaya]

They might have found a way to sell cheaper server cpu's that don't need pricey extensions this year, but require them in the future. Upgrade in place could be a much needed/wanted feature, who needs AVX512?

Say, for PCI-e lanes, in comparison to Epyc which has 128 PCI-e lanes standard?

Seems like sIntel can serve any flavor of cool-aid they want, and their customers willingly drink it.

 

[Crinkles]

Say, for PCI-e lanes, in comparison to Epyc which has 128 PCI-e lanes standard?

Mister that's not a chip! It's a whole bag of chips and they have nothing to do with Intels whacky software unlocking features proposal.

::> their customers willingly drink it.

Some drink others mindlessly caress pci traces.

 

[defaultluser]

Sounds like IBM's software updates to unlock already installed Mainframe hardware.

The difference here is - if you run IBM Z, you have no other choice - your options here either include a new AMD system, or else another Intel system!

Why would anyone pay for peace-meal 30-40% performance bumps, when you can spend a bit more money and double it!