Intel now deactivates AVX-512 capability on new Alder Lake CPUs
Click here to post a comment for Intel now deactivates AVX-512 capability on new Alder Lake CPUs on our message forum
itpro
That's greed.
cucaulay malkin
That's great
still,sue the crap out them if you have an adl-s,they can't do that.
AuerX
The difference between consumer and enterprise level gear I guess.
NewTRUMP Order
What a dick move, that's like selling a sports car base model and disabling the turbo charger on the engine AFTER you sell it with it running.
Jcegeland
Intel should go fuck them selves! If the silicone has it, then it should be enabled!
Agonist
Sony got sued when they removed otherOS from the PS3.
Intel just does not know how to be decent.
schmidtbag
Sort of. It's more like an anti-roll bar getting removed - it isn't really a big deal in day to day driving but it definitely will have an impact in specific situations. But even then, that's stupid, because hardly anything needs AVX512. It's a feature that adds a great deal of complexity and expense to a chip, so, it really seems like poor insight if they felt the need to disable it.
nizzen
And we have even activated it again on the latest Asus 1302 beta bios that came yesterday, on old 12900k 😀
My spare 12900k's will be worth like gold for PS3 enthusiasts 😀
For people that don't know: You need to disable e-cores to enable avx-512. So you need to be abit enthusiast to do so 😛
H83
I don´t understand Intel. They spent a lot of money promoting and leveraging AVX512 for "regular" and professional consumers and now they disable it. Even worse, AVX512 was one of the few features were they could differentiate themselves from AMD...
This move seems so stupid.
nizzen
Avx 512 was never official supported...
People wanting avx512 is already using it. People that never will use it, is crying for no support LOL
nevcairiel
They never sold you AVX-512. It was never part of their marketing or specification. You only knew about it because some people poked around in it. Therefor, they have no obligation to keep it or give it to you.
Kaarme
Intel reportedly dreams of a CPU ecosystem where they can sell only a few models of CPUs to every customer, and the customer then pays separately to activate different technological options in the CPU they bought, above the very basic, default limit. Your stance is on that side. Traditionally people like to think that they own what they carry home from the shop. Even if Intel didn't advertise a feature, like AVX-512, the chip did have it and it was possible to use it, even if it required some conditions (disabling efficiency cores). So, it was what the customer bought. From this point of view (or stance), it's a dubious move to remove the option afterwards.
You are right that it's not really comparable to a car's turbo charger because the turbo would naturally be used during every drive. Maybe it would be more comparable to a collision alert system that wasn't turned on initially, nor mentioned anywhere in ads or brochures, but by digging through the touch screen menus, a driver could turn it on and it would work more or less as expected. Then, when the car got a software update, it would disappear entirely. I imagine people who did turn it on and kept it on happily would be less than pleased by the update.
anticupidon
Lemme get this clear.
The featured is present in the silicon, at hardware level.
But they choose not to enable it by some microcode alteration?
Have I got this clear?
schmidtbag
I don't think it's even microcode. I think it's just BIOS.
nizzen
must be Microcode, because we just inject the old cpu microcode to get avx 512 working in new bioses 🙂
anticupidon
If that's the case, they have to talk with OEMs and motherboards manufacturers to have it disabled.
It's a assumption.
This has more weight and probability.
Either way, we as customers are screwed by greed.
What's next, next gen Intel GPUs will have the pay for features traits?
nizzen
Desktop Gpu's already have "features" disabled vs the "PRO" workstation gpu's.
nizzen
Newest Asus Apex z690 beta bios with Avx 512 support:
Apex bios 1302 with ucode 15
https://p.sfx.ms/icons/v2/Large/Default.png
1302 ucode15.cap
tunejunky
i agree at heart.
but being local and knowing Intel the way i do i'm not being snarky or an ass when i say that's why they have the lawyers.
so they can do as they like and outlast anyone to getting to and through a court case.
this is better off as a complaint to a regulatory body as that's free.
the sad truth is they know this will affect only a tiny sliver of folks to mass market sales, but a noticeable increase in xeon sales at the exact same time Xeon is under siege.
and yes it is exactly market segregation.
tunejunky
exactly right on the first paragraph, analogies are always rough on the second 😎
