Intel wants to put functionality of its processors behind a pay wall. While that seems quite interesting for Xeon chips, the business model could set a nasty precedent.
Just because you bought an Intel processor doesn’t mean you bought the whole Intel processor. At least: it won’t be that way in the future. Intel wants to put features of its chips behind a pay wall so you can unlock them software-wise after you buy them. Software Defined Silicon (SDSi) is what the manufacturer euphemistically calls the approach. In practice, the chip maker is working on a pay wall for sold CPUs.
More overview
In the Xeon lineup, that plan may provide more oversight. Today, the third generation of the Xeon Scalable portfolio consists of 53 different processors. Under the hood, however, there is not that much difference between the different models. Things like the amount of supported memory, the presence of Network Function Virtualization or boost capabilities are not necessarily driven by the underlying hardware. Intel artificially makes the difference because a processor that supports up to 4.5 TB of RAM is worth more than one that is limited to 2 TB.
In the future, Intel does not want to unnecessarily fragment its portfolio. The manufacturer’s vision is to sell a basic CPU model at a base price. Advanced features that would normally be in a different CPU model are then available to everyone upon payment of an additional price. This makes the lineup more manageable and may also be of interest to customers. After all, his no longer have to choose the chip that suits them best but may have a few features too many, but can pay only for what they need.
The road to microtransactions
However, there is a philosophical side to the approach. With SDSi, you’re not really buying CPUs from Intel. You do buy a piece of hardware, but Intel clearly retains ownership and can provide you with additional access to features already physically present in the processor you bought. Support for that way of doing things allows for more sophisticated business models, where Intel can, for example, charge licensing fees on a monthly basis for paid functionality.
Critics fear a model of real microtransactions, along the lines of the gaming world. After all, when it rains at Xeon, it drips at Core. What about a workstation with Core i9, where the turbo boost capability is behind a pay wall?
read also
Intel renews commitment to R&D spending
It’s not that far off yet, of course. Currently, Intel is looking at support for SDSi In Linux 5.18 in preparation for the concept. It does seem that Intel is serious about the paywall model. The question is whether it thereby gives AMD more powder in its competition or will be able to market base models at a more attractive price point.
Not the first time
This is not the first time Intel has experimented with this business model. Back in 2010, the manufacturer tried the Intel Upgrade Service, aimed specifically at CPUs at the lower end of the spectrum. For example, for the Pentium G6951, you could activate an extra megabyte of cache for $50. A year later, some Sandy Bridge processors became a similar program in a number of countries, including the Netherlands and Germany. Even before the end of 2011, the program was dropped under pressure from critics. The failed experiment clearly shows that Intel would not shy away from bringing SDSi from Xeon to Core, should the model catch on this time.