The reason Intel is not producing hot chips anymore

[Blitzvogel]

I don't see desktops going away, but a further push towards a couple different cores used across many products in differing core counts seems to make sense. Perhaps in 10 years, the same Intel core will appear in all of their products, with the count obviously scaling up with available TDP/TDW. Vector/SIMD per core is the only truly major improvement I see in the coming years until new materials become available like graphene to allow the 10 GHz like speeds Intel was dreaming of back in the Netburst days.

Tablets are still a bit of a fad but I do believe they are here to stay. Even Apple understands that their Macbook and Mac line is still important because they're overall capabilities are beyond what even the newest iPad Air is reasonably capable of. Adding a keyboard and whatever else to an iPad just essentially turns the device into an ok notebook running a relatively closed operating system.

 

[Cerb]

Software costs the same whether it is for a laptop or desktop, so that is a red herring.

No, it's not. Notebook and desktop is a setup of two PCs. Just a notebook is one PC. Needing a portable computer is already assumed.

I guess you are entitled to you opinion, but I dont think you need to "roll your eyes" and be derogatory to mine. I do feel that it is an unnecessary inconvenience to hook up and unhook to a docking station when a true desktop does not require that. If you want to dock and undock all the time, more power to you. I dont feel it is necessary.

A desktop then requires added peripherals and/or syncing over the internet. You have to do something extra to make a seamless swap between them possible, be it taking your laptop out of your bag/briefcase and setting it down on your desk, or waiting for dropbox or whatever else you set up to do its thing, assuming your software doesn't have hardcoded locations or crap like that (vertical market software tends to suck like that).

Neither myself or any of my family has had a laptop that lasted more than 3 or 4 years, and when a laptop or tablet has a problem, it is pretty much throw it away and get another. So not even including the cost of the docking devices, cost and performance advantage is still in favor of the desktop.

Have any of them bought sufficiently-good laptops? Latitudes, Precisions, Thinkpad Ts or better, Elitebooks, etc., last quite a long time. I finally upgraded to a ~2005/6 vintage one when my 12-year-old one was going to cost about $30 to repair . While it has been a bit unstable, I think was a driver problem, because the latest kernel has been rock solid for the last couple weeks.

 

[mikeymikec]

I notice you can't contradict me regarding Moore's Law, which is the foundation of my argument. In turn, I think your argument is absurd and doesn't recognize reality. Point by point:

1) "Display revolution?" Really? Uh, Thunderbolt? We already have a form factor suited for portable connectivity to large monitors. You might know about it, although I doubt it, given your non-argument - it's on 50 million smartphones. And on every Mac now manufactured.

2) Large monitors? Answered in Point 1. Really, this is like shooting fish in a barrel.

Re: Thunderbolt - Revolution requires execution. An Apple only feature, they've waited yonks to licence it to competitors in the hopes of gaining additional footing with this "great new feature" (and failed), they jealously guard their hardware revenue, these points don't make a good combination for mass adoption. Any manufacturer who considers using this tech to connect to Apple equipment needs to also consider Apple coming after their revenue stream.

To go back to your "smartphone with Photoshop" comment, how exactly would someone go about doing Photoshop work on a smartphone interface? Most phone interfaces revolve around the idea of "you can do about 5 different things with what you've got in front of you". While a smartphone could conceivably spawn a desktop-style interface when needed, then control mechanisms are needed for precision control. Again, perfectly possible (Bluetooth keyboard and mouse spring to mind), but why bother? If you want precision control (which you probably do given your Photoshop/Illustrator example), why on earth are you using the dumbest tool available for it?

3) I wasn't saying anything about TV, was I? Not that it matters. Certainly doesn't counter my point.

It isn't all about you, you know. My points regarding television were that some facets of modern life aren't going to disappear because a new device comes on the scene, and also that I'd bet that people were predicting the death of TV probably a decade ago because newer tech had come along that could potentially replace it, but it hasn't happened.

I can easily see the desktop leaving the "pure consumer" space (and by "pure consumer" I mean people who don't use computing equipment for any productivity tasks), but the entire industry is about selling you a device out of every class. In some ways it is beneficial to hardware design (e.g. not having to spawn a desktop-style interface on a phone), but it is mainly about selling money. Why else would an iPad require immediate connection to a "proper computer" before it will do anything else?

 

[TheDarkKnight]

So you're going to ignore all the evidence that PC sales are slowing, Processor sales are slowing, etc. and say the PC market isn't dying down?

Seriously?

OBVIOUSLY there is still a use for desktops, but EVERY company is realizing that if you focus on desktop market you will FAIL. Mobile chips is where every company's focus is. Yes, I still LOVE having my desktop. I would be lying if I said my laptop and tablet don't get a TON of use. Actually about to watch some TV using XBMC on my tablet right now. It was much quicker to take it downstairs and has a much longer battery life for viewing TV than my laptop and it's mobile unlike my desktop.

You still got a CRT monitor too brah?

Let me make sure I understand what you just said. You are at home, i.e., not out and about sitting in a dentist/doctor waiting room, riding as a passenger in a car, on a plane, so you are "at home" and you are choosing to watch television on a tablet with a screen size of (I am guessing) no larger than 10.1"? Did I read your post correctly?

Wait...I know what happened...a thief broke in last night and stole the 50" television in your living room so that's all you got right now? *sigh*. I just had to figure out what could possibly be going on in your head to do such a thing. I think I figured it out.

Because if I didn't....God help us all!!!!

 

[Sheep221]

Technically desktops will always be here, yes laptops, tablets and smartphones are replacing the desktops for simple users, with that I otherwise agree because they are less costly to own and operate. Desktops will however still hold major role in professional/manufacturing/industry etc. The stationary thing has reason it is like that, not everything that once had x86 CPU now has to be thrown out and replaced with ARM tablet.

 

[VirtualLarry]

Oh I couldn't agree more. People buy those hunks of crap and wonder why as soon as they get even a couple applications going it slows to a crawl. Up until last year you could get laptops with the AMD C-50 processor. I had one come in for repair with the customer complaining it was too slow. I told her there wasn't much I could do. I showed her the WEI for that processor was which I think was a 2.8 and then showed her an older Pentium D which is approaching 10 year old technology that got a 4.5 score.

Perhaps this is the true reason why MS killed the WEI in 8.1? Because it was showing how truely low-end most OEM boxes were?

 

[Morbus]

I dont think laptops and tablets are less costly at all, I think they just appeal better to the mass market. In my life, I have owned three different desktops (when I say three, it's really just the one that I have been upgrading for 10 years now) and one small notebook because, for a while, I spent 2 to 3 hours of free time away from my computer and I wanted to write/browse the web/game and stuff, so I spent 360€ on a cheap ass 768p 12 inch notebook and it was awesome. But it was very expensive for what it did. With that money I could buy a whole desktop that was twice as powerful, but guess what, less practical.

And the reason us geeks are geeks is the same exact reason the mass market is "dropping" the desktop computer: people don't want to be nailed down to a chair. People want flexibility, and they DON'T want power or speed or performance. They just want a machine that will save their stupid photos and videos and run excel and word and internet explorer for two years before it gets bloated to death with spyware and adware and they actually throw it away and buy something new. For 800€. Every two years.

And they make a habit out of this.

And I'm sorry but spending 400€ a year on computer stuff? That nets you a very nice chunk of money and you could get a hugely powerful desktop PC and keep it up to date and running fast as hell! In fact, I never considered my desktop PC a slow on and in these last 10 years I've spent what? 3000€? Probably not even that! That's less that 400€ a year, it's 75% of that! And I've got a mid-to-high end PC, two screens, one of them full HD 24 inch IPS panel, a nice 5.1 sound system, a nice silent tower, backlit keyboard and gaming mouse and even a tablet input thingy to draw on!

This, my friends and fellow geeks, is the reason the desktop is slowing down: we THINK. The massmarket doesn't.

Thanks for reading.

 

[Morbus]

When I walk into realestate offices I see laptops now. When I walk into a lot of businesses it's laptops. My Mom's house has changed over to laptops a while back. Now her husband has changed over to an ipad and retired his windows 8 laptop. He has a keyboard for it and can't be happier. My mom actually mostly uses her phone most the time. Kids don't want PC's it's mostly done on their phones or tablets.

And they pay twice the price they would be paying with a desktop, all because of their precious mobility.

You know why? Because they are not geeks.

The single most important reason the desktop is NOT dying is because we have the laptops and we have the tablets and smartphones and all that: they allow the desktop to live on in the hands of the people that actually need performance and power and, in the end, good value for their money. The same people that, ten years ago, didn't know what an internet was are the same people that today DO NOT use a desktop computer.

That's a good think in my book. I don't want them dumbing down my desktop, because I use it and I need it.

In all my jobs there was an almost exclusive usage of desktop computers: more price effective, cheaper to maintain, more usable, more upgradable.
In my university 90% of the machines were desktop computers: same as the above, plus it removed the hassle of booking a laptop (which you could do, but you didn't cause why bother when you had the desktop computers?).
In my home I have my desktop that I've maintained for 10 years now and for much less money than I would have a laptop, at much better performance levels. We do have an old laptop for my sis, as work horse, but we'll be scrapping that in the near future, in favor of an i3 desktop that I will be building for 600€... Equivalent to 800€-900€ laptops.

Of course over at my grandmother's house they own 3 different laptops and a tablet. They spend more than 500€ a year on average and have terribly slow machines, by any standard, they use to store photos, browse the web and catch viruses.

I understand where you're coming from, much in the same way I understand why the people in my grandmother's house spend so much for so little benefit. But it's two worlds apart. It's like claiming that the television is dying because people are going to the gym more often (in reference to couch potatoes vs trim fit hipsters)...

The one has nothing to do with the other!

Eventually the phones will be so powerful you'll just wirelessly connect to your TV or a separate keyboard and screen and do everything you need.

Sorry to break it to you, but that's a desktop computer for all means and purposes. If you are tied down to a desk, it's a desktop.

At some point too it's going to get to expensive to make enthusiasts PC parts since it won't trickle down anywhere to midrange owners that don't exist by then. The laws of volume/price will be gone. You'll probably be buying server parts or something for the diehards.

Haven't we always been buying server parts anyway? I fail to understand your argument here. The prices have never been lower, and PC gaming is shifting for sure, but the new generation of consoles bodes well for the PC graphics market, and that, in the end, gaming, is what will dictate if the PC dies or lives. It has always been that, year after year.

It's all about gaming.

 

[ehume]

If anyone are still in doubt. All desktop chips on the market today are either server or mobile chips rebinned into the desktop. There are no chips that was designed with desktop in mind as the first priority.

I'm curious now. I thought the 49xx and 48xx were the cut-down server parts, and the 4770k, 4670k and their non-k brethren were purpose-built. Are they down-binned server parts?

I suspected that some lower end "desktop" part were up-binned laptop parts, but I have no way of knowing which ones were initially aimed there.

So, which are the rebinned server parts? And which are the rebinned laptop parts?

 

[Homeles]

I'm curious now. I thought the 49xx and 48xx were the cut-down server parts, and the 4770k, 4670k and their non-k brethren were purpose-built. Are they down-binned server parts?

I suspected that some lower end "desktop" part were up-binned laptop parts, but I have no way of knowing which ones were initially aimed there.

So, which are the rebinned server parts? And which are the rebinned laptop parts?

The consumer models are lower quality parts. E.g., they'll have higher leakage.

 

[WilliamM2]

No, it's not. Notebook and desktop is a setup of two PCs. Just a notebook is one PC. Needing a portable computer is already assumed.

Why? I have a computer at work, and a computer at home, why would you assume the need for a portable device?

 

[mikeymikec]

Perhaps this is the true reason why MS killed the WEI in 8.1? Because it was showing how truely low-end most OEM boxes were?

I would buy that if the WEI assessment figure came up during the computer's first boot (or every so often for some reason), ie. if the average user didn't have to go out of their way to see it, but I bet if you asked a group of ten random people what the highest score in a given version of Windows is, they wouldn't know. The highest score has shifted with every version as well.

WEI was phased out because it was mostly useless. I checked it occasionally if I suspected that something was up (with say the graphics driver), or if I had just upgraded the RAM. I also suspect that the memory benchmark was manually adjusted by certain factors (e.g. "if memory >4GB then adjust score by x, or if DDR speed is higher than x adjust score by y).

If anyone are still in doubt. All desktop chips on the market today are either server or mobile chips rebinned into the desktop. There are no chips that was designed with desktop in mind as the first priority.

Isn't that simply because of the way that technology has moved on and requirements have merged?

Once, the P4 wasn't a power hungry heat monster. In the server arena, being a power hungry heat monster didn't matter particularly. Since then, a desktop part being a power-hungry heat monster was acceptable (at which point, the server and desktop parts' requirements weren't that different, apart from varying levels of cache), and since then, it wasn't acceptable for a desktop part to be like the Prescott. Same thing in much of the server arena.

The only support for your statement that I can see is through a google search for 'intel cpu ecc capable', which turns up an Intel site search of "ECC compatible Intel CPUs" which lists a load of desktop parts, but "ECC compatible" and "fully utilising ECC" are not the same thing (though perhaps Intel considers them to be).

 

[William Gaatjes]

What i would like to see :

A desktop pc to stay as a home server or media pc or workstation. And a smartphone and a tablet that connects to it through a wireless docking/ charging station with wifi. A laptop that connects through wifi but has it's own power adapter.

For tablets and smartphones :
Wireless charging technology is already developed.
No connectors are needed anymore.
Wifi is fast enough to synchronize devices with each other.
The technology is already here. But the software integration is not.
And that is the crux, the problem.

We have 3 mayor players that do not want to work with each other for seamingly integration of devices through hardware and software.
Android, Apple, and Microsoft.

There have been androids apps developed that have PC software to let the desktop function as a server. But it is not seamingly integrated into the desktop OS. If you go only Apple, this functionality exists but at a price tag.

For me there will always be a desktop pc. If it may be a huge ATX case or uATX in a nice cute casing. The desktop PC is just better for some tasks.
Even if it may just be running legacy software that requires using virtualization software such as VMware or parallels. I just do not see that happen on Smartphone or tablet soc's.

 

[ehume]

And this is why you don't want to be using your laptop at home.

"The FBI can secretly activate a computer’s webcam to spy on an individual without turning on the indicator light, a former official revealed . . ."

 

[ninaholic37]

And this is why you don't want to be using your laptop at home.

"The FBI can secretly activate a computer’s webcam to spy on an individual without turning on the indicator light, a former official revealed . . ."

Put black tape / cardboard over the webcam when doing illegal things?

 

[ehume]

Put black tape / cardboard over the webcam when doing illegal things?

Or at least when you are doing private things. But if they can turn on the camera (pun intended), they can turn on the microphone.

 

[Torn Mind]

And they pay twice the price they would be paying with a desktop, all because of their precious mobility.

You know why? Because they are not geeks.

The single most important reason the desktop is NOT dying is because we have the laptops and we have the tablets and smartphones and all that: they allow the desktop to live on in the hands of the people that actually need performance and power and, in the end, good value for their money. The same people that, ten years ago, didn't know what an internet was are the same people that today DO NOT use a desktop computer.

That's a good think in my book. I don't want them dumbing down my desktop, because I use it and I need it.

Dumb down the desktop? All computers are dumb devices, waiting for input from the user to dictate what is it supposed to do or and insert into its various ports devices the computer can control. If Average Joe internet surfer bought a desktop to surf the Internet, he has no direct effect on the desktop you use and whatever you use it for. What matters is that his money fills the coffers for the manufactuers, and they in turn use that money to develop the next gen of products, which might very well be more desktop products.

 

[Torn Mind]

I dont think laptops and tablets are less costly at all, I think they just appeal better to the mass market. In my life, I have owned three different desktops (when I say three, it's really just the one that I have been upgrading for 10 years now) and one small notebook because, for a while, I spent 2 to 3 hours of free time away from my computer and I wanted to write/browse the web/game and stuff, so I spent 360€ on a cheap ass 768p 12 inch notebook and it was awesome. But it was very expensive for what it did. With that money I could buy a whole desktop that was twice as powerful, but guess what, less practical.

And the reason us geeks are geeks is the same exact reason the mass market is "dropping" the desktop computer: people don't want to be nailed down to a chair. People want flexibility, and they DON'T want power or speed or performance. They just want a machine that will save their stupid photos and videos and run excel and word and internet explorer for two years before it gets bloated to death with spyware and adware and they actually throw it away and buy something new. For 800€. Every two years.

And they make a habit out of this.

And I'm sorry but spending 400€ a year on computer stuff? That nets you a very nice chunk of money and you could get a hugely powerful desktop PC and keep it up to date and running fast as hell! In fact, I never considered my desktop PC a slow on and in these last 10 years I've spent what? 3000€? Probably not even that! That's less that 400€ a year, it's 75% of that! And I've got a mid-to-high end PC, two screens, one of them full HD 24 inch IPS panel, a nice 5.1 sound system, a nice silent tower, backlit keyboard and gaming mouse and even a tablet input thingy to draw on!

This, my friends and fellow geeks, is the reason the desktop is slowing down: we THINK. The massmarket doesn't.

Thanks for reading.

Just because mobility or flexibility is not a critical factor in your lifestyle does not mean others don't need it. It is not just Mr. Average Joe who values mobility. The business sector has always had its selection of mobile products to choose from, such those Tablet PCs like the 27xxp from HP or the Fujitsu Lifebook T series. The computer in general, regardless of its form, is a tool, and a tool is only as good as how well it does its job(s). Laptops have some pros over other form factors, tablets have their pros over other form facors, and desktops also.

If your just trying to pimp your superior intelligence and the all-out superiority of the desktop, you simply failed to think and realize that certain situations call for a different set of attributes than what the desktop provides. Wanting flexibility and mobiliy does not make one stupid; it simply is the preference of the user.

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

I dont think laptops and tablets are less costly at all, I think they just appeal better to the mass market. In my life, I have owned three different desktops (when I say three, it's really just the one that I have been upgrading for 10 years now) and one small notebook because, for a while, I spent 2 to 3 hours of free time away from my computer and I wanted to write/browse the web/game and stuff, so I spent 360€ on a cheap ass 768p 12 inch notebook and it was awesome. But it was very expensive for what it did. With that money I could buy a whole desktop that was twice as powerful, but guess what, less practical.

And the reason us geeks are geeks is the same exact reason the mass market is "dropping" the desktop computer: people don't want to be nailed down to a chair. People want flexibility, and they DON'T want power or speed or performance. They just want a machine that will save their stupid photos and videos and run excel and word and internet explorer for two years before it gets bloated to death with spyware and adware and they actually throw it away and buy something new. For 800€. Every two years.

And they make a habit out of this.

And I'm sorry but spending 400€ a year on computer stuff? That nets you a very nice chunk of money and you could get a hugely powerful desktop PC and keep it up to date and running fast as hell! In fact, I never considered my desktop PC a slow on and in these last 10 years I've spent what? 3000€? Probably not even that! That's less that 400€ a year, it's 75% of that! And I've got a mid-to-high end PC, two screens, one of them full HD 24 inch IPS panel, a nice 5.1 sound system, a nice silent tower, backlit keyboard and gaming mouse and even a tablet input thingy to draw on!

This, my friends and fellow geeks, is the reason the desktop is slowing down: we THINK. The massmarket doesn't.

Thanks for reading.

I do have to agree with you. Looking at the way people use computers is just painful. I've seen people that buy the cheapest laptops on Black Friday with no regard for specs or build quality, abuse them to death, and then buy new ones in two years. After they grow tired of that, they'll drop $2000 on a Macbook and swear off Windows.

I've introduced some of these people to high-end desktops and now they can't stand using a laptop. This is what Intel and AMD should be pushing, a powerful desktop with a large monitor that can serve all of your needs. Why they are jumping on this manufactured push to cheap, commodity CPUs I don't understand. I'm not saying there is no use for mobile products or that desktop sales aren't declining but talk about throwing the baby with the bath water.

 

[Blandge]

I've introduced some of these people to high-end desktops and now they can't stand using a laptop.

I agree with this so much, and I have the exact same experience. Tons of people's only experience with PCs is the old piece of junk they bought in 2004 when Windows was too big and processors were too slow. Most likely they've been using laptops ever since, and they get pretty much the same experience now with a laptop as they did then with a desktop. This makes the tablet experience seem pretty good because it's not quite as fast as a laptop, but they don't have to deal with the Windows bloat. They don't even understand what it means to have a truly fast computing experience on Windows. They don't understand that it's possible to have 50 tabs open, play a game, watch a movie, have several word, ppt and excel files, and have no delay when switching between them.

If anything Intel and the industry have done such a good job of selling the new mobile products that the much of the public don't understand how much traditional desktop has improved. The laptops of today are roughly equivalent to the desktops of 5+ years ago in terms of computing power, so if you haven't used a desktop in that much time you probably don't think desktops are that great.

 

[sm625]

All the evidence points to a maturing market, with flat and stable sales, rather than any sort of bubble-popping bell curve forming collapse.

Image source: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/30/pc-boom-over-tablets-smartphones

 

[WaitingForNehalem]

I am not denying that desktop sales won't decline. However, I think that due to Microsoft and Intel, the decline of the desktop will occur much more quickly. Microsoft seems to think that everyone wants a tablet. Intel thinks everyone wants a 2 in 1.

I honestly don't get these companies. Maybe they want the growth that PCs had in the 90s. In the end, it all comes down to money. I'm just not sure $200 tablets will bring that but what do I know? I don't spend millions of dollars on research so maybe I am out of the touch with the majority of conumsers that just play Candy Crush and surf Facebook.


What looks more comfortable?:

Credit: #Grey on HardOCP

 

[mrmt]

This makes the tablet experience seem pretty good because it's not quite as fast as a laptop, but they don't have to deal with the Windows bloat.

Tablets are great for content consumption. A few seconds and you are already browsing, checking email, watching movies or reading a book. That in a very convenient form factor, anywhere you want.

Notebooks are great for productivity. Get your work wherever/whenever you want, and if you have Haswell + SSD you can get small lead times to start, just like tablets.

But.... What's the desktop killer app? Games? PC gaming isn't mainstream. A keyboard and a monitor? Multi-monitor setup? These goes with the notebook. That's not mainstream too. There is no killer app for the desktop anymore. Only if you game, do a lot of video encoding or download torrents like hell the desktop becomes an interesting alternative.

 

[mrmt]

What looks more comfortable?:

And why would you need a desktop for that first setup? You can just hook a monitor, a keyboard and mouse on your notebook and you are set. Plus you still have mobility.

 

[mikeymikec]

And this is why you don't want to be using your laptop at home.

"The FBI can secretly activate a computer’s webcam to spy on an individual without turning on the indicator light, a former official revealed . . ."

Does anyone buy this? Any laptop? Is there even a standardised method of lighting the LED on a webcam? Because it would seem logical IMHO to have the LED lit as a direct result of current being supplied to the webcam to run it "under load", but if that wasn't possible/desirable then surely it would be switched on by the driver as part of the routine for initialising the webcam, so does the driver need to be compromised first? All are webcam drivers compromised?

This story reminds me of the multitude of technophobes I've encountered who have either pointed their desktop webcam away from them when it's not in use or they've taped the laptop webcam over... IMO one of these people somehow manages to be an IT "journalist" and decided to rationalise their behaviour by writing this story.

IMO tapping an analog mic on a computer (and accomplish it trivially on many peoples' computers) would be a lot easier to manage, but I could be wrong. Many laptop webcams take standard drivers these days. I'm not sure how many laptop webcams come with the LED mentioned these days though.

PS - I don't approve of mass surveillance, and I look forward to further revelations from Edward Snowden and anyone who follows his footsteps, so I wouldn't call myself a sceptic in such ideas in general, but this one reeks of BS IMO. For the driver approach a number of manufacturers had to either have been infiltrated and code altered or for the manufacturer to be playing ball with the US government. I doubt that any/many/all of these manufacturers are American. It's possible of course. In short, I would like to see some actual evidence, or at least a convincing technical argument for how it could be done in a mass scale. The more amusing side of it would be if this article's claims are true and then US government laptops have been compromised by organisations that aren't on friendly terms with the US government.