Could Intel kill off the removable CPU?

At some point, a self-confessed computer geek will have built a computer for themselves, or a friend. They’ll have invested much time and love selecting the right components including motherboard, CPU and memory, to fit their computing and budgetary needs.


An example of the BGA solution, with the Intel Atom CPU (bottom right) soldered to the board

But if Intel’s rumoured shift to a ball grid array (BGA), where the CPU is soldered directly to the motherboard, turns out to be fact, it will take some of the magic and mysticism out of building a computer. Not to mention alienating the enthusiast market, where CPU choice is a key factor in spending a premium on a CPU that can be pushed to the limit through overclocking and voltage mods.

Broadwell is the codename of the 14nm product that Intel is developing as the successor to the 22nm Haswell (which replaces the current 22nm Ivy Bridge tech). It’s these Broadwell chips that are rumoured to be soldered directly to the board, with southbridge functionality integrated into the chip. This will essentially turn the Broadwell chips into a System on Chip (SOC) solution.


The Core i7 using the LGA socket solution

Power and cost savings are being touted as possible reasons for the shift in direction. The Broadwell chips top out at 57 watts and Intel will still maintain profits while pushing the cost of the SOC onto the motherboard manufacturers. They have done this already by introducing the LGA socket with socket 775 CPU’s. It also means motherboard manufacturers may have to limit their catalogue of motherboards and will need to eat up the support costs if there is a problem with the CPU.

Intel and AMD both offer BGA solutions already with their Atom and E series chips, but these are generally seen as budget friendly solutions, where people are happy to sacrifice performance to keep a few bucks in their pockets.

The good news; Intel is not giving up on LGA just yet. With Ivy Bridge and Sandy Bridge both co-existing, Intel envisage Haswell and Broadwell sitting alongside each other, with Haswell being the preferred choice for enthusiast due to probably performance gains and swappable CPU. The product that will follow Broadwell is tipped to be offered in both BGA and LGA solutions as well.

But rest assured, Intel will be watching how Broadwell performs – from both cost and power perspectives. If they feel that it’s better for their profits to dump the LGA socket in favour of BGA, they will. And it’s this attitude that could benefit the struggling AMD, as they are prepared to offer swappable CPUs as long as people are buying them.

Source: PC Perspective | Images courtesy of iBASE and Tweaktown

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Google Drive integration in GMail to allow huge file sharing

Next Story

Lenovo's IdeaPad Yoga 11 on sale early, cheaper, for now

54 Comments

View more comments

Wakers said,
Sigh. Please stop spreading this rumour.

It's this simple - the chip after haswell will be a replacement for the Atom, which is uncompetitive in netbook / tablet / mobile market.

The second chip after Haswell will be LGA. They've even said that when Haswell is released, the existing LGA lineup will get a refresh with greater clock speeds.


That just does not compute as the roadmap is clear: Sandy Bridge (Tock) -> Ivy Bridge (Tick) -> Haswell (Tock) -> Broadwell (Tick) -> Skylake (Tock) -> Skymont (Tick)

The Atom is not part of this design line! If this would be about the Atom successor, we wouldn't be talking about Haswell/Broadwell but about the Cedarview successor [Silvermont, ValleyView, Airmont]...

MFH said,

That just does not compute as the roadmap is clear: Sandy Bridge (Tock) -> Ivy Bridge (Tick) -> Haswell (Tock) -> Broadwell (Tick) -> Skylake (Tock) -> Skymont (Tick)

The Atom is not part of this design line! If this would be about the Atom successor, we wouldn't be talking about Haswell/Broadwell but about the Cedarview successor [Silvermont, ValleyView, Airmont]...

They've said for years that they want to do away with this cycle.

Wakers said,

They've said for years that they want to do away with this cycle.


For years? This cycle is just in place for about 5 years now (started with C2D) and they are following it ever since. Therefor I see NO indication that they will drop that cycle - especially as it has proven to be a really successful model...

Do you have any major source on how Intel is dropping Tick-Tock?

Wakers said,
Sigh. Please stop spreading this rumour.

It's this simple - the chip after haswell will be a replacement for the Atom, which is uncompetitive in netbook / tablet / mobile market.

The second chip after Haswell will be LGA. They've even said that when Haswell is released, the existing LGA lineup will get a refresh with greater clock speeds.

All of this has come from some idiot using Google Translate on a Chinese / Korean / Japanase (I forget which) article, coupled with him apparently being a clot.


This info was from semiaccurate, wasn't it?

NeoPogo said,
People hating progress again....

How is it that ever since 2006/7 taking away choice is perceived as "progress" by the masses?

MFH said,

How is it that ever since 2006/7 taking away choice is perceived as "progress" by the masses?

Can you back up your claim that unlimited choice is always the only path to progress?

Joshie said,

Can you back up your claim that unlimited choice is always the only path to progress?

Counter question: can you prove that limiting choice is progress?

MFH said,

Counter question: can you prove that limiting choice is progress?

Alas! You made the initial claim. By all rules of debate, the burden is yours. By dodging the request, you only cast doubt on your own assertion.

The problem when there really isn't any competition. Intel pretty much rules the roost now with their chips and thus can make up their own rules. I am an AMD fan and will continue to purchase their CPUs since the performance is fine for my needs, but even I know that they are outclassed on the high end by Intel. I had been toying with the idea of going Intel on my next upgrade, but if they lock out the enthusiast crowd, I know I'll be sticking with AMD in all of my future upgrades. Even if they aren't top of the line. At least I know they will still cater to the do-it-yourself geeks like myself.

if the soldered one is way less expensive, and easy to assemble a computer with it. and by that reach a broader range of audiences. so be it. i'm good with it

Intel already releases a new socket almost every year so upgrading your CPU hasn't made that much sense for a while. Not to mention these days you rarely run into a "I wish my CPU was faster" situation with any modern quad core Intel unless you use it for things like 3D rendering or scientific calculation where nothing is fast enough.

I wonder what will happen to other motherboard vendors though. Would I still be able to buy for example a Gigabyte motherboard with an Intel chip of my choosing soldered on it? Would certain motherboard features like FireWire or Thunderbolt or SLI also mean having to spend more on a motherboard with a higher spec CPU than I need, like having the best mobo features only combined with the fastest (and most expensive) CPUs?

You will definitely loose the choice we have today. It's simply not profitable for manufacturers to have MxN different models available...

This is not the first time a non removable CPU board has been released.
~10 years ago when I used to build low budget systems, I used to use some ECS boards with non removable AMD Durons.

..so,, no Intel won't kill off the removable CPU by doing this

If this will finally put the "useless" OEM's out of business I'm all for it. My number one complaint working with PC's have always been OEM's that have flooded the market with the ********* motherboards and components. It is these morons that have given PC's a bad rap, causing system to fail an to be unstable. As long as the quality and reliability is top notch then I don't mind giving up some control. And of course there's always AMD, so all is not lost.

deepfunkysoul said,
If this will finally put the "useless" OEM's out of business I'm all for it.

Well considering that ASUS makes better MoBos than Intel you worst nightmares could come true... Not to mention that to this day Intel doesn't understand how quiet cooling works (their CPU coolers are just a joke...)

MFH said,

Well considering that ASUS makes better MoBos than Intel you worst nightmares could come true... Not to mention that to this day Intel doesn't understand how quiet cooling works (their CPU coolers are just a joke...)

I guess you missed the "useless" OEM's part. Asus is not one of them. I would take an Intel board over Pc chips or ECS anyday.

deepfunkysoul said,

I guess you missed the "useless" OEM's part. Asus is not one of them. I would take an Intel board over Pc chips or ECS anyday.


What are useless OEMs for you? And why should they go away if CPUs are soldered? Lastly if they go away why should the useful not go away with them?

clearly this is just a variant of broadwell meant for TABLETS and ULTRABOOKS where a removable cpu is a pointless thing to have for nearly everybody who buys it.

no doubt there will be versions of broadwell chips and skylake (it's successor) which will be LGA socket based.

How about a Cpu die on the motherboard.
Cpu ON Die On Motherboard, they could call it CONDOM, sounds better than SoC.

and it brings a new meaning to "Intel Inside" haha

They would still have to make the other kind because of 3rd party motherboards. It is highly unlikely Intel is going to put motherbaord makers out of business with such a move. Plenty people still want customized PC's. I had a PC i had 10 years siimply because I could upgarde to 4 different processors. I started with dual Pentium III 450's and end at Pentium III 1.3's and there wree plenty in between.

This solution would be ok for intel made boards of for laptops and OEM desktop in certain categories like the consumer models. But many businesses still update the CPU only where possible.

i build my own computers and have for 15 years.If i can't get a normal cpu then i will have to use the 2 computers and 2 laptops i have for a whole lot longer.I don't use Intel anyway,and i sure don't put it in customers computers

Commenting is disabled on this article.