When Purchasing an Intel Processor Can Be Confusing

[Rob Williams]

When the time rolls around when a PC enthusiast needs (or wants) to build a new computer, choosing the right components more often than not isn't that difficult. For those not too familiar with computer hardware, it's a different story. If minimal research is done, someone could end up purchasing a processor that either far exceeds their needs, or doesn't meet them.

Read the rest of our post and then discuss it here!

 

[marfig]

Indeed the 2600 would seem the ideal processor for me. Never the 2600K. Gets in fact very confusing sometimes. When early this year I upgraded from a 5 year old machine, I had trouble keeping up with the new developments and bothered more than a few forums with what I perceived to be annoying questions, but that ended up generating debate to my surprise.

One note: The Intel vPro is not in fact a discrete technology. It's the name given to the combination of a series of technologies including Intel VT (Intel Virtualization, which includes VT-x and VT-d). So when VT-d is missing, necessarily vPro is too, simply because the requirements aren't met, even if other technologies that compose vPro are present. Just felt the need to clarify that point in case the article leads you to think of vPro as an individual technology that is missing.

Speaking of which, I sort of understand why Intel didn't include VT-d in the K series (but did include VT-x) since Intel establishes the business market as the target for VT-d, not home or enthusiast markets. So they are being coherent here. Of course, we can question whether that target exclusivity makes sense in this day and age when virtualization is becoming so ubiquitous in the enthusiast market. As I see it, it was time they reviewed this little business strategy of them.

 

[DarkStarr]

lol 2600S = more like 2600SLOW 2600K is the top so yea... hahaha Let me go update my sig roflmao

 

[Rob Williams]

Speaking of which, I sort of understand why Intel didn't include VT-d in the K series (but did include VT-x) since Intel establishes the business market as the target for VT-d, not home or enthusiast markets.

That's true, but that doesn't excuse the fact that the feature was taken out. Intel could have left the feature there just fine, but it didn't, and that move is super-odd to me. An enthusiast part should have the kit and kaboodle as far as I am concerned, so to remove a forward-looking feature like VT-d is just... stupid.

As an enthusiast, and knowing this, I'd never purchase the K models if it meant giving up something like that. I use virtualization all the time, and a lot of enthusiasts do as well. So when I get proper support for VT-d, I'd like to actually be able to take advantage of it.

 

[DarkStarr]

Maybe it had issues at high clock speeds? No idea but if so I would understand why it was removed.

 

[Kougar]

Maybe it had issues at high clock speeds? No idea but if so I would understand why it was removed.

It's possible but I think it is unlikely. There just isn't any sense for the highest model part to be sold with less features than the next cheaper model.

I was telling Rob awhile back that I was a bit embarrassed I didn't even notice this issue when Sandy Bridge first launched, I simply assumed (and many sites reported) that the 2600K and 2600 parts were identical save for the unlocked multi.