Intel "Bartlett Lake-S" Flagship Appears, Won't Boot

erek

erek

8-D
2FA
Joined
Dec 19, 2005
Messages
18,884
"Unfortunately, regardless of the SKU or consumer motherboard choice, the platform will not work, and the CPU will not boot, as Intel has restricted "Bartlett Lake-S" to keep it away from consumers. Companies like ASRock have confirmed that the "Bartlett Lake-S" Core 200E will not be available for consumer motherboards and will only be used in the embedded and edge computer sector. This means you can technically buy and use this CPU for any Windows or Linux task, including gaming, but you will have to go through a process of acquiring an industrial-grade motherboard or a mini-PC that suits this platform. This means gaming support will be limited, as Intel explicitly will not bring any optimizations like APO/IPO to the platform for gaming. Instead, it will be treated as a generic x86-64 Intel CPU, just like any other processor. Extracting the maximum gaming performance could also be problematic, as there could be compatibility issues, given that Intel has envisioned other applications for this platform."

1772304520244.png


Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/346875/...s-wont-boot-on-consumer-motherboards#comments
 
erek said:
"Unfortunately, regardless of the SKU or consumer motherboard choice, the platform will not work, and the CPU will not boot, as Intel has restricted "Bartlett Lake-S" to keep it away from consumers. Companies like ASRock have confirmed that the "Bartlett Lake-S" Core 200E will not be available for consumer motherboards and will only be used in the embedded and edge computer sector. This means you can technically buy and use this CPU for any Windows or Linux task, including gaming, but you will have to go through a process of acquiring an industrial-grade motherboard or a mini-PC that suits this platform. This means gaming support will be limited, as Intel explicitly will not bring any optimizations like APO/IPO to the platform for gaming. Instead, it will be treated as a generic x86-64 Intel CPU, just like any other processor. Extracting the maximum gaming performance could also be problematic, as there could be compatibility issues, given that Intel has envisioned other applications for this platform."

View attachment 788400

Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/346875/...s-wont-boot-on-consumer-motherboards#comments
Click to expand...
LOL: "years of blueballing and it gets a lockout from the consumer market for the few peope who still would buy intel CPUs"
 
Not quite sure why they would lock it down. It's not like the performance could be kept a secret.
 
  • Like
Reactions: erek
like this
Funnily enough, DAMMiT's graphics division is taking this stance as well (eg. cock-blocking FSR4, removing mainline driver support for recent GPUs, etc.), in stark contrast to the CPU division
 
erek said:
"Unfortunately, regardless of the SKU or consumer motherboard choice, the platform will not work, and the CPU will not boot, as Intel has restricted "Bartlett Lake-S" to keep it away from consumers. Companies like ASRock have confirmed that the "Bartlett Lake-S" Core 200E will not be available for consumer motherboards and will only be used in the embedded and edge computer sector. This means you can technically buy and use this CPU for any Windows or Linux task, including gaming, but you will have to go through a process of acquiring an industrial-grade motherboard or a mini-PC that suits this platform. This means gaming support will be limited, as Intel explicitly will not bring any optimizations like APO/IPO to the platform for gaming. Instead, it will be treated as a generic x86-64 Intel CPU, just like any other processor. Extracting the maximum gaming performance could also be problematic, as there could be compatibility issues, given that Intel has envisioned other applications for this platform."

View attachment 788400

Source: https://www.techpowerup.com/346875/...s-wont-boot-on-consumer-motherboards#comments
Click to expand...
Buy AMD.
 
<-old
WhoBeDaPlaya said:
Funnily enough, DAMMiT's graphics division is taking this stance as well (eg. cock-blocking FSR4, removing mainline driver support for recent GPUs, etc.), in stark contrast to the CPU division
Click to expand...
I haven't seen that acronym in a long time. 20 years since the buyout. Searching for ATi doesn't even come up in search!
 
HockeyJon said:
Because they are still thinking like a market leader and believe you will buy a much more expensive industrial-grade motherboard in order to access it.
Click to expand...
I doubt that, as it wont be optimized for gaming or those loads so why would anyone run out to buy a high end Supermicro or something and this chip, to game on?

I feel like this is more "We made a new chip, it will perform like crap for day to day people and gaming, so lets just lock it to a specific sector"
 
MrGuvernment said:
I doubt that, as it wont be optimized for gaming or those loads so why would anyone run out to buy a high end Supermicro or something and this chip, to game on?

I feel like this is more "We made a new chip, it will perform like crap for day to day people and gaming, so lets just lock it to a specific sector"
Click to expand...

It could be that, but if the customer wants to overpay for a CPU they don’t need, I’d probably just let them. AMD made the 9950x3D for gamers and it provides essentially not tangible benefit over the 9800x3D for that purpose, but many ended up buying it because it was “the best”, and then end up parking the extra cores anyway.
 
I imagine someone would try to game on those with an w680 asrock board at some point, would be fun to see.

Intel could be saving some money not doing bios/validation down the stack, what consumer launch entail and so on, but could be more about some branding decision, 10-12 pcore on old platform could be noise over the new stuff they want to make and sales.
 
Last edited:
HockeyJon said:
It could be that, but if the customer wants to overpay for a CPU they don’t need, I’d probably just let them. AMD made the 9950x3D for gamers and it provides essentially not tangible benefit over the 9800x3D for that purpose, but many ended up buying it because it was “the best”, and then end up parking the extra cores anyway.
Click to expand...
Ya, called "more money than sense" all to brag...
 
LukeTbk said:
I imagine someone would try to game on those with an w680 asrock board at some point, would be fun to see.

I imagine Intel could be saving some money not doing bios/validation down the stack, what consumer launch entail and so on, but could be more about some branding decision, 10-12 pcore on old platform could be noise over the new stuff they want to make and sales.
Click to expand...
Do you think they might try to go the way of Threadripper where it is locked to OEM boards?
 
MrGuvernment said:
Do you think they might try to go the way of Threadripper where it is locked to OEM boards?
Click to expand...
they do feature intel boot guard, so the vendor and client that want that level of security can use it (and I imagine most will) (as atm/robot/medical machine and others would not like the cpu to work if someone has physical access or change the bios otherwise).

The way intel lock cpus is different I think and make it way more possible to use an Intel cpu on any socket compatible board (the lock is more motherboard level and about restricting unsigned bios less fusing the cpu-motherboard together forever), but those vendors need to make the bios for them to work well for gaming use as you cannot use a custom bios.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top