Intel uses the exact same silicon for both SKUs, one has some of the silicon just disabled/burned off. It's a concious decision to sell basically exact same hardware at different price points.
Gusar is right, you have bought that processor knowing its limits, why are you angry now? It would make sense if you bought a processor with that feature and it didn't work, but this isn't the case..
p.s. if you notice almost every producer sells crippled versions of its products to differentiate price ranges.
Previously Black series vs normal phenoms.
There are two methods to produce segmentation:
- produce one full featured design and cut the parts out. Top-down.
1) can mix damaged chips
2) easier to support by means of drivers etc, due to same "housing"
3) cheaper to make, because they are made en masse and cut down as needed
4) many other needed parts match all crippled models
5) as effect, longer support cycle because cheap to maintain
1) no one likes crippling
2) more raw material waste
3) more energy loss
- produce many designs, designed for each specific case. Bottom-up.
1) can pack more chips on single waffle, less raw material waste
2) more energy efficient
1) they actually have nothing to de-cripple. They are crippled from design :)
2) harder to maintain, smaller support window. For example, compare G92 based nvidia 8800-gtx295 vs HD2xxx-4xxx.
3) harder to test, more bugs
4) development costs more, more wastes due to incorrect overproduction
* do not perform any segmentation, only filter chips based on their readings and clocks.
Thats what I prefer.
But I don't think this should interest you.
You just pick good price and all features you need and you are done. Let manufacturers decide how they implement it - crippled after or crippled on paper, in the end it plays little role.