bit-tech.net

Microsoft Surface Pro 2 gets sneaky CPU upgrade

Microsoft Surface Pro 2 gets sneaky CPU upgrade

Microsoft's Surface Pro 2 tablets now include a more capable process in the Core i5-4300U, adding various new features from transactional memory support to VT-d and vPro.

Microsoft has quietly revised the hardware inside its Surface Pro 2 tablet, replacing the processor with one that offers a significant speed boost along with features that could interest enterprise users especially.

Designed to replace 2012's Surface Pro, the Surface Pro 2 is largely an internal revision. Aside from an improved kickstand and minor casing changes, the biggest difference between the two models is in hardware makeup: the original's Intel Core i5-3317U 1.7GHz 17W processor is replaced with a next-generation Core i5-4200U 1.6GHz 15W chip. As well as offering improved performance despite a lower clockspeed, the chip helped dramatically improve the battery life of the tablet - a major criticism against its predecessor.

Now, Microsoft has changed processors yet again - but without the fanfare of the Surface Pro 2 launch. Models received as warranty replacements and purchase new in the US in the last few days have turned out to feature a Core i5-4300U in place of the expected Core i5-4200U. While still a 15W part, the higher-end chip boasts a boosted clockspeed of 1.9GHz and a slightly faster Intel HD Graphics 4400 integrated graphics processor (IGP) at 1.1GHz to 1GHz.

The change isn't just about boosting performance, however: the i5-4300U includes numerous enterprise-grade features missing from its lower-end equivalent, in particular support for transactional memory operations in the form of the Haswell-specific Intel TSX-NI instruction set extensions. The processor also includes support for the vPro and Intel Trusted Execution Technology security features, again missing from its predecessor, along with the Intel Virtualisation Technology for Direct IO (VT-d) support originally lost in the shift to the Core i5-4200U.

The new processor, in other words, is a considerably more capable beast and includes features that enterprise users - Microsoft's primary target market for the Surface Pro line, in case its moniker wasn't clue enough - will find of particular interest. Quite why the company has made the switch without fanfare, then, is not clear - although once stock of the Core i5-4200U models is depleted, we wouldn't be surprised to see an official announcement of the change being made by the company.

For now, there appears to be no guaranteed way to ensure that a given Surface Pro 2 will include the upgraded processor - beyond hassling suppliers for confirmation that their stock does indeed come from the very newest batches.

59 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Corky42 3rd January 2014, 13:33 Quote
It must suck if you got a Surface Pro 2 for Christmas, now that the Surface Pro 2.5 is hitting retailers.
Maybe break it in some way to get it changed under warranty.
Bede 3rd January 2014, 13:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
It must suck if you got a Surface Pro 2 for Christmas, now that the Surface Pro 2.5 is hitting retailers.
Maybe break it in some way to get it changed under warranty.

Because encouraging fraud is both a legal and moral thing to do.
Corky42 3rd January 2014, 15:09 Quote
Where as upgrading some customers that bought the same model device after the Christmas rush is totally moral of course ? and while I'm no lawyer false advertising and misleading investors is perfectly legit isn't it.
Guinevere 3rd January 2014, 16:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Maybe break it in some way to get it changed under warranty.

Surely this forum has rules in place to prevent the encouragement and endorsements of criminal acts?

Sorry to be a g*t so early in the new year, but purchasing tech gear is always a risk that something new and better will be coming out pretty soon. Just because an upgrade comes out very VERY early does not provide justification for fraud.

How far do your suggested acts of criminal retribution go? You think damaging your product and hoping you get an upgraded replacement is okay? (Even though you'd just get a refurb in truth). How about claiming your tablet was stolen and defrauding your insurers instead? How about intercepting a shipment from Microsoft and stealing direct from source? How about picking the pocket of a MS exec and running up a bill on the company CC? How about mugging another customer and stealing their tablet?

How far is too far?

And by the way, I don't think selling a tablet with spec 'A' is false advertising, even if they upgrade to spec 'B' tomorrow, next week or next year.
Harlequin 3rd January 2014, 16:13 Quote
my galaxy S3 was a great phone - 6 weeks later , they brought out the 4G version - for the same price! did I commit a criminal act to get it replaced? nope - it does and still does what I want it to do.


same with this. my wife has the surface RT and is very happy ; so this has had a speed bump? you wont really notice it as the surface 2 is quick anyway
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 16:15 Quote
The CPU is locked at 2.6GHz... it won't go up to 2.9GHz... so no difference.
Nexxo 3rd January 2014, 16:18 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Where as upgrading some customers that bought the same model device after the Christmas rush is totally moral of course ? and while I'm no lawyer false advertising and misleading investors is perfectly legit isn't it.

SHOCK NEWS! Computer hardware that you buy TODAY may have LOWERED in VALUE and been SUPERCEDED by slightly SUPERIOR hardware in THREE MONTHS' TIME!!!

Oh, wait... Hasn't that always been so?

But go ahead, smash your insanely powerful, highly expensive pinnacle of tablet engineering in a childish tantrum because the tablet of little Johnnie down the street basically runs slightly faster. Seriously, First World Problems.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 16:27 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Where as upgrading some customers that bought the same model device after the Christmas rush is totally moral of course ? and while I'm no lawyer false advertising and misleading investors is perfectly legit isn't it.

Actually, many didn't notice, they already have the faster CPU, is what I am finding.
But in any case, if you look anywhere on Microsoft web site and documentation of the device, you'll see that Microsoft mentioned 'Core i5', with no mention of the actual CPU model.
So no false advertising.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 16:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
The CPU is locked at 2.6GHz... it won't go up to 2.9GHz... so no difference.
Except for the 1.9GHz base clock, to the original Surface Pro 2's 1.6GHz. Oh, and VT-d support, which the Surface Pro had but the Surface Pro 2 did not until the upgrade. Oh, and vPro. And Trusted Execution Technology. Ah, and TSX-NI...

Shall I go back out and come in again?
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 16:40 Quote
Sorry, I was referring to performance.
300MHz increase is nothing but marginal on the base clock.
Those that got the device already, clearly don't mind these missing features, else they would not buy it.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 16:49 Quote
I installed the latest firmware... and it still locked at 2.6GHz... but only when I do a Windows Update check, I have Intel Turbo boost monitor, showing that it does reach at 2.8GHz.... so I guess it can reach it... but under very specific condition(s).

Basically, when using the system regularly, ans not using a software that pushes the CPU... and set to High Performance... Now I can reach 2.8GHz and a minute time 2.9GHz. Normally, it's 2.5-2.6GHz easy.
Under High Performance, you do year the fan kick-in....
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 16:56 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Those that got the device already, clearly don't mind these missing features, else they would not buy it.
You're begging the question, there. Because the buyers of Surface Pro 2s had no choice as to whether they bought one with VT-d, vPro, TSX-NI and TET or one without you're claiming that they obviously didn't mind those features being missing. That completely ignores those buyers who purchased a Surface Pro 2 despite it lacking those features, in the spirit of compromise. To put it another way: if you offered a buyer their choice of Surface Pro 2 with i5-4200U or with i5-4300U and its boosted performance and added features with no difference in price, how many do you think would opt for the i5-4200U?

Have you never bought something which wasn't quite perfect, simply because it's the closest you could find? I don't think I've ever bought something that didn't fit that description - and I certainly wouldn't say I "didn't mind" the shortcomings, but simply that I was willing to put up with them 'cos it was either that or not having the object in question at all.

Anyway, it's all moot because Microsoft has made the move for one reason and one reason only: if it can't convince enterprises to adopt Surface Pro, the format is dead in the water. The introduction of vPro support, and to a lesser extent VT-d and TET, is absolutely critical here - which is why I predicted that we'll see an announcement of the change once stock of the original models is completely exhausted.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 16:58 Quote
They are other offerings, like Dell has a competing product.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 17:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
They are other offerings, like Dell has a competing product.
The Venue 11 Pro? That doesn't have VT-d, or TSX-NI, or vPro or TET either. And it's certainly no competition to the Surface Pro 2: it's an Atom chip, f'gawdsake.

EDIT: My mistake, there is a vPro-enabled, Core i5-based Venue 11 Pro. Trouble is, it isn't out until the 21st of January - so I stand by my statement: the Venue Pro as it was available up to the Surface Pro 2's CPU upgrade was no competition.

EDIT TO THE EDIT: The Core i5 Venue 11 Pro will, it seems, feature the i5-4300Y. That's slower than the i5-4300U of the refreshed Surface Pro 2, especially in IGP performance, but does include VT-d, vPro, TSX-NI and TET. So yes, that will be competition for the Surface Pro 2 when it's released. Not an option for anyone who needed a tablet before the end of this month, mind...
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 17:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
There is a core i5 version
See my edit: not available until the 21st of January, so not competition for anyone who has already bought a Surface Pro 2.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 17:23 Quote
you can buy the pro 1 for really cheap, or get the thinkpad yoga 2.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 17:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
you can buy the pro 1 for really cheap,
Even more compromising there: terrible battery life for a start, and the Core i5-3317U supports neither vPro nor TSX-NI. Nor TET, for that matter. Oh, and you'll have no support for the exciting new accessories which are Surface 2/Surface Pro 2 exclusive, like that strange DJ mixing deck thingy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
or get the thinkpad yoga 2.
You mean the Yoga 2 Pro? That's a 13.3in convertible Ultrabook with a touch-screen, not a tablet with a detachable keyboard. Even then, the middle model has the same i5-4200U as the pre-upgrade Surface Pro 2 - with the same lack of features - so you'd need to go to the top-end version with its i7-4500U. Oh, except that doesn't have vPro. Or VT-d. or TSX-NI. Or TET. And it's £200 more expensive than the Surface Pro 2.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 17:44 Quote
Ok you are pushing things... For battery life, you can get the battery cover when it comes out...
In the mean time, enjoy 6h of battery life of office work, 5h or more demanding task.

The new features are 4th gen Core i series, so if it didn't bother you before, most likely nowt now as well. Plus, teh chances that something actually uses these new features, now, is slim to none. There isn't any large market share, and software maker would work on compatibility mode. and assuming they needed those features, they probably already went and say.. let's get ultrabooks, or wait for next year for Surface Pro 3. As you can see on the interwebs, people aren't pissed off like you are.
The worst you get, is a "oh well", as the performance difference is marginal, and 'no one' cares about Intel extra features... as it was not a decision making. The decision from Microsoft, is either that Intel is discontinued the 4200U, or Microsoft wants to enter the business side... and if they want to do that, there is a bigger problem for them to fix: Make the Surface Pro serviceable... so maybe Pro 3.

Also, NO I mean the Thinkpad Yoga, the one with the pen.

Gareth, stop trying to hate Microsoft, to make an article. Bashing Microsoft for nothing to get click days are over.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 17:48 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Also, NO I mean the Thinkpad Yoga, the one with the pen.
I'm sorry, but Google turns up nothing. Could you provide me with a link to the ThinkPad Yoga 2, by any chance?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Gareth, stop trying to hate Microsoft, to make an article. Bashing Microsoft for nothing to get click days are over.
Who said I hated Microsoft? I'll have to tell my friends on Xbox Live, they'll enjoy the laugh. I'm merely correcting your fallacy above - that people bought the Surface Pro 2 because they "didn't mind" it not having certain features. That isn't going to be so in all cases, as I've proven that if people were looking to buy a Windows 8(.1) tablet towards the end of 2013 they didn't have a choice as to whether they had those features. No tablet with those features existed - until Microsoft quietly upgraded the CPU in the Surface Pro 2.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
The new features are 4th gen Core i series, so if it didn't bother you before, most likely nowt now as well.
No, they're not. Oh, TSX-NI is, sure. But vPro isn't Haswell-exclusive. Neither is VT-d. Or TET.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Plus, teh chances that something actually uses these new features, now, is slim to none.
vPro management software has existed for a long time. As has VT-d - my hypervisor of choice, VirtualBox, supports VT-d just fine. TET, too, is fully supported in most modern operating systems.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
As you can see on the interwebs, people aren't pissed off like you are.
Projecting much? I'm in no way annoyed at Microsoft's move here. On the contrary, I think it's good that they've upgraded the Surface Pro 2 to be better suited to enterprise use. I have no horse in this race: I don't own a Surface tablet of any kind, and I have no intention of changing that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
The worst you get, is a "oh well", as the performance difference is marginal, and 'no one' cares about Intel extra features... as it was not a decision making.
Really? 'Cos I'm seeing different. Heck, in this very thread there's a chap suggesting trying to get a warranty replacement just to get the new processor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
The decision from Microsoft, is either that Intel is discontinued the 4200U
It really, really hasn't, you know.
Corky42 3rd January 2014, 17:51 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guinevere
Sorry to be a g*t so early in the new year, but purchasing tech gear is always a risk that something new and better will be coming out pretty soon. Just because an upgrade comes out very VERY early does not provide justification for fraud.

How far is too far?

And by the way, I don't think selling a tablet with spec 'A' is false advertising, even if they upgrade to spec 'B' tomorrow, next week or next year.
So when a customer takes their Surface Pro 2 back because Microsoft's firmware update bricked it and it gets it exchanged for a Surface Pro 2.5 that's OK ? But if you do something that warrants an exchange that's not ? And i didn't claim its false advertising changing spec A for spec B, i merely pointed out Microsoft has been sued for false advertising in the past so they aren't exactly the saints most people make them out as.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harlequin
my galaxy S3 was a great phone - 6 weeks later , they brought out the 4G version - for the same price! did I commit a criminal act to get it replaced? nope - it does and still does what I want it to do.
And one was sold as the galaxy S3 3G, and the other sold as the galaxy S3 4G so people knew what they were buying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
SHOCK NEWS! Computer hardware that you buy TODAY may have LOWERED in VALUE and been SUPERCEDED by slightly SUPERIOR hardware in THREE MONTHS' TIME!!!
And when new hardware comes out its given a new name so people know what they are buying and are not paying their money for a lucky dip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Actually, many didn't notice, they already have the faster CPU, is what I am finding.
But in any case, if you look anywhere on Microsoft web site and documentation of the device, you'll see that Microsoft mentioned 'Core i5', with no mention of the actual CPU model.
So no false advertising.
As explained above i didn't claim the false advertising was specific to the change of specs, merely that Microsoft is far from the saints people like to proclaim
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 17:58 Quote
Never mind.. I got confused with the CPU model of these ThinkPad Yoga . Well if Lenovo doesn't have it , nor does Dell, nor does HP, and all opt to get Atom or Core i series without these features, even in the business line, it means that there is most likely no market for it. I mean you think that at least 1 would get it... well you have Dell... but Dell is wants the Ultra Low voltage model, as it uses a fanless design tablet.

I believe I didn't convey my point properly. My point was that I don't see that these features were a decision making one when buying the Surface Pro 2. And if it was.. then it was probably down the list... as you would opt for an ultrabook instead, or wait for the Dell Venue Pro 11, or some other product.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 17:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42

As explained above i didn't claim the false advertising was specific to the change of specs, merely that Microsoft is far from the saints people like to proclaim

My apologies, I miss understood your post.. didn't get my breakfast when I answered.
:/
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 18:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Never mind.. I got confused with the CPU model of these ThinkPad Yoga .
And the model number, it would seem. So, we're agreed that there was no tablet available prior to the end of 2013 which included all the processor features of the refreshed Surface Pro 2, then?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Well if Lenovo doesn't have it , nor does Dell, nor does HP, and all opt to get Atom or Core i series without these features, even in the business line, it means that there is most likely no market for it.
An interesting conclusion. Why, then, is Dell about to launch a model with these features - and why has Microsoft updated the design to include them? If there's no market, wouldn't they have been better off leaving the cheaper, less feature-rich processors in place? I know of several enterprises - the sort of sizes where you'd do an order for 600 tablets as a trial run - where vPro support is an absolute necessity, without which no x86 hardware is going anywhere near the staff.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
I believe I didn't convey my point properly. My point was that I don't see that these features were a decision making one when buying the Surface Pro 2. And if it was.. then it was probably down the list... as you would opt for an ultrabook instead, or wait for the Dell Venue Pro 11, or some other product.
If that was your point, then no: you didn't convey it properly, or I failed to read it properly. Am I saying that everyone who bought a Surface Pro 2 would have instead opted for Similar Tablet From Another Company Instead if it had the features of the refreshed Surface Pro 2? No. I'm not even saying that everyone who bought the original Surface Pro 2 would benefit from most: TSX-NI is sparsely supported, VT-d is only of interest if you're doing virtualisation, vPro is pretty much pointless outside the enterprise... It's only really the speed boost that would help across the board, plus arguably TET.

What I was attempting to do was correct your fallacy of claiming, as I interpreted it, that nobody would benefit from the upgrade. You've already proven yourself wrong when you stated that the new chip is locked at 2.6GHz, showing that it does indeed hit 2.9GHz when required. I only wanted you to see that for selected people who bought the Surface Pro 2 - those who use virtualisation, those who need transactional memory support, those who use their device in a corporate or enterprise environment with vPro awareness, and so forth - the revised model has significantly fewer compromises, and had it existed at the original point of purchase would have been the logical choice over the actual Surface Pro 2 as-was.

Y'get me?
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 18:20 Quote
Model number of the thinkPad does exists:
http://shop.lenovo.com/ca/en/laptops/thinkpad/yoga-series/yoga/
I thought it had a different Core i5 CPU.

All Ultra Voltage Core i5 have these features, Dell is getting that as the tablet uses a fanless design. So, it will have these features.

The reason why Microsoft switch is unknown for certain... at least not yet. But what I can assume, as the the 4300U is the same price, and released AFTER the Surface Pro 2 development stage, it could be that Intel is discontinued the 4200U (the other OEMs probably did a mass order already, while Microsoft is keeping it's warehouses empty, to avoid what happened with the Surface gen 1 line of products), or it could be a demand thing.. Intel is not pushing them out fast enough, as other are using it, so Microsoft switch the CPU to the 4300U which no one or few are using... so Intel can deliver to Microsoft.
bawjaws 3rd January 2014, 18:21 Quote
Good to see Gareth has chilled out for 2014 ;)
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 18:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree

What I was attempting to do was correct your fallacy of claiming, as I interpreted it, that nobody would benefit from the upgrade. You've already proven yourself wrong when you stated that the new chip is locked at 2.6GHz, showing that it does indeed hit 2.9GHz when required. I only wanted you to see that for selected people who bought the Surface Pro 2 - those who use virtualisation, those who need transactional memory support, those who use their device in a corporate or enterprise environment with vPro awareness, and so forth - the revised model has significantly fewer compromises, and had it existed at the original point of purchase would have been the logical choice over the actual Surface Pro 2 as-was.

Y'get me?

I corrected myself, as I reported what I was testing from my Surface Pro 2. I am not doing testing like this as a career, or hobby. I went as I go, after further thinking and testing, I corrected myself. Take the info as is. Feel free to do more in depth testing and perhaps more properly than I did.

And by 'nobody' and I meant in a generalized way... in life they are always exceptions... so calm down. I am sure you'll find some one that loves monochrome (green and black) CRT monitor, budget class, where it flickers like no tomorrow, and push how its far superior of any monitor released afterwards.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 18:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Model number of the thinkPad does exists:
http://shop.lenovo.com/ca/en/laptops/thinkpad/yoga-series/yoga/
That's the Thinkpad Yoga. You told me to look for the Thinkpad Yoga 2, which doesn't exist. Remember? Post 18 in the thread. "you can buy the pro 1 for really cheap, or get the thinkpad yoga 2" (my emphasis.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
All Ultra Voltage Core i5 have these features, Dell is getting that as the tablet uses a fanless design. So, it will have these features.
But the Core i5-4300U isn't an Ultra Low Voltage model, and the Surface Pro 2 isn't fanless.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
The reason why Microsoft switch is unknown for certain... at least not yet. But what I can assume, as the the 4300U is the same price, and released AFTER the Surface Pro 2 development stage, it could be that Intel is discontinued the 4200U
I can tell you now that Intel is categorically not discontinuing the 4200U right now. It may do in the future, but it isn't doing now. I told you so upthread, in fact.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bawjaws
Good to see Gareth has chilled out for 2014 ;)
Never give up! NEVER SURRENDER!
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
I corrected myself, as I reported what I was testing from my Surface Pro.
Isn't that what I just said?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
And by 'nobody' and I meant in a generalized way... in life they are always exceptions... so calm down. I am sure you'll find some one that loves monochrome (green and black) CRT monitor, budget class, where it flickers like no tomorrow, and push how its far superior of any monitor released afterwards.
I've actually got a monochrome monitor (amber, rather than green) on my desk right now. Buy the Custom PC after next to find out why!
Nexxo 3rd January 2014, 18:30 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
So when a customer takes their Surface Pro 2 back because Microsoft's firmware update bricked it and it gets it exchanged for a Surface Pro 2.5 that's OK ? But if you do something that warrants an exchange that's not ?
If you deliberately do something that warrants an exchange, it is not.

Microsoft has an obligation to sell you a working product. If the company borks it by one of their firmware updates (which we can assume is not deliberate, BTW), then they have an obligation to fix it or substitute it with a working model. Microsoft does not have an obligation to fix or replace your product if it gets broken by mistreatment or neglect on your part. That is your responsibility.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
And when new hardware comes out its given a new name so people know what they are buying and are not paying their money for a lucky dip.
But they are not. They are buying a product with advertised spec. If that spec is uprated somewhere along the way, that is a bonus, but the other costumers were not short-changed --they got exactly what they thought they were buying.

Products undergo revisions all the time. A lot of those revisions may be improvements and removals of flaws and weaknesses that became apparent only during use over time. Most of these revisions we never even find out about.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 18:35 Quote
[QUOTE=Gareth Halfacree;3475017But the Core i5-4300U isn't an Ultra Low Voltage model, and the Surface Pro 2 isn't fanless.[/quote]
Dell does not make the Surface Pro 2.

[quote]
I can tell you now that Intel is categorically not discontinuing the 4200U right now.[/QUOTE]
Well you have more sources, than m and contacts, so you know best.. I was providing assumptions.
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 18:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Dell does not make the Surface Pro 2.
And Lenovo doesn't make a Thinkpad Yoga 2. Difference is: I never claimed Dell made the Surface Pro 2, did I?
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Well you have more sources, than m and contacts, so you know best.. I was providing assumptions.
You're familiar with the aphorism regarding assuming, yes? It makes an ass out of you and a guy called Ming.

EDIT: Oh, and your claim that all Ultra Low Voltage Core chips include the features of the new Surface Pro 2? Yeah, they actually don't. There's a Core i5-4200Y, which is the ULV variant of the i5-4200U - and, unsurprisingly given its model number, it doesn't include TSX-NI, vPro, VT-d, or TET.
GoodBytes 3rd January 2014, 19:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
And Lenovo doesn't make a Thinkpad Yoga 2. Difference is: I never claimed Dell made the Surface Pro 2, did I?
You did.
Quote:

But the Core i5-4300U isn't an Ultra Low Voltage model, and the Surface Pro 2 isn't fanless.
I was talking about the Dell choosing Ultra Low Voltage CPU.

Quote:

EDIT: Oh, and your claim that all Ultra Low Voltage Core chips include the features of the new Surface Pro 2? Yeah, they actually don't. There's a Core i5-4200Y, which is the ULV variant of the i5-4200U - and, unsurprisingly given its model number, it doesn't include TSX-NI, vPro, VT-d, or TET.
k
Gareth Halfacree 3rd January 2014, 19:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
You did. I was talking about the Dell choosing Ultra Low Voltage CPU.
And I was talking about Microsoft switching chips too. Funny how conversations work, innit? You stated that Dell added vPro et al to its tablet because it didn't have a choice, owing to the move to ULV chips; I stated that couldn't account for Microsoft doing the same, 'cos Microsoft isn't moving to ULV chips. Y'see? At no point did I say "hurr, durr, Microsoft make Dell's tablets!!!111eleven" Whereas you did claim Lenovo make a Thinkpad Yoga 2, did you not?

Plus there's the fact that, as I mentioned, there are ULV chips without vPro et al Dell could have chosen - meaning your claim is, at best, mistaken.

Is that any clearer?
Snips 3rd January 2014, 21:56 Quote
Any chance of an official line from Intel on the switch Gareth? We may have assumed it was Microsoft's doing but it could have just been offered on a plate by Intel, if there was some kind of underlying problem with the chip?
Corky42 4th January 2014, 02:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
If you deliberately do something that warrants an exchange, it is not.
Yea because the world is full of honest, moral people and company's isn't it
Like politicians claiming for expenses they ain't entitled to, or company's avoiding taxes, or bankers fixing interest rates.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Microsoft has an obligation to sell you a working product. If the company borks it by one of their firmware updates (which we can assume is not deliberate, BTW), then they have an obligation to fix it or substitute it with a working model. Microsoft does not have an obligation to fix or replace your product if it gets broken by mistreatment or neglect on your part. That is your responsibility.
Well in fact they don't mention anything concerning a botched firmware update, well unless you count that as "materials or workmanship"
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
But they are not. They are buying a product with advertised spec. If that spec is uprated somewhere along the way, that is a bonus, but the other costumers were not short-changed --they got exactly what they thought they were buying.

Products undergo revisions all the time. A lot of those revisions may be improvements and removals of flaws and weaknesses that became apparent only during use over time. Most of these revisions we never even find out about.
Well they may have got exactly what they thought they were buying, but that doesn't mean they will be happy to know their 2 month old tablet is slower than ones you can buy now, and doesn't come with TSX, vPro, TXT and VT-d.
And while you are correct in saying products undergo revisions all the time, most of the time this is as you say to fix problems found over extended use and not to add new features such as what has happen with the Surface Pro 2.5
GoodBytes 4th January 2014, 02:37 Quote
If you buy what you need, then the marginal performance boost should not be a problem.
And, as the missing features, well you should know about that, before hand.

New firmware coming up Jan 14, but nothing official, yet.
Every company makes mistakes. It's never acceptable, they don't do this on purpose... they have no gains from doing this.
Bede 4th January 2014, 02:42 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Yea because the world is full of honest, moral people and company's isn't it
Like politicians claiming for expenses they ain't entitled to, or company's avoiding taxes, or bankers fixing interest rates.

That's pathetic. You name two widely publicised acts of criminality, that people have gone to prison for, and then suggest that because that happens it's ok to commit other fraud.

It's like when chavs claim for whiplash - it seems like a victimless crime to them, but the end result of so many people doing it is that car insurance costs go up to compensate.
Corky42 4th January 2014, 03:36 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bede
That's pathetic. You name two widely publicised acts of criminality, that people have gone to prison for, and then suggest that because that happens it's ok to commit other fraud.
So you have never heard of lead by example then.
If big company's and public figures can commit large scale fraud for billions is it any wonder people think its OK ?

Maybe in this perfect world you live in all the politicians, bankers and tax avoidance (perfectly legal BTW) have been locked up. But sadly in the real world that the rest of us live in very few have served a custodial sentence.
RichCreedy 4th January 2014, 10:47 Quote
is it possible they wanted the i5-4300u originally, but due to supply issues had to go for the 4200u to get to market? both processors were released q3. and anyway, don't Microsoft state that specification may change from time to time
Nexxo 4th January 2014, 12:02 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Yea because the world is full of honest, moral people and company's isn't it
Like politicians claiming for expenses they ain't entitled to, or company's avoiding taxes, or bankers fixing interest rates.
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise that one's own morality was dependent on that of others. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go and steal me some stuff because others do it too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Well in fact they don't mention anything concerning a botched firmware update, well unless you count that as "materials or workmanship"
The Sales of Goods act (1979) states that the goods sold must function as per their intended purpose. If a firmware update shops them from functioning, it is the manufacturer's responsibility to fix or exchange the product.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Well they may have got exactly what they thought they were buying, but that doesn't mean they will be happy to know their 2 month old tablet is slower than ones you can buy now, and doesn't come with TSX, vPro, TXT and VT-d.
And while you are correct in saying products undergo revisions all the time, most of the time this is as you say to fix problems found over extended use and not to add new features such as what has happen with the Surface Pro 2.5
That's not Microsoft's problem. They got what they understood they were buying. The Honda Civic 2011 revision, although still the same model, included a lot of little extras that my Honda Civic 2009 model did not have. Such is life.
Gareth Halfacree 4th January 2014, 12:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Snips
Any chance of an official line from Intel on the switch Gareth? We may have assumed it was Microsoft's doing but it could have just been offered on a plate by Intel, if there was some kind of underlying problem with the chip?
I'll drop 'em a line, although they obviously won't speak for Microsoft's decision - but they might let slip something that hasn't appeared on their publicly-accessible EOL notification list yet. Could be a while before I get an official response, though: at this time of year, in the run-up to CES, PRs are notoriously difficult to pin down!
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichCreedy
is it possible they wanted the i5-4300u originally, but due to supply issues had to go for the 4200u to get to market?
Perfectly possible, yes - I'll ask Intel about relative supply of both parts, but they're usually pretty cagey about that sort of thing so I may not get a firm response.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
The Honda Civic 2011 revision, although still the same model, included a lot of little extras that my Honda Civic 2009 model did not have. Such is life.
That's a bit disingenuous, Nexxo: your Honda Civic 2009 didn't get superseded by the upgraded model until two years after release; the Surface Pro 2, on the other hand, barely made it three months before being quietly and, despite what some might say, quite considerably upgraded. Is that Microsoft's prerogative to do so? Absolutely. Is it in any way similar to Honda upgrading the Civic after two years? I'd say not. Add to that the fact that dealers distinguish between the Honda Civic 2009 and Honda Civic 2011 model years - in other words, it's impossible to buy a Honda Civic 2009 thinking you were buying a 2011 - while Microsoft and its retail partners do not do the same for the two models of Surface Pro 2, and I think that argument falls down.
Corky42 4th January 2014, 12:43 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Oh I'm sorry, I didn't realise that one's own morality was dependent on that of others. Now if you'll excuse me, I'll go and steal me some stuff because others do it too.
And where does a person get their morals from ?
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy gives the following description
Quote:
The term “morality” can be used either
descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward by a society or,
some other group, such as a religion, or
accepted by an individual for her own behavior or
normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
The Sales of Goods act (1979) states that the goods sold must function as per their intended purpose. If a firmware update shops them from functioning, it is the manufacturer's responsibility to fix or exchange the product.
No. The manufacturer isn't responsible your rights are against the retailer – the company that sold you the product – not the manufacturer, and so you must make any claim against the retailer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
That's not Microsoft's problem. They got what they understood they were buying. The Honda Civic 2011 revision, although still the same model, included a lot of little extras that my Honda Civic 2009 model did not have. Such is life.
Well it is Microsoft's problem if people start to think im not buying one of those as they may add a load of new features a couple of months after i bought one.
Its expected that a 2011 car may differ from a car two years older, but we are not talking years here we are talking about two months, should we call one Surface Pro 2 the Surface Pro 2 October revision and the other one the Surface Pro 2 December revision ? How about we name each Surface Pro 2 after the month it was sold like we do with years for cars ?

We could even put a plate on them to show what month it was made in the same way we use licenses plates to identify the year when a car was made.
Nexxo 4th January 2014, 13:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
That's a bit disingenuous, Nexxo: your Honda Civic 2009 didn't get superseded by the upgraded model until two years after release; the Surface Pro 2, on the other hand, barely made it three months before being quietly and, despite what some might say, quite considerably upgraded. Is that Microsoft's prerogative to do so? Absolutely. Is it in any way similar to Honda upgrading the Civic after two years? I'd say not. Add to that the fact that dealers distinguish between the Honda Civic 2009 and Honda Civic 2011 model years - in other words, it's impossible to buy a Honda Civic 2009 thinking you were buying a 2011 - while Microsoft and its retail partners do not do the same for the two models of Surface Pro 2, and I think that argument falls down.
Actually the 2009 and 2011 model look virtually identical. The latter does come with hidden extras. And of course, in the computer world things move faster.

The point remains: if Microsoft sells the Pro 2 with an X list of specs, and people buy it in awareness and acceptance of those specs, then it does not matter if Microsoft later ups those specs. Otherwise how long should Microsoft leave it before upgrading? How long should Apple have left it to go from iPad 3 to the iPad 4? What difference does it make to existing owners whether their model is superseded three months or twelve months down the line? Or is it about a subjective feeling that they paid to be top dog for more than a few months? I mean, for real?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
And where does a person get their morals from ?
The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy gives the following description
As a psychologist I could go on for a few hours about that, but I won't. If you are arguing that it is OK to deliberately break your tablet to get an upgrade under warranty, then that's your moral standard and I'm not going to argue with you about those. But the law says it is just as wrong as the acts that you hold up as example, and which incidentally people go to prison for. Just sayin'.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
No. The manufacturer isn't responsible your rights are against the retailer – the company that sold you the product – not the manufacturer, and so you must make any claim against the retailer.
And who do you think that the retailer claims against? Same difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Well it is Microsoft's problem if people start to think im not buying one of those as they may add a load of new features a couple of months after i bought one.
Its expected that a 2011 car may differ from a car two years older, but we are not talking years here we are talking about two months, should we call one Surface Pro 2 the Surface Pro 2 October revision and the other one the Surface Pro 2 December revision ? How about we name each Surface Pro 2 after the month it was sold like we do with years for cars ?

We could even put a plate on them to show what month it was made in the same way we use licenses plates to identify the year when a car was made.
It is not a clever move by Microsoft, but it does not warrant the huge outrage either. People got what they understood they bought, and they got an outstanding piece of kit. Then the world moved on. The wise master says: be an early adopter at your own risk. He also says: stop acting like a spoilt brat and count your blessings.
Gareth Halfacree 4th January 2014, 13:24 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Actually the 2009 and 2011 model look virtually identical.
I didn't say they didn't; I said that dealers distinguish between model years. Doesn't matter how identical they look from the outside: one is on their books as the Honda Civic 2009, the other as the Honda Civic 2011. They're also both advertised under those headings. The Surface Pro 2, on the other hand? Both models are listed in stock control systems under identical SKUs. See the distinction?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
And of course, in the computer world things move faster.
By a factor of eight? You sure about that? Wouldn't we be on the iPad 27 by now if that were the case?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
The point remains: if Microsoft sells the Pro 2 with an X list of specs, and people buy it in awareness and acceptance of those specs, then it does not matter if Microsoft later ups those specs. Otherwise how long should Microsoft leave it before upgrading? How long should Apple have left it to go from iPad 3 to the iPad 4?
You're missing something there: what if Apple hadn't gone from the iPad 3 to the iPad 4, but from the iPad 3 to the iPad 3? What's that? You can't tell the difference? Neither can anybody buying a Surface Pro 2. People's complaint here is that Microsoft isn't making a distinction; had the company released the new model as a Surface Pro 2 Business Edition, so you knew exactly what you were buying when you went into the shop, I bet there wouldn't be as many complaints. As it stands, if you go into a shop tomorrow to buy a Surface Pro 2 you'll have no idea whether you're getting the old processor or the new processor. That's suboptimal, wouldn't you agree?

Would you still be happy if you bought your Honda Civic 2009 at launch, then less than three months later Honda upgraded the engine considerably without changing the model year, model number, or telling anyone about the change while keeping the price the same? 'Cos I wouldn't. I'd be asking for a partial refund, I reckon.
Nexxo 4th January 2014, 13:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
As it stands, if you go into a shop tomorrow to buy a Surface Pro 2 you'll have no idea whether you're getting the old processor or the new processor. That's suboptimal, wouldn't you agree?
I would agree that is a problem, because in effect you don't know what you are buying.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gareth Halfacree
Would you still be happy if you bought your Honda Civic 2009 at launch, then less than three months later Honda upgraded the engine considerably without changing the model year, model number, or telling anyone about the change while keeping the price the same? 'Cos I wouldn't. I'd be asking for a partial refund, I reckon.
I wouldn't, because I knew what I was buying at the time, even if three months later things may change. If the new model gets mixed in with the old and it is pot luck which one you get, then I'd object.
Corky42 4th January 2014, 14:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
The point remains: if Microsoft sells the Pro 2 with an X list of specs, and people buy it in awareness and acceptance of those specs, then it does not matter if Microsoft later ups those specs. Otherwise how long should Microsoft leave it before upgrading? How long should Apple have left it to go from iPad 3 to the iPad 4? What difference does it make to existing owners whether their model is superseded three months or twelve months down the line? Or is it about a subjective feeling that they paid to be top dog for more than a few months? I mean, for real?
Its not about when a previous model is superseded its about distinguishing between one model and another so the customer knows what they are paying their money for and not taking a lucky dip.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
As a psychologist I could go on for a few hours about that, but I won't. If you are arguing that it is OK to deliberately break your tablet to get an upgrade under warranty, then that's your moral standard and I'm not going to argue with you about those. But the law says it is just as wrong as the acts that you hold up as example, and which incidentally people go to prison for. Just sayin'.
Sorry but at any point did I say I would break it or anyone else should ? IIRC i said...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Maybe break it in some way to get it changed under warranty.
And just to clarify maybe has the definition of Perhaps; possibly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
And who do you think that the retailer claims against? Same difference.
No. It all depends on what legal or otherwise agreement the retails has with the manufacturer who is under no obligation to reimburse the retailer should they wish.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
It is not a clever move by Microsoft, but it does not warrant the huge outrage either. People got what they understood they bought, and they got an outstanding piece of kit. Then the world moved on. The wise master says: be an early adopter at your own risk. He also says: stop acting like a spoilt brat and count your blessings.
Just not as "outstanding" as one bought 2-3 months down the line.
Nexxo 4th January 2014, 14:29 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Sorry but at any point did I say I would break it or anyone else should ? IIRC i said...

And just to clarify maybe has the definition of Perhaps; possibly.
Yup, and then you went on to defend that action, and I went on to challenge it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
No. It all depends on what legal or otherwise agreement the retails has with the manufacturer who is under no obligation to reimburse the retailer should they wish.
A manufacturer has product liability towards the supplier/retailer as well as the customer.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Just not as "outstanding" as one bought 2-3 months down the line.
Isn't that always the case with technology?
Corky42 4th January 2014, 17:04 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Yup, and then you went on to defend that action, and I went on to challenge it.
Sorry maybe i missed the part where i defended that action, and even if i did im not sure a possibility can be defended as until it happens it remains exactly that, a possibility not an action.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
A manufacturer has product liability towards the supplier/retailer as well as the customer.
No. The only liability a manufacturer has with a retailer is when individuals are harmed by an unsafe product, a retailer has no legal standing if the manufacturer decides its not going to reimburse the retailer for exchanging a product not covered by its warranty
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Isn't that always the case with technology?
When a new product comes out yes, but as has been said many times this isn't being sold as a new product so the customer has no way of knowing if they are getting the Surface Pro 2 or the 2.5
ArcAngeL 4th January 2014, 19:58 Quote
With the Intel 4400, you should be able to achieve intel intru 3d display output.
Nexxo 4th January 2014, 20:09 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
Sorry maybe i missed the part where i defended that action, and even if i did im not sure a possibility can be defended as until it happens it remains exactly that, a possibility not an action.
"But they're bad guys too!", remember? And of course the morality of a possible action can be defended or challenged. You know, like hypothetically?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
No. The only liability a manufacturer has with a retailer is when individuals are harmed by an unsafe product, a retailer has no legal standing if the manufacturer decides its not going to reimburse the retailer for exchanging a product not covered by its warranty.
So you're saying that a manufacturer is liable for faulty products (as in: not fit for purpose, or malfunctioning)?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Corky42
When a new product comes out yes, but as has been said many times this isn't being sold as a new product so the customer has no way of knowing if they are getting the Surface Pro 2 or the 2.5

Now they don't, but when they bought one before this upgrade occurred they knew exactly what they were getting, and for those customers it does not matter whether an improved version has come on the scene a few months later.
PaulC2K 4th January 2014, 20:34 Quote
Could someone who isnt discussing morals, and squabbling over alternative i5 tablets past and present... point me in the direction of somewhere to discuss this article?

I came into this thread not looking at the comment count, read most of it and thought to myself 'probably nobody else gives a damn anyway' and find 50 posts! wow, i was mistaken... except there isnt even 1 post in all this discussing the article.
Corky42 4th January 2014, 20:45 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
"But they're bad guys too!", remember? And of course the morality of a possible action can be defended or challenged. You know, like hypothetically?
Yes and i also remember saying that is it any wonder people think its OK to commit fraud when they see politicians and big company's doing the exact same thing and getting away with it, apart from the odd time someone is made an example of.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
So you're saying that a manufacturer is liable for faulty products (as in: not fit for purpose, or malfunctioning)?
Well that depends on if we are still discussing the sales of goods act, or the manufactures warranty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nexxo
Now they don't, but when they bought one before this upgrade occurred they knew exactly what they were getting, and for those customers it does not matter whether an improved version has come on the scene a few months later.
And you know this how ? either way selling the same model of product but with two very different feature sets and CPU speeds causes nothing but resentment and confusion about the product.
Nexxo 4th January 2014, 21:03 Quote
I'm saying that when you buy a product knowing what it is you're buying, you have no entitlement to a free upgrade when an improved version of said product comes out somewhere down the line, whether that is in a year's time or in two months' time. Have a snit, argue that "they're doing it too!" and all the other overentitled child reasoning, but that doesn't change the fact it is overentitled child reasoning.
Corky42 5th January 2014, 08:55 Quote
You know if you have to result to insulting people some would say its you acting childish, but that's kinda par for the course with you isn't it.

Either way you seem to be happy with, to use your example. Being sold a 2009 spec Honda Civic re-badged as a 2011 model, after all they are both cars and you knew you were buying a car so you're happy even though the next customer gets the upgraded version of your car for the same money.
Nexxo 5th January 2014, 10:38 Quote
No, I have already agreed with Gareth that it is a problem when the two versions are sold concurrently without the buyer knowing which one they are getting.

I'm sorry if you feel insulted if I criticise an attitude that you illustrated (I mean, really?). I was under the impression that we were talking about hypotheticals.
greypilgers 5th January 2014, 14:48 Quote
Ha ha ha ha... I pity you all, arguing over the semantics of a few throwaway comments made days ago, because none of you can bear to be proved wrong... Ha ha ha ha ha ha haa..... The article reported what happened, and people have different views on its implications, but bickering for days is just silly.
NethLyn 5th January 2014, 20:39 Quote
It all depends on whether Intel have something new to announce in all their markets, isn't the end of January normally when the firesale happens and they release what's new?

If so then it's Microsoft's stupid idea to use the same name on a different and better product and make customers play a lottery. I know I wouldn't bother with one until all the old stock was cleared/returned and that could take until Easter, if not later.
Nexxo 6th January 2014, 08:57 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by greypilgers
Ha ha ha ha... I pity you all, arguing over the semantics of a few throwaway comments made days ago, because none of you can bear to be proved wrong... Ha ha ha ha ha ha haa..... The article reported what happened, and people have different views on its implications, but bickering for days is just silly.

Dude. This is Bit-Tech forums! :p
faugusztin 6th January 2014, 12:01 Quote
To be honest, from those features VT-d is super-pointless in a tablet. Why, you may ask. Well, what devices can you assign to virtual machine via VT-d on a tablet ? SATA controller ? Uhm no, that needs to stay with the base OS, or it wouldn't run. Graphics adapter ? Same problem. And we could go through all components of Surface Pro, and you would find there is actually nothing you can use VT-d for. There are simply no PCI-E devices in Surface Pro you could take from the base OS and assign it to the virtual machine.

And for assigning USB to the VM, you don't even need VT-d. And VT-x for CPU virtualization is there in older CPU too.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums