Intel CPU Binning process and hyper threading

So I've been reading textbooks on micro processors and read up on hyper threading works (shared registers etc) and was a bit more curious about the intel binning process.

I know that CPUs that can't sustain the higher clock speeds and binned to mobile chips, chips that have 2 failed cores etc.

but I got wondering on the i5/i7 binning, it would make sense that intel would only want to produce one chip and then bin that into the other chips, but i5s physically lack certain extensions, have less cache per core etc and don't have hyper threading.

Now what I'm wondering is do desktop i5s have hyper threading (I know my mobile ivy in my thinkpad does) but intel disables (physically binning it? microcode disabled? etc) it because they weren't good enough to be an i7 but not bad enough to be something else.

anyone with knowledge on this subject, your answer would be much appreciated.

So after a bit of more research the internet is saying i5s are i7s with defective L3.

so does that mean intel is intentionally disabling hyper threading just to gimp the i5s?

It makes sense to be that... Realistically, manufacturing one chip and making 10 products from that one chip is cheaper, than having 10 production lines for each product. However, I believe they have 2 lines...
One for hyperthreading products, such as i7/i3 and one for non ht, i5 and pentiums. Why? You said it yourself. It's not just the hyperthreading. There are other differences between i7 and i5...
But that is just my speculation...
It would be really interesting to me too, to know how this thing works in Intel's hands...

yea, AMD, Nvidia and other chip makers have pretty straight forward binning processes (AMD 8xxx vs 6xxxs etc)

I would imagine that the i7's are chips with everything in order. and i5's could have any number of defects ranging from cache to other functions. rather than have 20 models based on the defects(cache, hyper threading, some other feature) they just have 3-4 and make them all the same by disabling certain things.

This would also explain why they still make Pentiums and dual core i3's. Better than just trowing them away.

Feel free to correct me I didn't research this too hard.

1 Like

AMD started this since the first Phenom... Triple cores was quad cores with defective core, or just locked core. Similar with the dual cores. Hence people unlocking their CPUs from dual to quad cores... The big search for CPUs, manufactured while full moon on the 7-th week of 2009 or whatever...

ekhm, no. ATi was first that could be unlocked (8500->9250, 9500-9800, and many many more), still there were plenty of those before in cpu's...

well I'm mostly curious on the Hyper Threading part, since I know its a minor change to a core and would not likely be binned without taking out the whole core.


I agree with @greenwithao on this one, it is most likely done to contain the range of cpu's.

I wonder if they do this with Xeons and i7s in the extreme lineup. I.E. a "defective" Xeon 2650 V3 is turned into a 1650 V3 or an i7 5930/5820k

yea, I'm really curious what parts are physically malformed (cache unable to reach clock speeds) and what other parts they intentionally gimp.