I get it but imagine the GPU style markup when all mobos have a set amount of RAM. You’ll have two identical boards except for $30 worth of memory with a price spread of $200+. Not fun.
I don’t think you are wrong, but I don’t think you go far enough. In a few generations, the only option for top performance will be a SoC. You’ll get to pick which SoC you want and what box you want to put it in.
System in a Package (SiP) at least. Might not be efficient to etch the logic and that much memory onto the same silicon die, as the latest and greatest TSMC node will likely be much more expensive per square mm than the cutting edge memory production node from Samsung or whatever foundry where the memory is being made.
But with advanced packaging going the way it’s been over the last decade or so, it’s going to be hard to compete with the latency/throughout of an in-package interposer. You can only do so much with the vias/pathways on a printed circuit board.
No, I don’t think you owe an apology. It’s a super common terminology almost to the point where I wouldn’t really even consider it outright wrong to describe it as a SoC. It’s just that the blurred distinction between a single chip and multiple chiplets packaged together are almost impossible for an outsider to tell without really getting into the published spec sheets for a product (and sometimes may not even be known then).
It’s just more technically precise to describe them as SiP, even if SoC functionally means something quite similar (and the language may evolve to the point where the terms are interchangeable in practice).
Honestly I upgrade every few years and isually have to purchase a new mobo anyhow. I do think this could lead to less options for mobos though.
I get it but imagine the GPU style markup when all mobos have a set amount of RAM. You’ll have two identical boards except for $30 worth of memory with a price spread of $200+. Not fun.
I don’t think you are wrong, but I don’t think you go far enough. In a few generations, the only option for top performance will be a SoC. You’ll get to pick which SoC you want and what box you want to put it in.
System in a Package (SiP) at least. Might not be efficient to etch the logic and that much memory onto the same silicon die, as the latest and greatest TSMC node will likely be much more expensive per square mm than the cutting edge memory production node from Samsung or whatever foundry where the memory is being made.
But with advanced packaging going the way it’s been over the last decade or so, it’s going to be hard to compete with the latency/throughout of an in-package interposer. You can only do so much with the vias/pathways on a printed circuit board.
You are correct, I’m referring to on package. Need more coffee.
No, I don’t think you owe an apology. It’s a super common terminology almost to the point where I wouldn’t really even consider it outright wrong to describe it as a SoC. It’s just that the blurred distinction between a single chip and multiple chiplets packaged together are almost impossible for an outsider to tell without really getting into the published spec sheets for a product (and sometimes may not even be known then).
It’s just more technically precise to describe them as SiP, even if SoC functionally means something quite similar (and the language may evolve to the point where the terms are interchangeable in practice).