[paulmd]

Generally true but in practice there are almost no CPUs where the only thing that is broken is hyperthreads. All CPU companies will disable fully-functional chips to make that segment of their product lineup.

Also, the reality is that the consumer market is a massive beneficiary of this whole scheme. The server market is effectively subsidizing consumer processors to the tune of billions, if consumers had to pay full freight on their dies prices would be several times higher than they are.

[valarauca1]

    if consumers had to pay full freight on their dies prices
     would be several times higher than they are. 

This is doubtful, Intel's margins are amazing as they're fully integrated vertical monopoly. They make the wafers, own the fabs, cut their own masks, etc. Very literally sand comes in one end, and chips come out the other.

The fundamental processes of producing an equal die space SoC as a Xeon on the same (node) is likely roughly equal cost (or I imagine the fabs as a service would go out of business). So saying Intel -needs- the consumer market to subsidize their server line is a total lie.

Intel puts an extreme markup on their server class processors, and a milder mark up on the consumer segment