AMD explains why the Durons are locked

[Czar]

http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/1/11920.html


<< Speaking to The Register, AMD's European marketing manager Richard Baker, said that the Duron had been locked to discourage re-marking. Unlike Intel, AMD also puts the speed (MHz) directly onto the die with a laser - tricky to remove without damaging the chip itself.

&quot;The obvious first thing to say is that we advise our customers not to overclock our processors. It can detrimentally effect the performance and reliability of the processors. Physically altering the processor itself certainly will invalidate its warranty,&quot; he said.

This is very different to the stance taken by Intel a number of years ago when a spokesman for the company said: &quot;Hell, run them as fast as you like. We'll sell you a new one when it breaks.&quot; Chipzilla has also tended to be more conservative in its speed ratings, which may account for its somewhat more cavalier attitude. Of course these days Intels locks things down more tightly than anyone.

In essence, AMD is trying to establish itself as a credible alternative to Intel in the corporate space. The side effect of firming up its reliability figures and market position is that the high esteem it has been held in by the overclocking community may well atrophy. >>



So I guess AMD is just playing Intel now. Sucks.

 

[randomlinh]

haven't we all known this from the start? That's pretty much the basis for locking processors.....

 

[Perce]

This is a no biggie, because AMD &quot;locked&quot; one of their CPUs, so what? The Duron will give us a good inexpensive CPU other than the Celeron, end result, lower prices.

 

[thermite88]

The AMD may sound good on paper, but it has been a very poor second to Intel CPU when the overclocking potential is accounted for.

I run a Celeron 533A at 840 MHz. The system is rock stable. The cost of the CPU is $120 (< $100 now). No new MB is needed.

An AMD Duron 800 may be equal or superior in performance, but the total cost of CPU plus a new MB is 3-4 times more than the Celeron. I am not saying that the Celeron is better, just that it is a much better value for the money.

The last AMD CPU I owned was a K6-200. I could overclock it to 233MHz and it ran very hot. By comparison, all Intel chips allowed me to overclock at least 50% over rated frequency and run cool.

SisSoft Sandra benchmarks:
Memory benchmark: 344/440
CPU benchmark: 2259/1126

Windows 2000 Professional
Celeron 533A @ 840, 1.8V, Golden Orb
P3V4X (BIOS 1005), 105 FSB @ 3/4 CPU/memory bus
256MB KingMax, PC133, SPD 333, 7.5 ns
Adaptec 26160 SCSI adapter, WD Enterprice 10K 9.1MB LVD
Matrox G200SG 8MB
Eqsonics AudioPCI
Plextor 412 CDR
Plextor 32x caddy CD drive
Aiwa DDS2 4mm tape
Iomega Insider SCSI zip drive.

 

[Double Trouble]

Oh well <*chucks plans to buy AMD processor out the window*>.....

AMD's processors are a good value even if not overclocked, but you still have to contend with certain chipset &quot;issues&quot; because of VIA and you have to be picky about the power supply, memory etc etc. The thing that put AMD 'over the top' for me was that you could overclock the Athlon, T-Bird or Duron and make it a REALLY great value. Since they've truly locked the new CPUs (or so it appears), they are no longer as good of a value. Instead, you can just buy a celeron and put it into your existing system and overclock it -- and have the best 'value' upgrade.

 

[Rogue]

Fellas, fellas, fellas! C'mon. You are making it sound like you won't buy anyone's processor if they clock lock it. Clock locked or not, AMD still offers the most bang for the buck. The only processor out there that can really be overclocked via the multiplier is a Cyrix and I seriously doubt that you will even come close to owning one of those just to overclock it. Also, have faith in the fact that there is a way around virtually anything. You can't possibly give up on an up-and-coming processor company because they have finally made the big time and are looking to protect their position.

 

[Double Trouble]

Rogue: Noone has been able to find a way 'around' the intel multiplier lock, and if AMD really doesn't want us to, we won't be able to get around the multiplier lock there either.

Further, Intel multipliers are locked, but because of the chipsets, you can still overclock and get an even better value by upping the FSB. With the Athlon/T-Bird/Duron, that's not the case, and thus you'll be stuck with the speed it's rated for. That's still a pretty good deal, but for me it's not good enough to warrant dealing with 'issues' of AMD processor supporting motherboards.

<<You can't possibly give up on an up-and-coming processor company because they have finally made the big time and are looking to protect their position. >>

I don't care whether the company is up and coming or not, nor do I care what company makes the processor. I care about getting the best value for my particular setup. If the AMD's could be overclocked (like the Athlon), the scale would tip in AMD's favor. Now that they've locked it down (good reason or not), the scale is back to Intel..... No more T-Bird or Duron for me.

 

[CQuinn]

<< The AMD may sound good on paper, but it has been a very poor second to Intel CPU when the overclocking potential is accounted for. >>



So don't count it. When I get around to choosing a new CPU, I
set my baseline on how much bang for the buck I can expect before
I start to tweak the system. I only consider overclocking as
a means to move above my &quot;comfort zone&quot;.

thermite88, you are right that a new CPU/Mboard will cost more,
but in theory you are benefitting from newer features to the
system as well by doing so. I say &quot;in theory&quot; because it seems
all the chipset makers have fallen short in providing a subsystem
that brings the best advantages of the new CPUs to light.
Otherwise there would be a more compelling reason to upgrade.

 

[Scifione]

Read this!!!!!!!!!!

http://amdzone.pcstats.com/messageview.cfm?start=41&amp;catid=3&amp;threadid=17845

Then take some Advil for you headack because that was over your head. It is posible. This is just like the Athlon when is cameout. It had to be altered to OC it (Goldfinger). Remember that the Duron offers the cance to upgrade to T-bird. The motherboard market has been a (b)witch to us. This goes for the CPU companies to. We have been forced to go from socket to slot to socket to socket with a slocket inbetween. They seen to have the idea that we like repeatedly buying a new motherboard for the latest greatest processor.

The Duron 700 is better than Celeron2 OCed to 850 on a 100Mhz bus!
I want more bang for my buck to. I want more more more and OCing out the a$$!!!!!!

 

[randomlinh]

the whole best bang for the buck kinda leans towards buying a new system. If you were building a system from scratch, not assuming overclocking, I'd lean towards a duron over a celeron. I also consider overclocking a &quot;comfort zone&quot; unless I specifically buy a pretested cpu.

BUT, the problem w/ the chipset again is an issue. If via can get their act together, that would be great. But for me right now, I have a celeron 566->760 that I don't even fully use, so the purpose of upgrading would be purely for bragging rights

 

[Tripleshot]

Scifione

I have a duron 600 in my hand and I just can't find the place to put the goldfinger.
The T-bird 700 is in my other hand and I'll be damned if I am going to break the case,void the warrenty,look for a new mobo to support it,try and solder or unsolder connections.WTF!

Price/performance/value is now in Intels camp. Pure and simple.

 

[Double Trouble]

Tripleshot: <<Price/performance/value is now in Intels camp. Pure and simple. >>

Yep, but only for us computer geeks and tweakers. For someone that doesn't want to mess with their system and is never gonna overclock anything, the Duron is the best performance value. For anyone else, if the duron does prove to be locked down, the balance has shifted to the Dark Side again

 

[Keravnos]

well lemme tell you what overclocking is good for!

I got my 300A 2 years ago pushed it up to 450 and still play very well all games that come my way (a v3000 helps a lot too!). So in my mind if getting a 533a up to 840 while paying a price of less than 2 full priced games does not sound attractive enough then I am sorry I do not know what does!

For the record I will buy a cel 533 and a new mobo instead of just buying a p3 at 800 (heck, right now a p3/800 costs more!)

What duron? cannot o/c? Why bother?

 

[thedarkwolf]

&quot;What duron? cannot o/c? Why bother? &quot;

The reason was stated earlier. The duron is faster even when not overclocked. Even if it is locked you will still be able to overclock it once some of the better boards come out just not anywhere near as much as intell. Wasn't abit's slot A board able to hit 115mhz fsb most of the time. That would mean a duron 600=690, 650=747, and 700=805. Even the 600 should be able to match your 850mhz C2 performance wise if Abit or Asus comes through. We will have to wait and see some reviews of decent boards first rather than the crappy fic boards most reviewers have had sofar.

 

[Hyper99]

I think that duron are way over rated over celeron
duron at 700 = celeron @ 850 hmm?!
I am skeptical here and you won't know until you compare side by side
not on one stupid benchmarked that make duron look good
but I willing to bet that celeron are pretty strong in most area
just that they have their weakness and strength
the truth is duron at 700 is just as powerful as celeron @ 732mhz
not 850mhz like they claimed.
I went to intel website and they didn't give a rat *ss about
comparing themselve to anyone including AMD
With all these hype and baloony benchmark I see some are being
mislead again. It a shame no one telling the truth again.
Constantly making false claim of how powerful their cpu is.
Great job AMD for trying so hard to make Intel look weak,
pretty entertaining if you ask me.
AMD say their duron is 25 percent faster then celeron at same
speed say 600mhz duron is like a celeron 750mhz?
Overrated bullcrap, sounds like another Cyrix PR wannabe.
I have been trying to warn some people that overclocking duron
and athlon is actually more difficult then some realized.
You need to pay at least 60-80 bucks more for these overclocking
gadget called goldfinger
The truth kind of show itself in the long run doesn't it hehe
AMD could also say that their duron is 50 percent faster then celeron
or thunderbird 66 percent faster then celeron or 50 percent faster then
PIII etc, and I bet that almost everyone will be took in for it.
My friend also believe his PIII @ 806 is weaker then athlon at 800mhz well guess what? They are the same.

 

[Hyper99]

To avoid all these headache from AMD
I'm going with Celeron and try it for more fun
going from 66mhz to 100mhz sound exciting
533mhz to 800mhz
I heard that athlon/duron have a serious heat problem when overclocking
that not good, guess it won't last long huh like that
heck even my k6-2 500 at 550 was frying like a pancake if I had
run that a few more day who knows, dead cpu and motherboard too?
seem to run ok at 523 with 2.3v
Celeron at 800 have Pr rating of 960

 

[BoberFett]

What did he say?

 

[randomlinh]

Here's the whole problem in this argument, we're mixing consumers, and US. WE overclock. WE look for cpus that can do it. If it don't, SCREW IT (well, some of us say it).

Comsumer looks at PC World, and at general benches, and the fact that a duron 600 will outpace a celeron 600. Nuf said. They will be looking into a new system, so the cost of a new mobo+cpu vs. a cpu is almost irrelavant(sp?).

 

[Tripleshot]

BoberFett
HE SAID AMD LIES LIKE A RUG AND HES STAYING WITH INTEL.
DID YOU HEAR THAT?
I'M SHOUTING IN CASE YOU NEED TO GO FIND YOUR HEARING AID.

 

[BoberFett]

Take a Midol, Tripleshot.

Let me get out my Gibberish/English dictionary and see what we can make of that.

<< I think that duron are way over rated over celeron
duron at 700 = celeron @ 850 hmm?! >>

You think. Meaning it's your opinion. However you just overclocked your Cel 566 in that comparison to 850, why not FSB overclock that Duron up to about 770 and watch it dance on that Celerons grave.

<< I am skeptical here and you won't know until you compare side by side
not on one stupid benchmarked that make duron look good
but I willing to bet that celeron are pretty strong in most area
just that they have their weakness and strength
the truth is duron at 700 is just as powerful as celeron @ 732mhz
not 850mhz like they claimed. >>

OK, people have done benchmarks and have shown that Celerons are greatly outclassed by other processors running at the same speed.

<< I went to intel website and they didn't give a rat *ss about
comparing themselve to anyone including AMD >>

What's your point? That Intel is arrogant? That doesn't seem to say much about a processors performance though.

<< With all these hype and baloony benchmark I see some are being
mislead again. It a shame no one telling the truth again. >>

You're right, nobody is telling the truth, including Intel.

<< Constantly making false claim of how powerful their cpu is.
Great job AMD for trying so hard to make Intel look weak,
pretty entertaining if you ask me. >>

What's really entertaining is to watch Intel pretend that AMD isn't a real competitor. And to watch them struggle to try to convince people that Rambus is the only way to go.

<< AMD say their duron is 25 percent faster then celeron at same
speed say 600mhz duron is like a celeron 750mhz?
Overrated bullcrap, sounds like another Cyrix PR wannabe. >>

So how is it PR if one chip is faster than another. Seems to me that if benchmarks prove that, it's not PR, it's fact.

<< I have been trying to warn some people that overclocking duron
and athlon is actually more difficult then some realized.
You need to pay at least 60-80 bucks more for these overclocking
gadget called goldfinger >>

OK, so it's more difficult. And the overwhelming majority of computer owners will never overclock their computers so that's a moot point.

<< The truth kind of show itself in the long run doesn't it hehe >>

Your truth or the real truth?

<< AMD could also say that their duron is 50 percent faster then celeron
or thunderbird 66 percent faster then celeron or 50 percent faster then
PIII etc, and I bet that almost everyone will be took in for it. >>

And that wouldn't be fair, because Intel never lies about their products.

<< My friend also believe his PIII @ 806 is weaker then athlon at 800mhz well guess what? They are the same. >>

Where did the P3 come from? We were talking about Celerons and Durons.

Maybe the problem is in the translation. I'd better go track down my Troll/English dictionary.

 

[BoberFett]

Hyper99

Well would you look at this!

http://www.anandtech.com/showdoc.html?i=1277&amp;p=9

It's a benchmark in Quake3, the benchmark where Intel always beats AMD. What's that? At 640x480 where the CPU is the bottleneck, not the video card, about 2/3 of the way down, the Duron 700 is slightly faster than the Celeron 850.

Pretty much looks to me like the Duron 700 is as fast as that Celeron 850. So if you can't accept that as the truth, then the problem is yours and nobody elses.

 

[Mikewarrior2]

Bobberfett,

You'll have to ignore Hyper99 and his idiotic posts. You should have seen when he tried to say that celeron's were as fast as p3s cause Sandra said so.


Hyper99,

I don't care what you think.... You know what, nobody cares about what you think. You wanna know why? Cause its complete and non-understandable jibberish. A duron 700 will beat a Celeron2. Don't believe me. Look at anand's T-bird/Duron Preview. Or his V5 Rreview. Look at his charts. The Duron700 is consistently faster than a Celeron@850. If you mildly o/c the duron, the Celeron 2 is only in even more hurt.

And stop bringing up the PR rating from Sandra... You keep insisting that it is an accurate benchmark, when, clearly, it is not an accurate benchmark. especially when it comes to real-world applications and games.

The only time a Celeron2 should be considered is when someone is on an extreme budget and already has a BX-mb they want to continue to use.


Mike

 

[Tripleshot]

BoberFett
I don't have a headache.Don't need the midol since I read how well you responded to the post.I just didn't have the energy to go that far.
I'm off to see the wizard!

 

[HepDude]

I'm a little confused here.

Can AMD do something that will cause the multiplier to be locked even when Tom's fix (ie modifying the so-called bridges) is applied?

If not, then I'm sure modified Durons will be available for 10-20% more, and then you can run them at 900 as some dealers have already done.

 

[Huma]

Oh my god, Hyper99, are you retarded?