I hope to GOD Intel doesnt implement this!!

[caboob]

Intel invents overclock deterrent method

 

[Megatomic]

And they would say that they were doing it to protect the uninformed consumers. That sucks.

 

[Doh!]

Thank God AMD is still in business.

 

[zsouthboy]

I love how they say it will "help".... unscrupulous vendors, eh? what about the whole multiplier is locked thing? no?

You can't just remark a chip and sell it overclocked, it doesn't work that way

 

[Viewsonicboi]

LONG LIVE AMD!!!!!!!!

 

[rogue1979]

The Inquirer should just say it like it is. Intel makes cpu's multiplier locked to make more money, period. Now they are planning to stop the ever popular fsb overclocking. Nothing wrong with this, this is their choice. However, it is my choice to buy AMD.

 

[ReiAyanami]

guess too many with the northwood death syndrome. too many volts, two many volts

 

[zsouthboy]

Originally posted by: ReiAyanami
guess too many with the northwood death syndrome. too many volts, two many volts

hahahah thats a good one...

this device detects clock speed, not voltage...

we will still be able to overvolt the living crap out of these if we want, but no overclocking allowed. rofl .

 

[CraigRT]

Originally posted by: Doh!
Thank God AMD is still in business.

hell yeah

that seriously SUCKS!!!!!!!!

 

[Valvoline6]

Who knows if they're going to do this. It's just a patent at this point. When the chips actually come out with this, then get pissed. I love how the AMD fan boys jump on board this thread. LOL

 

[FearoftheNight]

Originally posted by: Valvoline6
Who knows if they're going to do this. It's just a patent at this point. When the chips actually come out with this, then get pissed. I love how the AMD fan boys jump on board this thread. LOL

lol

 

[Wingznut]

One wonders when the day might come, where people stop overreacting to theinquirer articles? Hasn't it already been decided that theinquirer is far from a reliable source?

To be honest, I don't know what that patent entails, or it's intended purpose.

That being said, there are many problems with that article...

• The strategy to alienate the enthusiasts, in order to force them to spend more money on the higher bin processors, would not work and I don't think it would take a genius to figure that out. Those people would just look elsewhere to buy a cpu.
• If Intel or AMD wanted to stop overclocking altogether TODAY, it would be pretty easy to do.
• The amount of people who do overclock is a relatively tiny demographic.
• True, you can't simply sell remarked chips. But it is very possible, and it happens all too often, that systems are sold with remarked cpu's. It happens a lot overseas, in particular. Remember, the overwhelming majority of cpu sales is in systems... Not by themselves.
• Valvoline is right. Every corporation holds many patents that they don't necessarily use.

What you guys need to remember is to look outside our little PC Enthusiasts world. We are a very small cog in this big machine.

 

[Bob151]

To every cloud is a silver lining.

This might be good for us in the long run...

Now that Intel has patented the technology(concept), other manufacturers like AMD, NVidia, etc... will have to pay a license fee to Intel to perform the same function.

Do you think they want to pay? Or face the posibility of additional patent infringment lawsuits(um, AMD) if they don't pay, but do the same thing?

 

[Soulkeeper]

hahaha lame

 

[tchybrid]

YEAH!!! LOVE LIVE AMD!!! w00t!

 

[ChampionAtTufshop]

although it does protect those who buy packages (many do, not everyone is a geek heh) who may get screwd
i mean how can you tell waht the difference is between a 1.8ghz and a 1.6 oced to 1.8ghz

unless you download wcpuid and see waht the freq is, theres not much that can tip you off

and for the others who buy components and piece together their own computers (w00t heh) they'd obviously look at the package and cpu to see that it is waht they paid for

its ALOT ezier to screw ppl wtih package deals (like prebuilt comps) than it is with ppl who buy packages

personally, im good (i have AMD hehe)

...hopefully amd doesnt pull a stunt like this

...and even so, i dont think intel will implement this...imagine the amount of ppl saying "screw you!" and going to amd cuz they cant overclock anymore lol

 

[sharkeeper]

Text

Cheers!

 

[Oakenfold]

and that could mean distributors and/or resellers remarking chips at higher frequencies and then selling them at higher prices

Um, that hasn't gone on in quite some time now right(shows the obvious retardedness of the source)? I'm new on the Intel Bandwagon, how long have the multiplier's been locked anyhow, and if this is a problem how come we don't know how to unlock the multiplier?

 

[DAPUNISHER]

It looks to be implemented by various methods using the boards chipset, so (and I'm guessing here of course ) it would depend on the board maker adding the support for it and since some board makers do quite well in the enthusiast market they may continue to provide " Retail enthusiast models" while adding the protection to their OEM and "normal" line of boards. Judging by the link shuttleteam provided this will be great for OEMs since even wire mods, soldering, and otherwise physyically altering the CPU bridges and such won't work and the manufacturer will be able to tell you overclocked it and refuse to honor the warranty

If the software readable register bits indicate that the system (processor) clock signal is over-clocked, the initialization sequence may inform the PC manufacturers to refuse to provide service support at block 840. However, if the software readable register bits indicate that the system (processor) clock signal is not over-clocked, the initialization sequence may proceed to determine whether such a system (processor) clock signal is under-clocked at block 850. If the software readable register bits indicate that the system (processor) clock signal is not under-clocked (i.e., normal), the initialization sequence may proceed to provide proper service support, including software diagnostics as requested by the end user at block 860. However, if the software readable register bits indicate that the system (processor) clock signal is under-clocked, the initialization sequence may proceed to inform the PC manufacturers that clock generator 130 of the computer system 100 may contain defects and need to be replaced.

Perhaps the "enthusiast models" available would just come with a 7 day warranty so in case the board is defective you can get a replacement and a "you're on your own good luck" policy afterwards??? The possibilities here are interesting as heck! the ways they could segragate us overclockers from the mainstream while not shutting us down. Of course someone will figure out how to circumvent the technology eventually anyways as software pirates and overclockers are a dogged and determined bunch

 

[Sahakiel]

Hm... if I'm reading that correct, it seems deceptively simple to bypass...


Just change the reference clock.

 

[DAPUNISHER]

Originally posted by: Sahakiel
Hm... if I'm reading that correct, it seems deceptively simple to bypass...


Just change the reference clock.

They seem to address that

The ring oscillator 300 may also be integrated into an I/O controller hub (ICH) of the chipset 140. The reference clock signal may exhibit any fixed, stable frequency, including 32.768 kHz for example. Since the reference clock signal may be independently fixed and may not be based on the RTC crystal 200, its fundamental frequency cannot be altered or changed by resellers, distributors and/or end users. Therefore the use of a ring oscillator 300 for generating a reference clock signal may be preferred over the use of a RTC crystal 200 since the fundamental frequency may not be susceptible to over-clocking efforts by resellers, distributors and/or end users.

They are offering multiple ways to prevent overclocking and end by saying

may be configured differently or employ some or different components than those illustrated without changing the basic function of the invention. Many modifications may be made to adapt the teachings of the present invention to a particular situation without departing from the scope thereof. Therefore, it is intended that the present invention not be limited to the various exemplary embodiments disclosed, but that the present invention includes all embodiments falling within the scope of the appended claims.

so the actual solution/solutions will most likely be very tough to get around.

 

[RadDavy]

I think Intel and AOL will merge one day......hahaha

 

[caboob]

I was a little quick on the trigger with news about this....seems that the patent application was filed in 1999 and Intel could very well have implemented this long ago if needed. I apologize for the sensationalism.

 

[rc240sx]

I just saw this on TECHTV website. Intel is only doing it on their motherboards which they are so currently doing. Most vendors like ASUS, MSI, ECS use a modiefied version of the chipset so you will still be able to overclock the FSB with a mobo other than INTEL.

 

[THUGSROOK]

HOCP has a few comments on this on their front page today.....