Intel invents a way to prevent running CPU out of spec **updated**

[Adul]

http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=8518


CHIP GIANT INTEL appears to have invented a cunning method which after detecting overclocking on a microprocessor can then prevent such overclocking by reducing the clock rate on a microprocessor.

The patent, 6,535,988 ? was granted to Intel on March 18th last, and was invented by David L. Poisner at the Folsom, California site.

It claims to detect and deter overclocking of a signal for microprocessors which includes a detection circuit and a prevention circuit, which limits or reduces the performance of the processor when the circuit detects an overclocked signal.



from Fishtank X

We apply for lots of patents due to the amount of research we do. We have not made an announcement on any kind of implementation of this

 

[FishTankX]

:Q

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Not sure that's a good idea, it'll just drive the overclockers to "other" cpu manufacturers...

 

[DannyBoy]

Now that sucks :|

Just as well im an AMD fan

 

[DannyBoy]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
Not sure that's a good idea, it'll just drive the overclockers to "other" cpu manufacturers...

Thats exactly what i was thinking.

I expect they will lose big profits if they were to do that.

Dan

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: MrFiTTy

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
Not sure that's a good idea, it'll just drive the overclockers to "other" cpu manufacturers...

Thats exactly what i was thinking.

I expect they will lose big profits if they were to do that.

Dan

I hardly see them loosing big profits, but I think they might notice it a tad.

 

[Barnaby W. Füi]

Originally posted by: Adul

Originally posted by: MrFiTTy

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
Not sure that's a good idea, it'll just drive the overclockers to "other" cpu manufacturers...

Thats exactly what i was thinking.

I expect they will lose big profits if they were to do that.

Dan

I hardly see them loosing big profits, but I think they might notice it a tad.

Even if they lose $5 from it, why do it?

 

[sharkeeper]

About time they do this.

Hopefully AMD will follow suit!

Cheers!

 

[DannyBoy]

Originally posted by: shuttleteam
About time they do this.

Hopefully AMD will follow suit!

Cheers!

You are telling me you want all processors to be locked at stock speed?

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: shuttleteam
About time they do this.

Hopefully AMD will follow suit!

Cheers!

hell no... :|

 

[FishTankX]

To make vendors feel more secure, that they're competitors aren't selling overclocked rigs. On the other hand..

From HardOCP.

We first heard this story late yesterday but we wanted to talk to Intel first to get the scoop straight from the horses mouth since this patent could cover a number of things. This is the response we received directly from Intel regarding the patent:

"We apply for lots of patents due to the amount of research we do. We have not made an announcement on any kind of implementation of this."

 

[First]

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: Adul

Originally posted by: MrFiTTy

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
Not sure that's a good idea, it'll just drive the overclockers to "other" cpu manufacturers...

Thats exactly what i was thinking.

I expect they will lose big profits if they were to do that.

Dan

I hardly see them loosing big profits, but I think they might notice it a tad.

Even if they lose $5 from it, why do it?

Same reason Intel has factory locked the multiplier of every single one of their CPUs for years; so vendors don't sell, for example, a 3GHz processor that is only rated for 2.53GHz operation.

 

[sharkeeper]

You are telling me you want all processors to be locked at stock speed? ]/Q]

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. Party's over. For real this time.

Same reason Intel has factory locked the multiplier of every single one of their CPUs for years; so vendors don't sell, for example, a 3GHz processor that is only rated for 2.53GHz operation.

Even worse is when this cpu winds up in a system that is doing calculations and the output is errant.

It's one thing when a CPU can run 3DMark whatever until the cows cross their legs but I'll be damned if I would trust the output from a so called stable system. The time has come folks, let's move on. CPU's are already fast enough where even if you purchase in the "lower end" of the spectrum it'll be plenty fast. I won't even go into the discussion of running pci peripherals over spec. :|

This team deserves more than a cookie for coming up with the idea!

Cheers!

 

[PCMarine]

Oh well.../me looks towards AMD

 

[TweakageMan]

Originally posted by: shuttleteam
About time they do this.

Hopefully AMD will follow suit!

Cheers!

Agreed.

 

[DannyBoy]

Well im glad im with AMD.

I now feel twice as strongly towards AMD when it comes to building my rigs.

Dan

 

[AgaBoogaBoo]

Originally posted by: MrFiTTy
Well im glad im with AMD.

I now feel twice as strongly towards AMD when it comes to building my rigs.

Dan

Why? They haven't started using it yet, have they? I think it will be dealt with when the time comes but till then it really doesn't make a difference.

 

[Jhhnn]

This was inevitable. Intel has had tremendous problems with remarking in various parts of the world. Many of these systems aren't very stable, and Intel rightfully believes the practice gives them a bad name.

Overclockers cost them money in other ways, too- after smoking their chip with too high a voltage, they return it under warranty, demanding a new chip. Overclockers are an extremely small segment of computer sales, and undoubtedly more trouble than they're worth.

Part of their problem is of Intel's own making, though- rather than grading chips according to their capabilities and selling them, they down-bin chips to fill pre-existing orders, otherwise overclocking wouldn't be possible.

Locking both the multiplier and the bus speed will render remarking and motherboard overclocking/overvoltage features pointless- solving their problem once and for all...

You'll still get what you pay for, and folks in some parts of the world will have better assurances of that.

No more free lunch....

 

[Budman]

Originally posted by: Evan Lieb

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey

Originally posted by: Adul

Originally posted by: MrFiTTy

Originally posted by: BingBongWongFooey
Not sure that's a good idea, it'll just drive the overclockers to "other" cpu manufacturers...

Thats exactly what i was thinking.

I expect they will lose big profits if they were to do that.

Dan

I hardly see them loosing big profits, but I think they might notice it a tad.

Even if they lose $5 from it, why do it?

Same reason Intel has factory locked the multiplier of every single one of their CPUs for years; so vendors don't sell, for example, a 3GHz processor that is only rated for 2.53GHz operation.

All it take is 2 seconds to open up Wcpuid or CPU-Z to see your true cpu specs.

 

[human2k]

repost

 

[BFG10K]

ven if they lose $5 from it, why do it?

But think of the money Intel willl save on RMAs made on chips damaged by overclocking.

Also it might hurt chip sales with the enthusiast market but it'll help OEMs to feel more comfortable about honouring warranty claims on genuinely defective processors.

All it take is 2 seconds to open up Wcpuid or CPU-Z to see your true cpu specs.

Or use Windows XP's properties on My Computer. It lists the both actual speed and the rated speed of a processor.

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: human2k
repost

different forum...

 

[sharkeeper]

Text

Cheers!

 

[mechBgon]

Originally posted by: shuttleteam

You are telling me you want all processors to be locked at stock speed? ]/Q]

Yes that is exactly what I'm saying. Party's over. For real this time.

Same reason Intel has factory locked the multiplier of every single one of their CPUs for years; so vendors don't sell, for example, a 3GHz processor that is only rated for 2.53GHz operation.

Even worse is when this cpu winds up in a system that is doing calculations and the output is errant.

It's one thing when a CPU can run 3DMark whatever until the cows cross their legs but I'll be damned if I would trust the output from a so called stable system. The time has come folks, let's move on. CPU's are already fast enough where even if you purchase in the "lower end" of the spectrum it'll be plenty fast. I won't even go into the discussion of running pci peripherals over spec. :|

This team deserves more than a cookie for coming up with the idea!

Cheers!

LOL! If you think today's CPUs are "fast enough," you need to do some 3D modelling/rendering/animation. About 36 hours into a render session, you won't be thinking your CPU is "fast enough" any more And as for out-of-spec PCI, there are several popular platforms now which can do away with that issue entirely. nForce2 is a prime example of that.

I do see your general idea, shuttleteam, but I don't agree that a system run above spec is necessarily untrustworthy. It's rather naive to assume that Intel or AMD always lock in a CPU at the highest speed it can possibly run, rather than the speed they need on the shelves the worst. The ability of a typical Pentium4 1.6A or AthlonXP 1700+ Tbred-B to run at spectacular OC's is empirical proof of that.

As for the matter at hand, Intel has a patent, but that doesn't necessarily mean they're going to use it, and the reaction of the enthusiast market is probably not going to sway them one way or the other. So don't worry, be happy

 

[BFG10K]

Note that I'm not necessarily for or against this technology, I'm just pointing out some of the potential benefits.