No OCing on certain Nehalems??

[thilanliyan]

http://www.fudzilla.com/index....=view&id=6965&Itemid=1
Crappy if true.

 

[bryanW1995]

keep in mind the soure of the article.

 

[panfist]

I think Intel is just trying to cash in on people who want to overclock. If you are an overclocker, you know that it's kind of an addiction. Most people start out saying, "I don't want to overclock because I don't know what I'm doing and I don't want to break anything." Then they move on to, "I keep reading about this really easy overclock that my platform can probably handle so I'm going to try it," and then you're hooked for life, always trying to push your platform a little bit farther.

If Intel eliminates overclocking from all but their overpriced "extreme" line of chips or whatever it's called for Nehalem, they stand to make a lot more money. Even if only 5 or 10% of consumers decide to step up the overclocking platform, that's so much more money they get to squeeze out of our pockets.

Unfortunately, because AMD has been so crappy lately, Intel is totally free to pull shit like this.

 

[v8envy]

Meh. If my choices were a QX processor for $1500, all other Intel chips with no ability to OC and AMD's current crop of products I know I'd be tweaking a 5000BE. And the 9850 wouldn't look all that terrible in comparison to Intel quads.

Intel has never 'supported' overclocking. Just look at their boards. It's up to the usual suspects selling mainboards to figure out how to best OC Intel's products and then charge us a premium for the privilege.

 

[Shortass]

Ouch, let's hope this doesn't pan out. Overclockers are a very small demographic in their CPU sales so any move to specifically destroy such a small part of their market doesn't seem to make sense. There's likely some other reason for this disability, if in fact it's true.

 

[n7]

This had better not be true.

Really had better not be true.

I'll assume it just means they won't have motherboards that don't do it, like now...& only their higher end motherboards will?

 

[Rubycon]

Well if software starts this then what's the point?

 

[bryanW1995]

the sad part is that right now intel COULD prevent overclocking and most users would still buy intel. Even with no OC at all, a $299 Q6700 will demolish anything amd makes. If nehalem comes out before amd gets 45nm up and running (at 3.0+ghz btw) then you couldn't blame intel for trying something like this.

 

[Jax Omen]

LOL @ pic.

Ruby, the simple solution to that is to not use Symantec

 

[GuitarDaddy]

Originally posted by: Rubycon
Well if software starts this then what's the point?

Surely software companies aren't that stupid?, I'll never buy a symantec product just because of this post

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: thilan29
http://www.fudzilla.com/index....=view&id=6965&Itemid=1
Crappy if true.

This is music to AMD's ears. Nothing like seeing the competition be as short-sighted as going from "only the paranoid survive" to "what are these pesky things you call customers, and how do we get rid of them?" in less than 2 years.

 

[Rubycon]

Originally posted by: Jax Omen
LOL @ pic.

Ruby, the simple solution to that is to not use Symantec

Rest assured, it's not real just an example. If Intel or anyone else for that matter wants this "protection" built into all of the installer checks, anything could happen. Of course cracks would solve that problem.

Rewind to 1997 when I had a Cyrix PR166+ system and could not install software that required a Pentium because it thought my CPU was a 486. There were patches to trick the installers into working though. (The Cyrix FPU was not much better than a 486 though. :laugh: )

 

[Jax Omen]

Of course it's not real. Doesn't mean Symantec doesn't suck balls.

 

[v8envy]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
the sad part is that right now intel COULD prevent overclocking and most users would still buy intel. Even with no OC at all, a $299 Q6700 will demolish anything amd makes. If nehalem comes out before amd gets 45nm up and running (at 3.0+ghz btw) then you couldn't blame intel for trying something like this.

Not quite. A 2.66 ghz Q6700 at $300 vs a 2.8-2.9 ghz 9850 at $240 would have the AMD walking away with wins and ties in the vast majority of applications. And at 20% less dough upfront the higher energy use won't seem as bad.

OTOH, if Intel's claims of as big a leap in performance over core2 as core2 was over Netburst pans out ...

 

[bradley]

Overclocking just adds to overhead and support costs, which indirectly add to the final price for overclockers and non-overclockers alike. Just like torrenters are a smaller percentage in comparison to the majority of bandwidth they represent. And many of these cpu comparisons have gotten ludicrous, surrounded by the assumption that overclocking is a given.

I'm more concerned with stability and power consumption myself than overclockability. So I kinda wish this story was true. Maybe this is the only story Fudzilla ever gets right. Who knows?

 

[tutelary]

Going to call *very likely* on this as it is complimentary to what they are already planning: Tiers of motherboards/processors for different 'levels' of consumer.

Most people here probably have too much processor for their needs anyway, and I'm going to stick with that regardless of how much it gets me flamed. Let's be realistic here: running a game on a 30inch lcd at full res isn't a 'need' either. Aside from the occasional professional/real power user I'm willing to bet anyone here with a quad could skip the next round of cpus and never notice outside the outrageously expensive gaming scene.

In short, I think Intel is going to catch all kinds of flack for what is really just a sound business strategy.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: v8envy
Meh. If my choices were a QX processor for $1500, all other Intel chips with no ability to OC and AMD's current crop of products I know I'd be tweaking a 5000BE. And the 9850 wouldn't look all that terrible in comparison to Intel quads.

i still think a Q6600 would spank that phenom's booty.


And watch, overclocking is only going to be available on the enthusiest platform, IE. The new skulltrail version. :X

Personally im not suprised. the typical consumer can build a machine for half the price and have it spank a 3000 dollar OEM systems.

Anyhow if neha doesnt allow overclocking, then im sticking to yorkfield. Sorry my yorkie at 4.25ghz will spank any neha on stock settings. Sorry, neha is going to be special, but not special enough to take down a yorkie clocked that high at stock.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: tutelary
Aside from the occasional professional/real power user I'm winning to bet anyone here with a quad could skip the next round of cpus and never notice outside the outrageously expensive gaming scene.

Well i did pull down a quad to drop in another quad. I wanted to gear towords low noise/heat/power so i picked up a dual sassoman rig.

Its a Quadcore, MP system. Uses 2 Laptop labeled' "xeon" processors at 2.0ghz. Total power draw off the wall is under 100W.

The entire unit is being drafted to be run passive also.

 

[The-Noid]

The way the speed is generated is different between nehalem and other intel march's. This has been stated publicly and is up to the third party mobo manufacturers to find a way around it.

With no FSB and no cpu multi the way the clock speed is designed is based only on the transport link. So this speed needs to be hacked.

 

[GuitarDaddy]

If Intel wants to abandon the enthusiasts thats fine, I will gladly go back to AMD with my next build. As was stated above the majority of us don't use the CPU power we already have, I build a new rig every 18mos to 2yrs because I want a new toy to play with not because I need the computing power. Hell my old A64 3200+ would still handle most of the tasks I do just fine. If forced to use a stock machine, I would buy a $300 dell and call it a day. So when I get ready to build my next "Toy" whoever offers the best tweaking options will get my money, regardless of weither I can buy a stock box that will out perform it on benchmarks or not.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: GuitarDaddy
I build a new rig every 18mos to 2yrs because I want a new toy to play with not because I need the computing power. Hell my old A64 3200+ would still handle most of the tasks I do just fine.

You know in the business financial world, they recomend replacing OEM computers every 1 to 1.5yrs. :X


Not because of functionality, but for reliability. :T

For fun i go though a system in 4 months. I dont think any besides my 2 G0 quads lasted longer then 4 months.

I still have them, i dont tinker with them anymore tho.

18 months to 2 yrs to me would be almost a mandatory upgrade. After 1.5 yrs the computer isnt as reliable as it used to be on a base level.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: v8envy

Originally posted by: bryanW1995
the sad part is that right now intel COULD prevent overclocking and most users would still buy intel. Even with no OC at all, a $299 Q6700 will demolish anything amd makes. If nehalem comes out before amd gets 45nm up and running (at 3.0+ghz btw) then you couldn't blame intel for trying something like this.

Not quite. A 2.66 ghz Q6700 at $300 vs a 2.8-2.9 ghz 9850 at $240 would have the AMD walking away with wins and ties in the vast majority of applications. And at 20% less dough upfront the higher energy use won't seem as bad.

OTOH, if Intel's claims of as big a leap in performance over core2 as core2 was over Netburst pans out ...

um, yeah, but how many 9850's can get to 2800 or 2900 on stock cooling @ 24/7 stability? What is nehalem going to be, 15-20% faster clock/clock than penryn? put a 2.5 ghz nehalem out there and you'll need over 3.0 on a phenom to beat it. put a 3.0+ghz nehalem out there and shanghai won't stand a chance unless it oc's like mad.

 

[bryanW1995]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: tutelary
Aside from the occasional professional/real power user I'm winning to bet anyone here with a quad could skip the next round of cpus and never notice outside the outrageously expensive gaming scene.

Well i did pull down a quad to drop in another quad. I wanted to gear towords low noise/heat/power so i picked up a dual sassoman rig.

Its a Quadcore, MP system. Uses 2 Laptop labeled' "xeon" processors at 2.0ghz. Total power draw off the wall is under 100W.

The entire unit is being drafted to be run passive also.

aigo, I believe that he meant you when he referred to the "real power user". just a hunch

 

[tutelary]

I can't even begin to understand the concept of replacing a machine 2 or 3 times a year. What's going to happen in 1.5 years time? I personally have never had a cap leak, and don't know anyone who has had one in 1.5 years time. I don't grasp what you mean by 'on a base level' they aren't as reliable after that period of time.

I believe with the likely huge economic downturn thats coming people had better pick something they are going to be happy with for awhile. The longer you can run a system the better. (even as a secondary, a backup in the closet, or a family machine given to someone outside your household.)

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: bryanW1995

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: tutelary
Aside from the occasional professional/real power user I'm winning to bet anyone here with a quad could skip the next round of cpus and never notice outside the outrageously expensive gaming scene.

Well i did pull down a quad to drop in another quad. I wanted to gear towords low noise/heat/power so i picked up a dual sassoman rig.

Its a Quadcore, MP system. Uses 2 Laptop labeled' "xeon" processors at 2.0ghz. Total power draw off the wall is under 100W.

The entire unit is being drafted to be run passive also.

aigo, I believe that he meant you when he referred to the "real power user". just a hunch

No because all that this machine will do is crunch, download p0rn.. oops i mean educational videos, and file serve. [hence why i need a low power, low heat server]

Quadcore well minus the crunching, this system is overkill. But on the other hand, any system i build is overkill minus that craptastic Abit IP35-E Q6600 build i did. That was at best, acceptable.

Anyhow im jumping on the enthusiest platform. Intel wouldnt shoot themself in the foot like this.

Guess i'll be grabbing another QX for neha.