Overclocking is stealing

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

KIAman

Diamond Member
Mar 7, 2001
3,342
23
81
I feel so guilty. I must confess.

My first PC purchase (with my own money) was a 386SX 16Mhz with a 40MB harddrive.

I doublespaced the drive to 80MB. I totally ripped the harddrive vendor of their $400.

I will report myself to MS immediately.
 

HGC

Senior member
Dec 22, 1999
605
0
0
Originally posted by: KIAman
I feel so guilty. I must confess.

My first PC purchase (with my own money) was a 386SX 16Mhz with a 40MB harddrive.

I doublespaced the drive to 80MB. I totally ripped the harddrive vendor of their $400.

I will report myself to MS immediately.

I used to rewind slot car motors to the point that sparks would shoot out from under the cars. I have lived with this shame for decades.

 

Eeqmcsq

Senior member
Jan 6, 2009
407
1
0
Hahahahaha, great thread.

You wouldn't steal a car.
You wouldn't steal a handbag.
You wouldn't steal a television.
You wouldn't steal a processor.

Overclocking processors is stealing.
Stealing is against the law.
Getting something for nothing IS A CRIME.
 

ChaosDivine

Senior member
May 23, 2008
370
0
0
Originally posted by: Eureka
You have a point. And remember, trying to use an OCed chip as if it was stock is like pretending that a mp3 rip is as good as a CD. In reality if you want full quality you have to pay the full price, or else you're getting lossy, muffled, staticy benchmarks.
Wat? :confused:
 

Eureka

Diamond Member
Sep 6, 2005
3,822
1
81
Originally posted by: ChaosDivine
Originally posted by: Eureka
You have a point. And remember, trying to use an OCed chip as if it was stock is like pretending that a mp3 rip is as good as a CD. In reality if you want full quality you have to pay the full price, or else you're getting lossy, muffled, staticy benchmarks.
Wat? :confused:

OK, well your name lends me the idea that you play Warhammer 40K. Well think about it this way, you can always make your own WH40k figurines out of silly putty, but there is no way in hell that your army based off of $2 jars of silly putty will ever look anything as good as those nice $500 sets.
 

deimos3428

Senior member
Mar 6, 2009
697
0
0
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
It's no different than downloading and burning a DVD, or borrowing a buddy's DVD and copying it, rather than buying your own.
Ok, obviously this is meant by a joke, but...

1. Copyright infringment does not equal theft. They are two completely separate crimes.
2. Where I live, borrowing a buddy's DVD and copying it isn't even illegal, as we pay a tax on all new media. ;)

 

nyker96

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2005
5,630
2
81
i think overclockers are like 1% of all the computer business. most of my friends all on dell or hp don't know what oc is. I think that is the majority of the buyer so amd or intel don't really need to worry too much about us here. we are the select few who dare to tread in danger zone. besides, when you oc you can always fry your equipments, burn your eye brows out or even worst cause a power surge that wipe out all your valuables.

but if you really feel this strongly, just leave things at stock will probably put your mind at peace.
 

jhansman

Platinum Member
Feb 5, 2004
2,768
29
91
So it's like that DVD anti-piracy ad that shows the kid stealing a purse, right? OCing is purse snatching! Who knew.....?
 

dguy6789

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2002
8,558
3
76
Originally posted by: Eureka
Originally posted by: ChaosDivine
Originally posted by: Eureka
You have a point. And remember, trying to use an OCed chip as if it was stock is like pretending that a mp3 rip is as good as a CD. In reality if you want full quality you have to pay the full price, or else you're getting lossy, muffled, staticy benchmarks.
Wat? :confused:

OK, well your name lends me the idea that you play Warhammer 40K. Well think about it this way, you can always make your own WH40k figurines out of silly putty, but there is no way in hell that your army based off of $2 jars of silly putty will ever look anything as good as those nice $500 sets.

Flawed analogy. My Q9550 overclocked to 3.4Ghz is every bit as "high quality" and "long lasting" and "good" as a $1000 QX9770. There is nothing special about the QX9770 besides the unlocked multiplier. The silicon is the same quality, the processor is the same quality, everything is the same.
 

ectx

Golden Member
Jan 25, 2000
1,398
0
0
Originally posted by: Xcobra
my logic: you buy it, you can do whatever the hell you want with it.


Agree - however, if you mess up anything through your oc, don't ask for a RMA. Ay least when it it clear that the early demise is due to the oc.




 

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
Originally posted by: frostedflakes
What about people who underclock their processors?

They should obviously be compensated by either AMD or Intel for their decrease in speed. It is only fair.
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,118
58
91
Originally posted by: dguy6789
Originally posted by: Eureka
Originally posted by: ChaosDivine
Originally posted by: Eureka
You have a point. And remember, trying to use an OCed chip as if it was stock is like pretending that a mp3 rip is as good as a CD. In reality if you want full quality you have to pay the full price, or else you're getting lossy, muffled, staticy benchmarks.
Wat? :confused:

OK, well your name lends me the idea that you play Warhammer 40K. Well think about it this way, you can always make your own WH40k figurines out of silly putty, but there is no way in hell that your army based off of $2 jars of silly putty will ever look anything as good as those nice $500 sets.

Flawed analogy. My Q9550 overclocked to 3.4Ghz is every bit as "high quality" and "long lasting" and "good" as a $1000 QX9770. There is nothing special about the QX9770 besides the unlocked multiplier. The silicon is the same quality, the processor is the same quality, everything is the same.

Do you really believe that, or is this continuing in the satirical spirit for which the thread exists? (honest question, I can't tell)

Perchance you believe what you posted, I have to ask if you are aware of the device physics involved that give rise to the existence of an IC's characteristic shmoo plot?

There are some testable consequences of what you posit in order for it to be true. For one thing in order for what you say to be true then all chips at a given clockspeed would have an identical VID and identical TDP.

Is this true? If it isn't, then why is it the case that chips end up binned with different VID's despite being binned out for the same clockspeed?

(Socratic method)
 

ArchAngel777

Diamond Member
Dec 24, 2000
5,223
61
91
When I read the first 1/2 of the OPs post I had thought "This guy is clearly an idiot, this HAS to be a joke" and sure enough, it was a joke. :D hehehe...
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,226
9,990
126
Just wait until "cap & trade" hits the overclocking crowd. There will be a tax on the speed/voltage of your CPU. It's a fact: overclocked CPUs can take 2-3x the power of a non-overclocked CPU. Imagine what that will cost you in the long run if you are taxed on the power of your CPU, in order to promote "greenness".
 

drizek

Golden Member
Jul 7, 2005
1,410
0
71
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Just wait until "cap & trade" hits the overclocking crowd. There will be a tax on the speed/voltage of your CPU. It's a fact: overclocked CPUs can take 2-3x the power of a non-overclocked CPU. Imagine what that will cost you in the long run if you are taxed on the power of your CPU, in order to promote "greenness".

It would be better for the environment to have a tax on die size as opposed to power consumption, as manufacturing is where the bulk of the power/chemical/water use goes over the lifetime of the CPU.

Companies should be rewarded for making small chips and punished for making something like, say, The GTX280.

There should also be laws requiring a base level of power saving features to reduce idle power draw, as well as reduce waste from PSUs(basically just strengthen Energy Star and 80Plus). Again, this would be more effective than capping max power consumption on computers that are only loaded a fraction of the time.
 
Dec 30, 2004
12,554
2
76
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Think about this, you overclockers - when you overclock, you're stealing. Say you bought an AMD 955 X4 CPU, and you wanted more power. Well, if you overclocked your chip, and then ignored the launch of the 965 CPU, you're stealing. You cost AMD a sale. IF you hadn't overclocked, you would have bought the new CPU to get to a higher speed.

You "unlockers" are just as bad. Paying for a dual/triple-core, and getting a quad-core. Costing AMD untold millions of quad-core sales.

It's no different than downloading and burning a DVD, or borrowing a buddy's DVD and copying it, rather than buying your own.

Each one of these examples is costing companies untold millions in lost sales.

Let this be a warning to you all, once the industry starts taking note of rampant "CPU speed piracy", you're all in trouble.

Then again, so am I.

Lol, clever troll, but I know you're smarter than this.

There is no End User License Agreement that I must agree to to use the CPU I buy. Because there are no DMCA rights for the company selling me the product (Intel/AMD), then there are no limitations on the sale. For them to try to do so (place limitations on the use of the product) would be illegal.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,226
9,990
126
Originally posted by: soccerballtux
Lol, clever troll, but I know you're smarter than this.

There is no End User License Agreement that I must agree to to use the CPU I buy. Because there are no DMCA rights for the company selling me the product (Intel/AMD), then there are no limitations on the sale. For them to try to do so (place limitations on the use of the product) would be illegal.

Great, now that you let that cat out of the bag, we're going to see motherboards that display a "CPU EULA", when switching processors or booting up for the first time.

Heck, that might be an interesting feature, especially when the motherboard declares, "CPU overclocked -- WARRANTY VOID".

Of course, to make that stick, you would need a small bit of flash memory on the CPU, or maybe just a fuse, that the mobo would blow once you overclocked, so then Intel or whomever would know to not take back the CPU.
 

drizek

Golden Member
Jul 7, 2005
1,410
0
71
They can print the EULA out on a sticker and place it over the socket. "By piecing 1189 holes in this legal document, you agree to abide by the following:"
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,226
9,990
126
I remember when I purchased my Atari Jaguar. The plastic wrap that enclosed the console was printed over with a EULA, that claimed that I was agreeing with it by opening the packaging.
 

dguy6789

Diamond Member
Dec 9, 2002
8,558
3
76
Originally posted by: Idontcare
Originally posted by: dguy6789
Originally posted by: Eureka
Originally posted by: ChaosDivine
Originally posted by: Eureka
You have a point. And remember, trying to use an OCed chip as if it was stock is like pretending that a mp3 rip is as good as a CD. In reality if you want full quality you have to pay the full price, or else you're getting lossy, muffled, staticy benchmarks.
Wat? :confused:

OK, well your name lends me the idea that you play Warhammer 40K. Well think about it this way, you can always make your own WH40k figurines out of silly putty, but there is no way in hell that your army based off of $2 jars of silly putty will ever look anything as good as those nice $500 sets.

Flawed analogy. My Q9550 overclocked to 3.4Ghz is every bit as "high quality" and "long lasting" and "good" as a $1000 QX9770. There is nothing special about the QX9770 besides the unlocked multiplier. The silicon is the same quality, the processor is the same quality, everything is the same.

Do you really believe that, or is this continuing in the satirical spirit for which the thread exists? (honest question, I can't tell)

Perchance you believe what you posted, I have to ask if you are aware of the device physics involved that give rise to the existence of an IC's characteristic shmoo plot?

There are some testable consequences of what you posit in order for it to be true. For one thing in order for what you say to be true then all chips at a given clockspeed would have an identical VID and identical TDP.

Is this true? If it isn't, then why is it the case that chips end up binned with different VID's despite being binned out for the same clockspeed?

(Socratic method)

This is my (basic) understanding of how processor clock speed and voltages are decided:

If Intel has 1000 chips produced and they need only 50 QX9770s(random numbers picked for this explanation) at whatever given voltage, they will test 50 chips for those specifications. If those 50 chips pass, then they won't test any more chips for QX9770 specifications. They will then test for the next model down to get enough chips for that processor model. That means that some chips might have been able to run at the QX9770 specifications but were never tested for it.

Let's assume the QX9770 runs at something like like 1.2 volts at 3.2Ghz. If Intel tests 120 Q9550s for 2.83Ghz at 1.2 volts and all they needed is 120 Q9550s, that's all they'll do. They don't test the the chips beyond the limits of what they are trying to get them to run at at the time. A Q9550 that passes testing for running at 2.83Ghz at 1.2 volts will be guaranteed to run at that clock speed but not guaranteed even a tiny bit higher. However, that doesn't mean that it isn't in fact the same silicon that can reach 3.2Ghz or maybe even higher on the same 1.2 volts. The consumer gets to figure that out if they so desire. This is all I'm saying. A Q9550 or a Q9650 could in fact be the same grade silicon as the QX9770. Of course something like a Q9550S is tested to even higher standards than the Q9550, but even that doesn't mean it's necessarily better, just that the guaranteed minimum is better.

To summarize, a 3.2Ghz 1.2 volt processor is not necessarily better than a 2.83Ghz 1.2 volt processor that was never tested for a higher clock speed. That 2.83Ghz processor just might clock as high at 1.2 volts as the 3.2Ghz one can. A 2.83Ghz 1.2 volt processor is better than a processor that couldn't reach 2.83Ghz without 1.25 volts though, I understand that.

I do understand that there are differing qualities in processors, and I suppose I shouldn't have made it sound like they are all the same. The poster I was quoting was implying that all $1000 processors are higher quality than all lower priced processors silicon wise. I was countering by saying(or attempting to) that it's in fact much more likely for a lower priced processor to be as good as the $1000 processor than not.(At least for the Core 2 line)
 

RussianSensation

Elite Member
Sep 5, 2003
19,458
765
126
Originally posted by: VirtualLarry
Think about this, you overclockers - when you overclock, you're stealing. Say you bought an AMD 955 X4 CPU, and you wanted more power. Well, if you overclocked your chip, and then ignored the launch of the 965 CPU, you're stealing. You cost AMD a sale. IF you hadn't overclocked, you would have bought the new CPU to get to a higher speed.

If you are overclocking, then you are the minority of consumers. For 97% of people who don't overclock, the revenue is preserved by both Intel and AMD.

For the other small minority, the most best bang-for-the-buck overclockable CPUs is what is purchased by these people -- we call enthusiasts. So overclocking actually helps with these sales...hence the awesome sales of XP2500+, P4 2.4C, A64 X2 3800+, E6400/6600, Q6600, etc.

Also, you are assuming that if you couldn't overclock say Core i7 920 to 940 speeds, then the "overclockers" would actually pay double for the 940. Since overclockers are the type who enjoy getting the most bank for their buck, they would probably logically discount paying 100% more for 5% performance boost of the 940 anyway.
 

Idontcare

Elite Member
Oct 10, 1999
21,118
58
91
Originally posted by: dguy6789
Originally posted by: Idontcare
Originally posted by: dguy6789
Originally posted by: Eureka
Originally posted by: ChaosDivine
Originally posted by: Eureka
You have a point. And remember, trying to use an OCed chip as if it was stock is like pretending that a mp3 rip is as good as a CD. In reality if you want full quality you have to pay the full price, or else you're getting lossy, muffled, staticy benchmarks.
Wat? :confused:

OK, well your name lends me the idea that you play Warhammer 40K. Well think about it this way, you can always make your own WH40k figurines out of silly putty, but there is no way in hell that your army based off of $2 jars of silly putty will ever look anything as good as those nice $500 sets.

Flawed analogy. My Q9550 overclocked to 3.4Ghz is every bit as "high quality" and "long lasting" and "good" as a $1000 QX9770. There is nothing special about the QX9770 besides the unlocked multiplier. The silicon is the same quality, the processor is the same quality, everything is the same.

Do you really believe that, or is this continuing in the satirical spirit for which the thread exists? (honest question, I can't tell)

Perchance you believe what you posted, I have to ask if you are aware of the device physics involved that give rise to the existence of an IC's characteristic shmoo plot?

There are some testable consequences of what you posit in order for it to be true. For one thing in order for what you say to be true then all chips at a given clockspeed would have an identical VID and identical TDP.

Is this true? If it isn't, then why is it the case that chips end up binned with different VID's despite being binned out for the same clockspeed?

(Socratic method)

This is my (basic) understanding of how processor clock speed and voltages are decided:

If Intel has 1000 chips produced and they need only 50 QX9770s(random numbers picked for this explanation) at whatever given voltage, they will test 50 chips for those specifications. If those 50 chips pass, then they won't test any more chips for QX9770 specifications. They will then test for the next model down to get enough chips for that processor model. That means that some chips might have been able to run at the QX9770 specifications but were never tested for it.

Let's assume the QX9770 runs at something like like 1.2 volts at 3.2Ghz. If Intel tests 120 Q9550s for 2.83Ghz at 1.2 volts and all they needed is 120 Q9550s, that's all they'll do. They don't test the the chips beyond the limits of what they are trying to get them to run at at the time. A Q9550 that passes testing for running at 2.83Ghz at 1.2 volts will be guaranteed to run at that clock speed but not guaranteed even a tiny bit higher. However, that doesn't mean that it isn't in fact the same silicon that can reach 3.2Ghz or maybe even higher on the same 1.2 volts. The consumer gets to figure that out if they so desire. This is all I'm saying. A Q9550 or a Q9650 could in fact be the same grade silicon as the QX9770. Of course something like a Q9550S is tested to even higher standards than the Q9550, but even that doesn't mean it's necessarily better, just that the guaranteed minimum is better.

To summarize, a 3.2Ghz 1.2 volt processor is not necessarily better than a 2.83Ghz 1.2 volt processor that was never tested for a higher clock speed. That 2.83Ghz processor just might clock as high at 1.2 volts as the 3.2Ghz one can. A 2.83Ghz 1.2 volt processor is better than a processor that couldn't reach 2.83Ghz without 1.25 volts though, I understand that.

I do understand that there are differing qualities in processors, and I suppose I shouldn't have made it sound like they are all the same. The poster I was quoting was implying that all $1000 processors are higher quality than all lower priced processors silicon wise. I was countering by saying(or attempting to) that it's in fact much more likely for a lower priced processor to be as good as the $1000 processor than not.(At least for the Core 2 line)

Ok we are agreed, I just couldn't let that all-inclusive statement you hung out there go without a little further inquiry.

Lower clocked chips can be every bit as good as higher clocked chips but that is not to say that they all are. You deftly demonstrated you understand this so I apologize for harassing you over the unspoken caveats, which were unspoken for reasons I also now understand given your post above.
 

HGC

Senior member
Dec 22, 1999
605
0
0
I guess overclocking my Black Editon processor means my soul is as black as the box it came in. :(