• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Overclocking is stealing

Page 5 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
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.

No youre wrong because the electrons are not traveling as they would in a CPU tht was running stock that speed why do you think they have different BINs noob, obviously the signal to noise ratio is different.what a noob.🙄🙄🙄
 
So, if you buy a volkswagon, are you stealing from cadilac?
If you buy as Mustang, and soup it up, are you stealing from Ferrari!
If you buy a microwave are you stealing from the oven manufacturers?
If you buy grass seed and plant it in your yard, are you stealing from god?
If you buy hookers and blow, are you stealing from ... Uh, that doesn't work.

Rofl
 
That's why chicks have always gone for overclockers. They love when we let that badboy side of us out. It gives em that sense of danger, they love it.
 
This is a point of much contention. Soon, everything sold will in fact be "licensed", not sold.

You cannot license physical objects. It has been already been fought in court over renting VHS and DVD and you can do whatever you want with a physical object. EULAs do not apply to actual things, only IP.
 
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.

no. you are wrong.

OC = trading CPU life to extend performance.

say suppose your CPU is designed to last 10 yrs. you OC and its likely to decrease its durability to 5 years...

The reason behind OC is in 5 yrs, its likely you will have already upgraded, as the cpu would worth $0 to you.
 
Back
Top