Sandy Bridge may be Un-Overclockable

Tofurkeymeister

Junior Member
May 8, 2010
17
0
0
http://www.bit-tech.net/news/hardware/2010/07/22/intel-to-limit-sandy-bridge-overclocking/1

Information provided by Intel in its own presentations about its upcoming mainstream LGA1155 Sandy Bridge CPUs appears to confirm the company has designed the CPUs to deliberately limit overclocking.

A video to HKEPC and posted on YouTube (see from 2mins onwards) confirms the fact that only a 2-3 per cent OC via Base Clock adjustments will be possible. This is because Intel has tied the speed of every bus (USB, SATA, PCI, PCI-E, CPU cores, Uncore, memory etc) to a single internal clock generator issuing the basic 100MHz Base Clock.

This clock gen is integrated into the P67 motherboard chipset and transmits the clock signal to the CPU via the DMI bus. This means there's no need for an external clock generator that used to allow completely separate control of all the individual hardware.

When you're overclocking, you want to be able to push certain frequencies, such as the Base Clock and memory clock, but leave others, such as SATA, completely stable as they're very sensitive to adjustment. Current motherboards allow multiple bus speeds because external clock generators are programmable via the BIOS.

According to one Taiwanese motherboard company, on a Sandy Bridge system, the fact that all the busses are linked means that turning up the Base Clock by just 5MHz caused the USB to fail and SATA bus to corrupt.


We chatted about possible work-arounds but at the moment the few 'asynchronous' setups tried were currently not working. It's been claimed to use out-of-the-box the design was deliberately limited with the intention to simplify board design and lower costs. This obviously has the 'unfortunate' side effect that enthusiasts will be unable to manually overclock Sandy Bridge CPUs to their limits, but the CPU's own internal overclocking, TurboBoost, will still work and Intel will offer some controlled multiplier overhead for enthusiasts as a token gesture.

At the time of writing we are still talking to Taiwan's motherboard companies, but the few we have had contact with are certainly worried as Intel's move not only impacts enthusiasts, it also takes control and emphasis away from motherboard manufacturers. After all, why would you buy one board over another if they all overclock the same? On the plus side, if a company does crack the Base Clock limit, then it means a potentially huge advantage over the competition. It's no understatement to say the next few months are crucial for the motherboard engineering teams.

On the plus side though, memory strap limits are at present removed on sample Sandy Bridge hardware - Intel's slides claim 2,133MHz - which is nice to have, but since most of the performance comes from additional CPU MHz rather than memory speed, it's not the answer we were really looking for.

HKEPC also mirror what we've heard and go further to include details Intel's upcoming LGA2011 Sandy Bridge-E and 'Patsburg' chipset that will replace the current X58 and LGA1366 platforms.

According to HKEPC the upper limit DDR3 support currently exceeds 2,666MHz (wowzers) and most importantly follows previous current generations basic designs so overclocking potential is unaffected, yet, unspecified.

Intel still plans to sell K-series CPUs which come with an unlocked CPU multiplier - and with this move, the K-series CPUs start to make a lot more sense, as they will be the only Intel CPUs capable of overclocking. Is this move a slap in the face for enthusiasts that will send them towards an AMD Fusion platform or are CPUs just getting fast enough that overclocking really doesn't matter that much to you any more?
Note the last three lines of text:

intel-p67pch2.png


intel-p67pch.png


intel-p67pch3.png


intel-2011.png



...hopefully Intel changes their mind
 
Last edited:

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
Looks like the K series will be the only way to go for overclocking.

Intel is finally going to capitalize on the overclocking comminuty by charging a premium on overclockable chips.
 

Kenmitch

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,505
2,250
136
Wow that would suck depending on the price of the K chips. Maybe a work around will be possible in bios? Without being able to up the Base clock overclocking just isn't the same :)
 

extra

Golden Member
Dec 18, 1999
1,947
7
81
Well, this is good news for AMD at the low end, that's for sure. Man. That blows. And people thought Aigo didn't know what he was talking about.

Hopefully the motherboard makers figure out some work around, eh?
 

nyker96

Diamond Member
Apr 19, 2005
5,630
2
81
well if not intel then amd, someone will be willing to put up a nice chip that can be easily overclockable.
 

BD231

Lifer
Feb 26, 2001
10,568
138
106
FAK YOU INTEL. Who are you to tell me I shouldn't jack up hardware I paid for with unrecommended voltage's and frequency's consequently shortening the lifespan of my CPU!?!?!?

So wait, is Sandy bridge going to have a K series as well ??? Or are the intel overclockers stuck with the core-k series CPU?
 

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,318
124
106
That would suck, but it probably doesn't matter to 95%+ of their customers, so if it allows them simplify their design and lower costs I could see why they'd do it.

And your picture says that fully and partially unlocked processors will be available, so it's really not that big a deal.

Not surprising either, as they basically tested this approach with the i7-875K and i5-655K processors. The premium you pay for the unlocked multiplier is $30 for the i5 and $40 for the i7. I'm guessing SB will be something very similar.
 

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
I would rather pay the extra $40 for an unlocked K-Series SB chip than start messing with BLK and VCore settings anyways. But thats just me.

Regardless, I am waiting for their high end line (which I hear does allow overclocking).
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
And your picture says that fully and partially unlocked processors will be available, so it's really not that big a deal.

I guess Aigo was referring to partially unlocked processors then. May be intel was sampling the aforementioned.
 

aigomorla

CPU, Cases&Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
21,074
3,577
126
I guess Aigo was referring to partially unlocked processors then. May be intel was sampling the aforementioned.

I hear an echo...

ECHO


:D

maybe my credibility will go up more after this.
Nah... i doubt it.. :p
 

Tofurkeymeister

Junior Member
May 8, 2010
17
0
0
I can't fault Intel for trying to make money, and it actually isn't that bad of a strategy. That being said, anything above a $50 premium for the unlocked version will be quite irritating.
 

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,318
124
106
Wonder what partially unlocked means ? Maybe the multiplier can only be changed within a small range ?

Would make some degree of sense I guess. You could then buy a normal 3GHz for lets say $300, or one that could be overclocked up to maybe 3.5Ghz for $350, or one that could be overclocked as much as you want for $400 (all numbers are fictional obviously).

The information might even have been on that slide in the OP, if only it hadn't been cropped like that. Guessing that's no accident.
 

Juddog

Diamond Member
Dec 11, 2006
7,851
6
81
Wow that totally sucks, but makes me feel not so bad for picking up a Bloomfield D0 that I've got currently running at 4.2 Ghz rock solid stable.
 

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
This is great news, AMD is going to sell alot more CPU's. It just pisses me off because my next upgrade in 12 months or so was going to be one of the new Intel CPU's and probably Nvidia GPU as it was looking by the roadmaps that in 12 months that was going to be the best way to go. Now i guess i might as well stick to ATI/AMD as i refuse to buy a CPU i cant OC.
 

busydude

Diamond Member
Feb 5, 2010
8,793
5
76
My understanding is

Partially unlocked looks suitable for OEM. Fully unlocked for enthusiasts? I hope there is no huge premiums for overclockable processors.
 

jvroig

Platinum Member
Nov 4, 2009
2,394
1
81
This is great news, AMD is going to sell alot more CPU's
Overclocking matters mostly to enthusiasts, I don't really see this as a big win or even a big opportunity for AMD. The OEM market is several times bigger, and if this delivers the promised "simplify board design and lower costs", this will be an OEM win. Not that Intel needs any more given their commanding lead, but this will do far more good than harm most likely.

Of course, they may lose sales from customers such as yourself, and rightfully so. But as the adage goes, "the sure fire way to failure is to try to please everyone". Here, I suppose Intel tried to please what they saw as the biggest slice of the pie. They will lose some of those not in that slice of the pie, but I doubt they'll lose sleep over it, especially if the OEM win this causes gives them yet another best quarter in history.
 

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
Overclocking matters mostly to enthusiasts, I don't really see this as a big win or even a big opportunity for AMD. The OEM market is several times bigger, and if this delivers the promised "simplify board design and lower costs", this will be an OEM win. Not that Intel needs any more given their commanding lead, but this will do far more good than harm most likely.

Of course, they may lose sales from customers such as yourself, and rightfully so. But as the adage goes, "the sure fire way to failure is to try to please everyone". Here, I suppose Intel tried to please what they saw as the biggest slice of the pie. They will lose some of those not in that slice of the pie, but I doubt they'll lose sleep over it, especially if the OEM win this causes gives them yet another best quarter in history.


While i agree 110% that overclocking matters mostly if not ONLY to enthusiasts i still think AMD is going to gain some ground, and enough to be noticed. I know alot of people that jumped on the i7 920 to hit 4Ghz+ and get some cheap awesome performance, i almost did myself. If those people now had to pay i7 960 or better prices to get the same performance, maybe even a little worse performance since they cannot OC i think they would be jumping all the hell over the AMD 1055/1090T, i know i would.
 

Edrick

Golden Member
Feb 18, 2010
1,939
230
106
While i agree 110% that overclocking matters mostly if not ONLY to enthusiasts i still think AMD is going to gain some ground, and enough to be noticed. I know alot of people that jumped on the i7 920 to hit 4Ghz+ and get some cheap awesome performance, i almost did myself. If those people now had to pay i7 960 or better prices to get the same performance, maybe even a little worse performance since they cannot OC i think they would be jumping all the hell over the AMD 1055/1090T, i know i would.

I disagree. The SB chips we are talking about (LGA1155) are not meant to be i7 920 replacements. They will be replacing the i3 and i5 600's.

Again, the same article says that the enthusiast platform of SB will be overclockable.
 

kalrith

Diamond Member
Aug 22, 2005
6,628
7
81
I won't buy a CPU that can't be overclocked unless its price/performance is better than competing CPUs after being overclocked to the max.

The best-case scenario is for a mobo manufacturer to find a way around this or for Intel to quit the shenanigans.
 

aigomorla

CPU, Cases&Cooling Mod PC Gaming Mod Elite Member
Super Moderator
Sep 28, 2005
21,074
3,577
126
I won't believe it until SB comes out

LOL...

Mkai... i cant say much without getting in trouble from my sponsor.

But lemme say this again.. if your an overclocker:

*goes hugz his westmeres-EP's*

:p

While i agree 110% that overclocking matters mostly if not ONLY to enthusiasts i still think AMD is going to gain some ground, and enough to be noticed.

i dont think bulldozer will be > then Westmere-EP.
I am hoping for it, but i highly doubt it.

I won't buy a CPU that can't be overclocked unless its price/performance is better than competing CPUs after being overclocked to the max.

So intel misses in sales on what? a few 1000 systems.
Who cares when DELL will buy 10,000 of them.

There is probably at least 20x more Dell machines out there then there are overclocked custom machines.
 
Last edited:

khon

Golden Member
Jun 8, 2010
1,318
124
106
i dont think bulldozer will be > then Westmere-EP.
I am hoping for it, but i highly doubt it.

If BD can't even beat Westmere-EP then AMD is seriously screwed, given that they'll be launching it about the same time Intel releases Sandy Bridge-B2.

Here's hoping BD is the new k8 instead.