The beginning of FSB detection and the end of OCing?

Hmm, interesting. I'll hold out for some more news though, although if what they are saying is true that could be very bad for us.
 
If this is ever fully implemented, then IMO what will happen is people will turn to building the quietest system possible. There will always be some way for people to say "mine is bigger". :)
 
It may happen on Intel's boards, but you know as well as I do that the 3rd party manufacturers that have a big stake in OCing wil find a way around it. If not, then other chipset makers will. I really don't see it becoming a big issue. There will always be ways around anything, with the one exception being death itself.... LOL
 
INTEL ROOLZ DOODZ!!!!


i had the suspecion they had completly lost any love for the hobbiest (in either system building or overclocking)...now I am proven.

the dumbest part of this is that its not like the mulitplier...those were locked to try to prevent faking a CPU (which IMO was retarded because if youre going to rip someone off, youre going to get around anything like that, which only keeps out script kiddies and the like). This is just a big "fuck you" to the overclocking community as a large.
 
Anybody here read the [H]'s article on the 900 series chipsets? Abit's here to save the day, as usual, and ASUS, Epox and however many other mobo makers will all have workarounds in their final shipping boards.

As long as Intel uses a memory controller on the northbridge, there isn't anything they can do with respect to FSB that those bright cookies in Taiwan can't undo.

Now, if AMD wanted to stop FSB clocking on their Hammer chips, they could do it. But Intel has very limited contol over the FSB of it's processors, unless it wants to have a different chipset rev for every FSB generation, which would kill it's economies of scale.

Ed has some good insight on a lot of issues, but sometimes he overreacts.
 
Intel could very easily stop FSB overclocking in the CPU itself. Thermal throttling works by dropping some of the clock pulses before they are distributed to to the execution units; no clock pulse means no works done, little heat generated.

It would be ridiculously easy to add a frequency detector that did the same thing. Too many clock pulse coming in? Ignore a few.
 
Yes, AMD who leaves the FX chips multiplier unlocked, and non-FX mulitplier down unlocked, will suddenly decide to lock FSB. Stupid?
 
M4d-K10wN said:
Yes, AMD who leaves the FX chips multiplier unlocked, and non-FX mulitplier down unlocked, will suddenly decide to lock FSB. Stupid?
Click to expand...

I was saying that AMD COULD do it. Not that they WOULD do it.
 
From an old launch paper by AMD, FX series were aimed at the "prosumers". AMD also defines "prosumers" as ethusiasts, overclockers and hardcore gamers.
 
Intel gets most of its money from mass produced pre-builts such as Dell, Compaq, HP, etc., so they really could care less about us enthusiasts... I don't really blame them, if someone could buy a $150 processor and get the same performance as a $500 processor, I'd stop them too. As long as AMD doesn't go and screw us over, then there's really no big deal.
 
AMD would probably do it with Opterons and A64's. I can't imagine why they would possibly do that with the multiplier unlocked FX line, though. Now, if only the FX chips cost less than $500, everybody would stay very happy.
 
If they lock the FSB or come up with this disposable socket, I'm just moving to AMD. These guys are idiots. They're just giving away the O/C market to AMD.
 
Addicted said:
If they lock the FSB or come up with this disposable socket, I'm just moving to AMD. These guys are idiots. They're just giving away the O/C market to AMD.
Click to expand...


Just to let you know, the crappy socket IS coming out, and this IS a feature of Intel chipsets now.
 
I think Intel's high off the smoke of their own chips. Pretty soon, they'll start buying up bundles of tiny companies because they have the corporate munchies and start calling AMD the 'Gringos'.

And if multiplier locks can be fixed with a pencil, chances are FSB locks won't be hard to crack either. For the first generation, anyway.
 
I'm getting tired of the complaints about the pins on the mobo. I think it's great. With some caution it doesn't seem to be too hard to install and 20 installations is no different from the pin-on-CPU of everything else from Intel. At least if you bust a pin now it's just the mobo, not some $400 CPU.
 
Looks like Anandtech has taken a look at the overclock lock on the new chipsets -- at least an early look.

http://www.anandtech.com/chipsets/showdoc.html?i=2092

In the ASUS board that they look at, a limit of 24% seems to be imposed right now -- definately above the 10% that is rumored as the "norm" for these chipsets, but for lower-speed Prescotts, is still too low.

Time will tell.
 
i doubt AMD will ever put an end to OCing, they need to stay competitve with Intel, afterall it is the enthusiasts that are keeping AMD alive ;)
 
advanced101101 said:
i doubt AMD will ever put an end to OCing, they need to stay competitve with Intel, afterall it is the enthusiasts that are keeping AMD alive ;)
Click to expand...
I sure hope not, enthusiasts make up too small a portion of the market.
 
drewb99 said:
I think Intel's high off the smoke of their own chips. Pretty soon, they'll start buying up bundles of tiny companies because they have the corporate munchies and start calling AMD the 'Gringos'.

And if multiplier locks can be fixed with a pencil, chances are FSB locks won't be hard to crack either. For the first generation, anyway.
Click to expand...

how many multiplier locks have you heard being broken with a pencil, ON AN INTEL? also this is chipset logic level control, there would be no way around it unless the motherboard makers found some hole.
 
emorphien said:
I'm getting tired of the complaints about the pins on the mobo. I think it's great. With some caution it doesn't seem to be too hard to install and 20 installations is no different from the pin-on-CPU of everything else from Intel. At least if you bust a pin now it's just the mobo, not some $400 CPU.
Click to expand...

dammit emo, i like you, dont start saying stuff like that :p first off ive installed intel CPUs more than 20 times and they definitly dont break. a cpu doesnt break unless you do something retarded with the pins, or throw it, neither of which anyone has ever complained about. now these sockets...i actually have seen and touched them. they look like such bad news. they did it in such a stupid way there are going to be many problems with it. they look and feel very frail, and bend very easily.

PS - if you read this, i'm coming back up to rochester come fall :)
 
Well, nobody's forcing you to buy a mobo with evil Intel chipsets. You could buy one with a VIA or even an :eek: ATi chipset. Such a shame, really, both of the latter companies suck at making chipsets. Nvidia makes great chipsets (although it always takes them two tries to get everything right). But then again, they only make chipsets for AMD boards.
 
bah@Intel, since when is it news that Intel's a bitch to OCers?

if AMD does follow suit, then , i'm sure of it, a new , 3rd company will rise to fill the niche of OCers..after all, we'll be a market just waiting to be exploited :p
 
kronchev said:
dammit emo, i like you, dont start saying stuff like that :p first off ive installed intel CPUs more than 20 times and they definitly dont break. a cpu doesnt break unless you do something retarded with the pins, or throw it, neither of which anyone has ever complained about. now these sockets...i actually have seen and touched them. they look like such bad news. they did it in such a stupid way there are going to be many problems with it. they look and feel very frail, and bend very easily.

PS - if you read this, i'm coming back up to rochester come fall :)
Click to expand...
Well, the concept seemed good, but like I said I haven't touched one yet. :p The retention and installation do sound flaky.

I just in some ways like the concept, if i had to deal with breaking something and i'm dealing with a $1000 CPU, i'd rather it be pin on the mobo than pins on the cpu. thas all! Personally I think they should have a recessed guide and metal bumps that contact the pad rather than pins. Hell someone could do that without even talking to intel. That would be a robust system I think. Not that many people are constantly swapping CPUs, but some do.

Of course in the ideal world the computer would do whatever I think and you could just toss the parts in a box and they'd all communicate without power or cables. :D

edit: ooo, Rochester. I'm in boston working for the summer.
 
heyheyhey said:
Intel gets most of its money from mass produced pre-builts such as Dell, Compaq, HP, etc., so they really could care less about us enthusiasts...
Click to expand...

This is not completely true. While enthusiasts make up a relatively small percentage of the total market, their influence on buying habits of other consumers is huge. Think about it. How many times have you given family/friends/whoever advice on a new computer because you're their friend/relative that knows about computers? I think it would be pretty stupid for any company to ignore this...
 
Deadlierchair said:
This is not completely true. While enthusiasts make up a relatively small percentage of the total market, their influence on buying habits of other consumers is huge. Think about it. How many times have you given family/friends/whoever advice on a new computer because you're their friend/relative that knows about computers? I think it would be pretty stupid for any company to ignore this...
Click to expand...
exactly what i was going to say. us overclockers might not make up a large percentage of sales, but our influence on other people's buying habbits make these companys alot of dough
 
[hard]420 said:
exactly what i was going to say. us overclockers might not make up a large percentage of sales, but our influence on other people's buying habbits make these companys alot of dough
Click to expand...
MMM, probably not as much as we'd like to think.
 
emorphien said:
MMM, probably not as much as we'd like to think.
Click to expand...


yup.

when i went into frys last, i heard some old bitch yelling about how she wanted to get away from the filth of AMD. apparently her hard drive died, and she was blaming AMD for it.

i mean... wtf? what idiot tech did she talk to to reach that conclusion?
 
emorphien said:
I'm getting tired of the complaints about the pins on the mobo. I think it's great. With some caution it doesn't seem to be too hard to install and 20 installations is no different from the pin-on-CPU of everything else from Intel. At least if you bust a pin now it's just the mobo, not some $400 CPU.
Click to expand...
I was pretty pissed off when I read about the new sockets, but this seems to make sense to me. I'd certainly rather pay a hundred bucks for a new mobo than three to four hundred for a new CPU, and the likelihood of damage to either (with pins) would probably be about the same. So I'm not upset about the socket anymore, although I think a replacable socket might be a solution worth looking into.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top