• Some users have recently had their accounts hijacked. It seems that the now defunct EVGA forums might have compromised your password there and seems many are using the same PW here. We would suggest you UPDATE YOUR PASSWORD and TURN ON 2FA for your account here to further secure it. None of the compromised accounts had 2FA turned on.
    Once you have enabled 2FA, your account will be updated soon to show a badge, letting other members know that you use 2FA to protect your account. This should be beneficial for everyone that uses FSFT.

Intel is the most considerate...

L

lightp2

Gawd
Joined
Oct 28, 2009
Messages
672
I have little bias per this post, this post is done on AMD-785G chipset computer. I have setup with integrated nvidia graphic/chipset. I do use Intel-based OEM machines. There is no demeaning in this post.

Intel is the most considerate...

1. with the launch of SB, high praise and also a lot of complicated comments.

2. One of the core issues relates to P67 chipset and H67 chipset

2a. P67 supports overclocking, but no GPU function

2b. H67 supports GPU/Quick Sync, but no overclocking

3. Understandably, many have opinions on the supposed limitations.

----------------------------------------------------

Reverse Thinking

1. By de-activating GPU function on P67, AMD/nVidia can sell not only high-end GPU, but also low-end GPU for other non-gaming group of users on this platform.

1a. If Intel activated GPU function on P67, as all media outlets have been writing, the lowest-end GPU market is gone for good for AMD/nVidia on the prospect of selling low-end GPU on this Intel chipset platform.

1b. Based on 1a, AMD/nVidia fans do not need to praise, but suppose at least neutral on this aspect. I would be extremely surprise if they complaint on this point.

2. By not-activating overclocking support on H65/H67 chipset series(even limited scale), it allows easy openings for entry-mid level desktop markets for AMD/nVidia (as you know, soon CPU-company)

2a. Based on recent SB results, I think almost everyone is sure of general Intel desktop parts performance.

2b. Based on generic technology progress, I think almost everyone is sure of process engineering performance of intel, at least short to mid-term wise.

2c. Based on posted results and user self-generated results seen on many forums, at least you know this is not theory.

2d. If Intel activated overclocking on all parts and all consumer chipsets, on generally accepted macro inspection, I suspect almost everyone will agree Intel will be very high on the consideration for any build, even the cheapest one. You dont need to take my words, just see the user self-generated builds/performance/efficiency numbers. With the latest SB numbers, the effect must be wide-reaching.

2e. So again, I would be very surprise if AMD/nVidia fans claim/complaint otherwise

By doing what is being layout,

3a. Intel allows alpha geeks to do what they want

3b. Intel allows techical folks to build with confident results

3c. Intel allows reasonable build even for most entry-level to lower-mid with sensible performance, no loss to many, look at perf of even lowest rated part.

3d. And allow nVidia/AMD/others to compliment with other parts if you need more

3e. And if you do not agree, it does allow alternative competitive builds, so it looks like other people can get a piece of the pie as well.

Obviously Intel needs to get return on their investment, so in case you really focus on intensive computing, then Intel expects some margins, for example, from servers, high-end parts, ECC support, high number PCI-E lanes, etc. Admittedly, the margin is high.

However, think about it, it does allow others to compliment with additional parts/alternative setups, if you so want. For example, I do build AMD setup with ECC RAM, no bias, I can only do what I can afford. However, if others seeking maximum performance, then Intel build will be considered.
 
Last edited:
I am so surprised in getting a counter response so quick.

So in this case, this post and the response clearly demonstrate

1. Intel basic market segments, which appears (not sure because this is unofficial observation) got listed in 1st post. The basic H6x series non-overclocking position suggestion is common in early reviews.

2. However, it looks like others are determined to alter the course of computing.

3. At least you know Intel at this point appears not to be involved in this effort. :)

4. Per the implication, it makes life even more challenging for non-Intel builds, I suppose.

Yes, I also want to be honest with all, I do not mind SB 2C/4T at 4.7GHz, I will buy if viable :)
 
Last edited:
News: AMD also segments CPUs and chipsets. Just as a quick example, only the 890FX supports IOMMU functionality out of the current desktop chipsets.

Of course Intel is slicing and dicing the product matrix to compete in every segment, but so does AMD. :p I have complained that it's getting ridiculous.
 
it would be nice to be able to shut down the power hungry nvidia card when in 2D mode and use the built in GPU, but I'll live. Gonna upgrade to socket 2011 when ivy bridge hits in 12 months, which won't have a GPU anyways.
 
stockwiz said:
it would be nice to be able to shut down the power hungry nvidia card when in 2D mode and use the built in GPU, but I'll live. Gonna upgrade to socket 2011 when ivy bridge hits in 12 months, which won't have a GPU anyways.
Click to expand...
In the AT review, it mentions that Intel said that switchable graphics will be coming to desktop for SB, which of course will require Z68 for switchable SB/PCIe cards (technically someone could make a H67 board with 4 lane x16 form slot).

I can imagine that the PCIe video card won't be completely powered down, but clocked down very significantly it should use little power in an idle state.
 
Last edited:
wait so z68 has built in graphics switching? Does virtu require any hardware modification or is it purely software?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top