Intel very seriously needs to consider the backlash that would come from this.
+1 for it being Fud, however things are plausible.
ps - Wutup Chaos!
Intel very seriously needs to consider the backlash that would come from this.
+1 for it being Fud, however things are plausible.
ps - Wutup Chaos!
Ah, ok, so what are all those additional pins up from LGA 1160 for then? Tri- channel DDR3? I am ok with that, as long as it does not require rediculously expensive motherboards and EE CPUs. Something along the lines of present q6600 and P35 prices midway through 09 and I won't complain:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Blauhung
Sounds like they will truly lock down the FSB in doing this. So the only way, even with the Extreme chips, will be to up the multi.
And if AMD doesn't get up out of their doldrums, are you really going to buy those chips? I mean if you have to OC the chip just to get it to run as fast as a stock Intel chip, what's the point? I suppose you avoid contributing to the goliath that Intel is becoming, there is that.
I could smell this one coming based on the last round of attempts Intel made to kill overclocking on the P4's (except for Extremes). You knew they wanted to do it. They probably only left the C2D's alone so they could get the enthusiasm going and now when they come 'round to refresh the C2D with Nehalem, they take the FSB/Mem onboard and finally they have the lockdown they've wanted for a long time. As before however, I think they are underestimating that while a small % of the market, the folks who OC, are "advisors" to a larger part of the market on what company to go with. Then there's the lawsuit to consider, as they may very well point to this type of long term dominance as to exactly why Intel is bad for the market. But that's really a sideline.
We all must have had feelings this might happen and have to make new choices depending on what's available. Remember, however, that the first Nehalem is an Extreme anyway, so for those waiting for the first round, it's evident that they don't want you to "wait" for the mainstream cpu's to find out if they OC or not.
The illustrious Francois Piednoel had mentioned a few weeks back that they were working on a successor to the SkullTrail with DDR3 so I'm assuming it is some sort of nehalem based platform.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blauhung
As to some of the other comments here; Guys, don't get your panties in such a bunch until there are at the least some facts known.
It seems to me that Intel has taken a stand for the overclocking community witrh the boards they've brought out in the last year namely SkullTrail and Bonetrail.
Let's wait and see what happens before we get our blood pressure running.;)
(ok Blauhung, does that get me a free board and chips..oops, and memory)
Good pts Movieman.
Yeah I'd have gotten Skulltrail if it had supported better memory. Perhaps all in time :)
Cant call Skulltrail a community release- what % of the 2% that are real overclockers/benchers can afford it, let alone use it to full potential?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave
Correct, they are for the additional QPI link and the 3rd memory channel. The socket 1336 CPUs might initially be EE but hopefully Blauhung is right and we will get some midrange ~$400 cpus for that socket as well, maybe single socket Xeons like we have now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frodin
This should not come as a surprise to ANY of you, current budget overclocking on Intel platforms is nothing more but an unavoidable side-effect of the FSB architecture. It was only a matter of time before system on a chip designs showed up and locked many of the variables we exploit on-die. Oveclocking will still be viable on socket 1336 but you will have to pay premium for it, mainstream platforms are going for performance/watt and limited overclocking is a side effect of improvements to which will benefit the vast majority of mainstream clients.
My concern is, assuming Bloomfield is too expensive compared to Penryn, will locked socket 1160 cpu's be faster than overclocked socket 775 Penryn's? I doubt it, so hopefully Bloomfield ends up being affordable or I will stick to Penryn for a long time.
Hmm, even though I believe Intel could perfectly prevent OC, then I sincerely doubt that they will. This is just more FUD, from a site using FUD as part of their name.
This information is failed without a more sensible and proven accurate source. When Fugger or some of the XIP / Legends say it will be so, then I'll believe it above what even Intel will state.
Until then, I believe, any Nehalem platform will be as overclockable as the current CPU and chipsets, in their respective markets.
To be blunt -- DILLIGAF?
Bloomfield/LGA1366 is not just 'Extreme' processors. It's a lot more than that. The LGA1160 socket is limited. Two channels of DDR3? This is what Intel has now. Two channels of DDR3 with an on-die memory controller? This is what AMD will offer soon.
Even if desktop processors for LGA1366 turn out to be expensive, there will be identical, renamed Xeons for the socket just like there are now. It's desktop, DP and MP. Motherboard manufacturers will know to take advantage of that, and release affordable LGA1366 boards for Xeon use.
And at the end of the day, this is just good old FUD. Maybe it turns out to be true, maybe not. I was aiming for Bloomfield anyway.
This move wouldn't surprise me. But its all FUD (no pun intended) until we multiple reviews and real world testing.
LGA 1366 for bloomfield UP, and gainstown DP. both are required for using QPI and the 3 channel memory controller. CPU will probably be $400 or so for the low end, motherboard will probably about the same as prices now.Quote:
Originally Posted by Frodin
There is no FSB, there is no bus at all. so you can't lock out something that isn't there. There also will be no extreme chips on the mainstream platform.Quote:
Originally Posted by Anemone
Yup, Intel isn't ignoring us. They are devoting entirely new platforms to this comunity. Because of the requirements that this community wants, these new platforms may cost a bit more. They are ignoring the people who get the cheap chips and make them work like the better ones do. They are not locking them out to prevent you from overclocking them. They are moving everything on die to lower power requirements and cost of production of the home and business desktop/mobile platforms with the goal of greatly improving performance per watt and dollar. This has the side effect of removing the levers that this community uses to raise the clock speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Movieman
I repeat, this is not in place to screw this community. That just happens to be a side effect of all the improvements that 98% of the users will greatly appreciate.
Just calm down.
The whole point of overclocking is to get more performance for your money for 99.9% of people out there. I doubt Intel is "catering" to anything. According to you, they're going to be catering to those who want to buy :banana::banana::banana::banana:ing $1000 chips and then OC them. That's not me, nor anyone I know or care to know. If this is true, which it very well could be, Intel's just being a giant douchebag because they can.
fixed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Swatrecon_
I have to call fake.
For intel to do this, they'd loose market they weren't even trying to make buy the more expensive stuff.
Enthusiasts build pcs for non-enthusiasts, if I had to buy the extreme edition to overclock type idea, I'd be going amd all the way, every system i'd build, intel would no longer be an option.
I think the people that pay over $500 for a CPU+Mobo are in the minority even here on XS. Its quite obvious though that due to the design the only way to overclock the low-end chips would be through the multi.
Depends if oveclocked AMD is faster than the mainstream nehalem.Quote:
Originally Posted by LuckyNV
If AMD is slower by stock, but faster when overclocked, then I'd go with AMD anyday if the prices aren't too high.
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdogg
Remember when Intel was against overclockin? What actually brought C2D to it's prime? 1: good OC capability 2: good performance over K8.
What if you couldn't OC C2D's, but could K8? C2D would fail here in XS.
Intel seems to have no threat from AMD right now, but what about if AMD becomes competitive @ same clockspeeds and AMD's clock like C2D does right now? Then Intel would want people to OC. ;)
RIght now people just buy the cheapest parts and OC them to near the top parts. :p
I just hope the enthuasiast platform has chips that will be accessible by the vast majority of this community. A lot of overclockers utilize budget chips and strive for moderate overclocks, alienating that supporting crowd of members could have drastic effects. Either way though, I'm more worried about the overclocking and cold-bug potentials of Nehalem over the platform itself. 45nm Core 2 will still be around and still be powerful, if Nehalem costs too much then just ride the 45nm train till 32nm Nehalem is out :up:
Well, stuff wasn't exactly that much cheaper (if at all), in the day when AMD 64 and X2 was king of the hill.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
:up:Quote:
Originally Posted by [XC] gomeler
Even if Nehalem had no OC capability at all, C2D / C2Q would probably still be a very excellent alternative, both in terms of performance and overclocking ability.
Nehalem's worst enemy is probably 45nm C2D / C2Q, and probably not anything AMD has to offer at the time (but God, I hope I am wrong).
although this is probably a lie.. (its FUD after all) i think its quite funny how people are acting! it's not the end of the world if you can't oc... you buy a car for £20,000 and you get 300bhp (for example), you then need to BUY extra stuff to get more BHP out of it.
getting a chip for £200 and then overclocking it to a £600 chip is intel loosing money and they do realise that you know :rolleyes:
That I do agree with, but this is XS after all hehe :p:Quote:
Originally Posted by Origin_Unknown
I bought a $1000 chip from Intel 1½ year ago, and if it couldn't clock beyond its 2667 MHz speed, then I wouldn't really put it past them (Intel never promised me more than that). For games and applications, I have never found a need for it to OC'ed. For benchmarking it is good that it can overclock, but still... I wouldn't pay $100.000 for a McLaren F1 and expect it to be like a >1.000.000$ McLaren F1. I believe you can only expect and demand to get, what you pay for ... the rest is just fortunate. Stock speed and features are what you payed for, not the promise of something faster or better.
Nothing was stopping you from OCing P4s, K7s, Sempron K8s and SC K8s(after the X2s got released). So it is not the same. You really need to read Blauhungs posts as wellQuote:
Originally Posted by Seraphiel
you guys need to chill!
do some reading first... and those of you over 18, try to remember back in the days...
the game stays the same, but the way you play it... it's another story.
I, for one, am waiting with high hopes this new architecture
As you still could with current X2, X4 / Phenom, C2D / C2Q ... and the difference is? This with regards to your >500$ statement for Nehalem CPU+Mobo.Quote:
Originally Posted by BrowncoatGR
Sure, just like then, there will be people chosing older and cheaper products/platforms, but there will also be those that will pay that 500$ or whatever it will cost.
I can't see the difference in examples.
But I could be missing the point, and if so, I will stand corrected :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dan_c
I believe few is taking this news seriously :)
Yep thanks for correcting my thinking, with QPI the FSB concept goes away. There must still be a ratio of core speed to memory speed though, I'd imagine. But it won't work the old way that's for sure.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blauhung
I wouldn't have expected any EE chips on the mainstream platform.
Well I don't know how's you guys. But I work as System's administrator.
Because current Intel architecture is superior to AMD's, I've got quad core
under my hood at home's computer.
Now because I'm the one who decide what kind of Office desktop's we're
buying it's all Intel C2D. There's about 500 of those.
When I was on AMD side I was buying AMD's for the Company.
Now, if they will lock their CPUs, i'm back at AMD's door step.
I'm sure there is much more guys like me...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Xope_Poquar