right... :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: intel if things stay like his is MAD (AMD) time for me :toast: :D
Printable View
right... :banana: :banana: :banana: :banana: intel if things stay like his is MAD (AMD) time for me :toast: :D
Are you sure? Nobody expected AMD to start superlocking their desktop cpu's as well.Quote:
Originally posted by Jrocket
AMD will never lock anything as far as the FSB is concerned. They got big mostly because of the enthusiasts. They might give you less features for ocing for cheaper cpus such as the A64 A64 FX type deal.
In eve of a new system for me, I was looking into both AMD as well as Intel systems. Now the choice seems much much easier.
Looks like the Abit board has already broken the lock :)
http://www.vrforums.com/showthread.p...threadid=14987
Wouldn't be too sure on that.
I think Intel are say if the overall clockspeed frequency exceeds 10%, then the overclocking protection kicks in.
That guy's overall clockspeed is 3.7Ghz.
10% would be around 3.9Ghz, so he's still within the limit.
So basically, the FSB requency can be whatever the hell you like, it's the actual overall CPU frequency that matters.
Would like to see that guy push over the 10% limit and see what happens.
yet another reason to get an fx:D
yes, but considering you can EASILY right now get HUGELY more than 10% clock increases on s478 chips, which are faster clock for clock, why would you want a chipset that stops you overclocking mroe than 10%.
Also, fsb can't be whatever you like as you have no multi control.
PRescott vs prescoot, s478 is FASTER, prescott 478 vs northy 478, NORTHY is faster.
HMm i'm sure we had all the fanboys excuse intel on prescotts release saying it needs socket 775 to work properly. What were we thinking, we should listen to fanboy's, they are ALWAYS correct .
For anyone thinking 3500+ 939, mine is doing 2.75Ghz on an antec true control and there the 12v line is dipping to 11.75 so i think it will go further. THats on a RBX waterblock, NOT cooled water, super stable since the second i installed. All i can say is, this is god damned fast.
But there is one more thing you've not mentioned. NVIDIA are planning P4 mobo's and chipsets, so we should see something after not to long if everyone is desparate for decent socket 775 boards.
Kanavit, what ar eyou on about, pinless cpu's gives greater pin density which lets you get more power. for one thing, it uses to much power hence heat issues, for another, my 939 chip has 939 pins, not even a low 775 pins, and is on cpu, and with basic water setup at 1.8v isn't breaking 43C loaded.
Well I will tell you what I heard...whether true we will have to wait and see.
915 is overclock limited 10% or so...the issue is on the cpu's not the chipsets.It also is faster with DDR1 over DDR2, and faster than 875 with DDr1 also.
925X is also overclock limited except with an EE. Intel are planning to unlock the EE like the FX from AMD is.
So..you want to overclock, Intel will force you to buy an EE unless the board makers find away round it.
lastly, ES cpu's will probably act like EE's with regard to overclocking.We need to see the boards clock with retail cpu's.
from what i remembered there were articles on this in magazines a month or two ago, stating that alderwood/granty would have 12% fsb limits inbuilt, which would leave you at a max of 224Mhz, which for a 3.6Ghz cpu would mean 18x224, which literally "just" breaks 4Ghz. Which can be far easily surpassed right now, on chips that are faster clock for clock, and run cooler, need less powerful PSU's, cost lest to run, and are available now.
BUt i disagree the new socket will cost a lot more , boards will be $10 higher due to pins, but theoretically, the chips should cost less due to lower failure rates and one less step in manufacture. Also DDR2 prices have dropped in uk/komplett to a point where ddr2 pc4200 is say £50 for 256mb and £130 for a 512 stick, almost identical to current prices for decent ddr sticks.
hmm, bigtoe, won't that mean though that though the EE's will have multi control upwards we might still see them stuck at 224Mhz, but just raising the multi to get speed.
WHIle thats better than nothing, a s478 EE will still completely kill it when it came to bandwidth and fsb clocks, and will be a good amount faster.
EDIT:- anyone let me know a trustworthy place in us to get a 530W fortron sent to me in UK, need a decent psu :(
i doubt that they will have upward multis unlocked, probably like the fx, default multis+lower.Quote:
Originally posted by drunkenmaster
hmm, bigtoe, won't that mean though that though the EE's will have multi control upwards we might still see them stuck at 224Mhz, but just raising the multi to get speed.
well from my understanding it works like this:
the chipset checks the cpu speed and compares it with the cpus marking (the infos about clockspeed, default multiplier etc are on a little memory cell inside the cpu) and then decides whether to accept the speed the cpu is runing at, or reset the system when it exceeds the programmed speed by more than 10%.
so yes, you will be able to get a higher fsb than 220mhz (10% increase) but only by lowering the multiplier and raising the fsb, wich only works on engineering samples like Visionary showed us.
the fsb is NOT locked directly, but as the multiplier and the max cpu speed are both locked now, the fsb is locked automatically...
so the only way to get a high fsb on a 915/925 chipset board will be with a prescott ES (only by lowering the multi and thereby reducing the max clockspeed) or a P4EE wich probably doesnt support the overclocking lock and can therefore be overclocked beyond a 10% increase of the default speed.
i know some of you already have your new 775 toys :D , so please report what happens if you raise the fsb above 10% (with the highest multiplier set in case its an es)
check this out, i think they ship to brittland
460Whttp://www.geizhals.at/eu/a62063.html
heres a 550W one, but its not quite cheap! 160€ 0.0
http://www.geizhals.at/eu/a62104.html
Thats A64, FX has full multi control (up to 25x)Quote:
probably like the fx, default multis+lower.
I wonder if the 'anti OC' feature is only BIOS related. Perhaps it wont allow the system to boot up past default+10%. In this case SetFSB, Clockgen, TurboPLL would be the 'el saviour' :D
:hitself: :DQuote:
Originally posted by macci
Thats A64, FX has full multi control (up to 25x)
but i dont think intel will unlock all multis on the EE...
on the other hand... ...for 1000$ they better should! :D
from what ive seen the mechanism gets iniciated even before the bios... would be surprised if it stops working once the cpu booted. why all this trouble to lock the cpus and then let them be ocable in windows? ... its not like intel has made any sence at all in the last months... years actually, so im not sure ^^Quote:
Originally posted by macci
I wonder if the 'anti OC' feature is only BIOS related. Perhaps it wont allow the system to boot up past default+10%. In this case SetFSB, Clockgen, TurboPLL would be the 'el saviour' :D
Rather poor move on Intel's part. The move itself feels kind of like a desperation measure, sort of like they know they are losing market and are trying to grasp at any and all possible revenue saving measures they can...
Unlocking the EE's would have been smart if they had done it at the beginning. Instead they priced it so high, few took the leap. I guess they can still make up ground, but it had better be a completely open lock up and down because I think most of the folks who would have bought into that price level of chip have done so, not much more revenue you can tap on that front.
If Nvidia were to leap into the P4 chipset arena now with the kind of performance they've been getting from the 250 series, Intel might have a hard time selling chipsets to Taiwan.
I guess lastly let's not underestimate the ability of the Asus, Abit and Giga's of the world to figure out how to get around this. It's a completely dumb move really by Intel, but someone will figure out how to short circuit it, so to speak. It's not like enthusiasts who still bought Intel needed a lot of reason to go AMD, but now the choice is practically a no brainer. S478 just won't be around much longer so that's only a choice for a short time.
Intel is just out to piss us off lately I think. No 64 bit until they're darn good and ready (read that as Intel 64bit stinks in performance so we don't want to show anyone yet) Limit overclocking because those folks don't buy our expensive chips (read that as failure to realize how often said folks upgrade their midgrade chips or recommend systems to others) DDR2 (read as forcefeeding a huge price/revenue stream into memory makers, thus recouping huge profits on their investments in said companies) BTX.. the list is getting long and it's not pretty at all. Intel inside just means "paid all my earnings to Intel and all I got was this little piece of crud silicon"
Watch the industry go into a slump in the end of the year, just because the market gets tired of this. Then they'll say they HAVE to charge more even. Just lovely
WELCOME TO XTREMESYSTEMS :D :toast:
PS: do you have any infos regarding the nforce4?
Scene: Intel Boardroom
Faceless suit 1: Our chips are hotter than afterburner on an F16, what are we going to do about it?
Faceless suit 2: Do? That sounds like a lot of work to me. Why dont we instead just make a new format that just dumps all our heat problems on everyone else? That way everyone else will have to build new things, not us.
Faceless suit 3: Hmm, sounds like a good plan. The thing is we also need to raise hardware sales, the levels are falling too low. Any ideas?
Faceless suit 4: Continuing with 2's idea of a new format, why dont we change the everything and give them "new features", so even if people have an old one then they have to buy a new one?
Faceless suit 2: How can we do that to cases, we dont need anything new from cases?
Faceless suit 5: I know, i know. Just turn everything in the case around, that way no old case will work with the new format. We can do that with everything, just change the shape, new connectors, new shapes, new money for us!
Faceless suit 1: I like the sound of that. Whilst we are at it why dont we dump all of our bent pin RMAs on motherboard makers, i mean their margins are huge, and i need a new car.
Faceless suit 3: There is still the danger that people might have fun with their computers, and might extract extra performance from them as it's fun.
Faceless suit 4: Woah, better put a stop to that sharpish. Just lock the frequency of the lot, then no one can gain virtually anything.
Faceless suit 5: And we had better cover out backsides by leaving a ridiculously expensive option in our strategy, just to show we are providing for the enthusiast market.
Faceless suit 3: Well thats enough work for today, we'll leave technology till tomorrow.
Faceless suit 2: Oh wait till you hear what ive got planned there, ive got some great ideas to screw the consumer.
Faceless suit 1: Anyone for a round of golf?
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
G
I had a P3 2.8C @ 3.5Ghz and didn't think it was that great little diffrence from my XP 2500+ @ 2.4GHz. Now the A64 3500+ @ 2.33Ghz is alot better then both of them quite happy. After the problems with my P4 and the poor overclock i won't be going back to Intel again! I know my A64 can do alot better but my ASUS A8V is holding me way back :rolleyes: Roll on NF3 Ultra!
Almost correct...Prescott vs Prescott, 915/925 + DDR is faster than 865/875 + DDR.Quote:
Originally posted by drunkenmaster
PRescott vs prescoot, s478 is FASTER, prescott 478 vs northy 478, NORTHY is faster.
I heard EE will become fully unlocked to compete with FX51, 53, 55 etc etc.You will also be able to run any fsb at any multi you choose...
So the move to AMD for the enthusiast on a budget has already started.Im sure when sales drop intel will release a "special" like the 1.6a(remember them?) that overclocks like a banshee to get sales back ;)
Intel will loose even more money when people go an buys AMD's instead and make all of their friends buy AMD CPU's too. :stick:Quote:
Originally posted by Kanavit
Intel is loosing a lot of money to people buying a 2.4c and ocing to 3.2ghz. the loose more than they gain, hence the locking mechanism.
Master G - I think you are frightfully close to the truth, which is kind of sad. Innovation be damned it's all about offering as little new stuff as possible for the highest extraction of dollars from the public as possible.
Open multiplier on the EE? Great! How about you charge the same as the FX while you are at it, or did that "charge the same price for performance" thing you claimed as basic Intel thinking die out when AMD beat you up?
DDR2? Could we START the market at a performance point that is better than DDR1? Oh wait, that's not possible. We'd much rather have DDR2 that performs worse and costs more - and have another round of golf. Don't see many of those claims now that a year ago they were saying DDR2 would be cheaper to produce.
AMD - you know I'm thinking the 90nm chips are going to look a lot like Presc compared to NW. People are going to happily buy the FX-53-and 55 instead because the delays can only mean that the 90nm chips are not coming out well.
And MS is just waiting to see where the dust falls. The sad part is that most of the dust is from them recycling old products like they were new again.
What fun...
If it is such a small part of the market, than how are they losing a lot of money????Quote:
Overclockers, hobbyists, and enthusiast still make the minority of the market. Intels main profit is from business such as HP, Dell, IBM, Gateway, Compaq. these large corporations don't overclock but pay big bucks.
Intel is loosing a lot of money to people buying a 2.4c and ocing to 3.2ghz. the loose more than they gain, hence the locking mechanism
because there isn't enough demand or revenue generated from enthusiast, hobbyists, and overclockers which only makes up 5% of the world market. Intel is a 50 billion dollar industry and cannot survive on 5%. Thats why. Gamers too, are too small enough market to do anything about, but not big enough to do anything either. So, Intel stays neutral, and anything that is invented for gaming through Intel technology is nothing but happen stance. Games revolve around Intel, Not the other way around.Quote:
Originally posted by Nohto
If it is such a small part of the market, than how are they losing a lot of money????
Hi, I couldn't help but notice you may have missed the point. Intel has gone out of it's way to limiting 5% of the markets ability to affect change on it's product.Quote:
Originally posted by Kanavit
Intel stays neutral
i guess, that 5% can grow. thus effecting Intel's revenue and profit margin. like i said before, it has been done for a reason.
man...this is so sucky :P