Shacoocoo guy = Sharikou? *shudders*Quote:
Originally Posted by Donnie27
I believe there will be continued and new support for the SC-775/771, in terms of newer steppings and chipset, but not anything that will support both them and Nehalem. The roadmaps implies this to some extend for both, at least as I read them :)
(Still haven't found sensible counters to our previous discussion hehe)
My dad being an electronics engineer for at least 50 years, has dealt with PLL systems they are tunable. So I would guess that there is code for adjusting the PLL frequency, they are not going to taylor the circuitry for each and every bin level, it just wouldn't be cost effective. This may actually make overclocking easier if there is code to change the cpu speed.
$400 for a starter overclockable part, with a $200 board and expensive DDR3 mem??? When today for $220 you can get an E8400 that goes to 3.8 Ghz, $240 gets a Q6600 and $290 a Q9300? With a cheap $120 mb and rock-bottom DDR2 mem to boot.
There's always a bright side. This is actually great news... for AMD :D
Not so great news for competition though :(
FALSE. IF this is true, then Intel gives AMD a great advantage = AMD in the battle = more competition = Intel will drop prices at least and AMD will push Overclocking forwards as much as possible. Basically when overclocking for cheap, you need to ditch Intel and go for AMD.Quote:
Originally Posted by DeepThought86
Quote:
Originally Posted by DeepThought86
$400 is not alot for a processor....
lol, sorry, but anyway you try to explain it, intel is trying to make overclocking into some upper niche luxury hobby... Great for their bottomline, but I won't swing that way, I'd rather get amd... Unless lynnfield will be oc'able, I will get a phenom system. Intel has a voice, and so should we, and I will voice my opinion against this change, I don't really care if budget overclocking loses Intel money, I will only support what benefits me... I had less reservation giving amd 400 for my opteron, cause amd is a small company and they have a tougher time competing, however I won't be forced into an expensive cpu. Again, Intel has a right of doing this, its their platform, but it does go against my better interests, and I have a strong feeling that this will help amd quite a bit as a lot of people won't give up their hobby. Its as simple as that, vast majority of the reasonable overclocking community will either stick with c2 or go to phenom if it catches up.
oh, and 400 is quite a bit for a processor, intel doesn't even have any mainstream cpus at that price point as of now...
I bet a good 75% of people here spend less than $400 on their CPU.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX
Well, depends on how you look at it. If it enables AMD to survive longer it's good. However Blauhung intimated that it's to enable cheaper mainstream parts for people who don't overclock (i.e. basically 98% of the market). This is going to hurt AMD more than any moves on the extreme high-end -- not to mention Nehalem is a nukular bom in the server market. If Intel abandons the bang-for-buck overclockers (70% of the 2% that overclock?) it's entirely possible AMD will too. And even if they don't, AMD has nothing until 2010 that hints at an improvement in single-threaded performance over what's available today i.e. relatively cheap 4GHz procs like the 8400.Quote:
Originally Posted by Calmatory
Also, $400 is a lot for a CPU! Go to Office Depot etc and see the $500-$1000 PC's including monitor. That's where the mainstream market is at.
I hang round these "Extreme" forums which inspired me to go out and put together a system myself for the first time. When it was time to buy I ended up with a $60 CPU that performs like a $110 one, a cheap mobo and the money I saved I used to get 6GB of RAM. The "poor enthusiasts" like me have nothing to gain from a move like this. And judging the popularity of the Q6600 by the number of threads it's spawned compared to say threads on $500+ procs, I'd say there are many more like me.
That is a good question. Before i became an overclocker i used to upgrade my CPU every 2-3 years. Since i started to be a overclocker i will buy 3-5 CPU's per year.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xope_Poquar
$1800.00 for my 2005 3600/2mb/800 Irwindales..:DQuote:
Originally Posted by lowfat
testing a board this week with a pair of X5482 Harpertowns that are almost $1500.00 EACH..
More than I can afford but damn to they bring home the bacon!:rofl:
Blauhung, do you know if intel will allow nvidia to make motherboards for the new processors anymore?
$400+ CPU prices are going to turn off 99% of enthusiasts who are in this for bang for the buck. There are competitons based on price per benchmark point. Unless they're writing reviews and getting engineering samples, your average enthusiast doesn't want the black box xtreme chips, they want $200 chips that can be chewed up and spit out.
On the other hand I have to admit I'd make the $400 jump. I doubt most will though.
:(
That about sums up my feelings on this.
Umm not if anyone notices this but that simply means we can't overclock via FSB... that doesn't mean we can't overclock
I have an inspiron 1525 with a T7250 in it. I loaded up prime 95 on it the other day on just one core, then locked the affinity to core 0. I literally saw a 1/2 second jump up to an 11x multi, but could never get it to repeat. Why, do you ask? Because the stupid computer kept tricking itself into thinking that both cores were being loaded. Idontcare and I had a fairly long discussion in the AT forums about this, with the tentative conclusion being that the computer doesn't know HOW to use just one core most of the time. I understand that nehalem will be able to jump up 3x instead of 1x, but if they don't figure out a way to improve the feature then it will continue to be nearly useless.Quote:
Originally Posted by Blauhung
Tell that to my Barton 2500+ and Brisbane G1 3600+. :shakes:Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX
Is long as Intel continue to release different FSB models, we should be able to oc. Just like we pin-mod 266fsb CPU to 333fsb, and 333 to 400fsb, there's probably way to trick the pll to do that. It'll just be we'll have to physically mod the cpu to oc.
Yup that's him, we also call him Doctor Nick. The fake doctor from the Simpsons;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Seraphiel
It seems FUD is successful in spreading Fear Uncertainty and Doubt... LOL.
Blauhung is one of the few who actually seems to know what he's talking about on this subject.
Having an on-die clock/PLL has nothing to do with locking out overclocking... http://www.nehalemnews.com.
-Chris.
NVIDIA's options with Nehalem... http://www.nehalemnews.com/2008/05/e...halem-sli.htmlQuote:
Originally Posted by WRC
-Chris.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrcape
Gosh I love how the rules change when the Blue team is doing it, it's bad but when the Green team is doing even worse, it's OK! Folks bragged about how sweet a deal was for a $389 to $439 3800+ for almost a year while AMD raped the market.:rolleyes: Green blooded guys from far and wide defended them. They absolutely gushed and blushed about $850 FX-55's and were down right Giddy over $634 4400+ so please spare that it cost too much crying!?:rofl: Please? NO, most folks here didn't buy Intel's top models and when Conroe launched Intel had enough sense to also ship some for the Sub $200 Market and not pull an AMD 3800+ trick.
Please speak for yourself:rolleyes: If any Nehalem ships anywhere near the $400 price point it will sell like gangbusters. Sure every one can't afford it, but many more will IMHO! Unlike the other guy, most of us can at least predict that Nehalem will be worth $400:ROTF:
Q9550/X3360 currently priced at 530 dollars.
QX9650/QX9770/QX9775 Currently priced +1200 dollars.
Q9450/X3350 Currently Priced 360 dollars.
Who says the Current Gen is mostly under 400 dollars?
The Only Cheap current Gen is Ones that can't be overclocked much such as the Q9300. Or The Dual-Cores which can overclock alot, but are not Quad-Cores.
I have a principle not to buy CPUs that cost over $300 (300€). I don't give a crap what the chip does in SPi or 3DMark, all it matters is it's relatively cheap and overclocks. After that price point the marginal gains you get aren't worth it. It's obvious those who buy $300+ chips don't care about performance/price so their opinions about this OC-lock aren't that relevant in the end as certainly the huge majority of overclocking is done on sub-$300 chips such as E6600/Q6600/E8_00 and lesser. The second issue are the motherboards. I never buy "high-end" boards that costs >200€, and since the high-end X58 seems to be the only choice with Bloomfield for some time that's yet another no-go.
I sincerely doubt we'll see sub-$300 LGA1366 chips and sensibly priced Bloomfield mobos - but I guess it's just Intel who loses. And I'm fine with that.
I've been doing the PC thing since the mid 90's and have NEVER spent that much on a cpu.Quote:
Originally Posted by ChaosMinionX
On 9th April, when I had asked the question "What about enthusiasts/overclocker??" while Mr Pat Gelsinger was giving info regarding Nehalem. He answered that they will continue with Extreme Edition trend. When I pressed more all he said was its "too early to talk about it". But honestly if this is a "locking mehanism" by any chance I think Intel may feel the heat after a quarter passes after the launch next year :P