No overclocking for mainstream Nehalem?

[fireice2]

news woundn't be catchy if it were not sensational. hehehe

Actually quite wrong. The sales of E2000 and E4000 series processors is mostly to OEMs that will never overclock their computers. HP/Compaq, Dell, Acer/Gateway, Toshiba, and Lenovo will never overclock the vast MAJORITY of their systems... and the ones that will be overclocked are the $899+ processors. I haven't seen any major company sell a factory-overclock mainstream/value/performance processor, but they're more than happy to sell a factory-overclocked extreme processor though. Those X6800s, QX6700s, QX6850s, QX9650s, and QX9770s are the ones that are sold specifically for overclocking. In reality, about 1% of consumer computers have user-overclocked components. We cannot look at reports from Anandtech and other sites about this type of thing--the average user will never overclock and will never build their own computer.

I bought an E2140 for overclocking it. There are thousands of other systems made by big companies that use E2000 or E4000 processors for their price and reasonable stock performance. That same stock performance that we cannot stand.

Nicely said.

[bowman]

Well, this is already taking place with the lowering of multis on the less expensive processors, to some degree anyway. Aside from multis though, what can they lock down in the processor to prevent any board from overclocking the processor?

Unlike current Core 2 processors, the system clock ('FSB'), memory controller, basically most of the stuff the FSB used to handle is now on-die like on AMDs. This means they can lock system clock frequency (FSB) and many memory overclocking functions. The board manufacturers used to handle the FSB and memory transfer functions, the chipset manufacturers did (so even if Intel pulled something like this Nvidia would probably step up to fill the void and grab the fleeing enthusiasts' money), but this time they will have less options.

I guess it's back to the pencil graphite and soldering irons if this holds any water.

[awdrifter]

If this is true, we'll either have to physically mod it, or just buy AMD.

[Nosfer@tu]

I say they are wrong

They just started indorsing and incuraging users to OC like 1 month ago...

I call BULL!!!

[Mechromancer]

This may hint to some problems Intel is having with their 45nm process. Overclocking probably decreases the life of these processors or either disrupts the Quick Path connections. This also means that LGA1366 CPUs will probably remain around that $1000 price point, the price we have to pay to overclock. I hope mobo manufacturers can get past this issue.

Good new for AMD though! If 45nm Deneb can overclock well and deliver on their "higher instructions per cycle" claim, AMD may gain back some of the enthusiast market with reasonable price/performance.

[Serra]

I don't understand when people say that Intel wouldn't/couldn't or that they'd shoot themselves in the foot if they did.

We represent no market to them. Plus, let's face it, it's not like stopping all overclocking would stop us from buying computers, we just wouldn't spend as much money on add-on products like cooling. We might even upgrade more often on average due to that savings. When AMD was strong there could have been an argument that we would jump ship and move people to their competitor... but in an age where you'll be able to buy a stock Intel CPU that will wipe the floor with anything but an LN2'd AMD... the attraction to AMD is pretty much lost on us. Cost to Intel = slight. Let Intel save ridiculous amounts of money by not seeing so many CPU's RMA'd because of amateur OCers? They'd probably come out ahead.

And so they make us mad? So what? Realistically, what are you going to do about it? If you actually want the best performance, you're going to buy their product anyway.

But can they do it, technically? Yes, if they wanted to. If they were really so inclined they could lock frequency and multiplier. I'm sure we'd find a way to do *something*... but it wouldn't be the same as it is now, not by far. As another user also stated, they now have the opportunity to cut off 90+% of all memory overclocking options.

So - would they try? Absolutely, yes. They've limited it before when they started locking multipliers. How far with they go? I don't know, but I hope they won't block us out.

Ultimately, I think it could go either way *if* AMD ceases to be a competitive force.

[Aivas47a]

It seems to me if anything Intel has become more receptive to overclocking. Just look at that recent video of Fugger onstage with Intel's CEO, busting records. Even if they have the capacity to "lock" many of the settings we've grown accustomed to tweaking, Intel would be hacking off a lot of "enthusiasts" who are important for generating marketing buzz. I think Intel is smarter than that (not to mention, I can't see Intel deliberately handing marketing opportunities like that to its competitors).

[DilTech]

It seems to me if anything Intel has become more receptive to overclocking. Just look at that recent video of Fugger onstage with Intel's CEO, busting records. Even if they have the capacity to "lock" many of the settings we've grown accustomed to tweaking, Intel would be hacking off a lot of "enthusiasts" who are important for generating marketing buzz. I think Intel is smarter than that (not to mention, I can't see Intel deliberately handing marketing opportunities like that to its competitors).

Intel would just hand those cherry chips over to the important guys, kinda like what companies do already.

[Shintai]

This is basicly why articles like FUD or theinq creates more bad than good. Now some are OMGG!!!!!!!!!!!! WE CANT OC ON MAINSTREAM INTEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yet, reality is you cant OC on mainstream Intel boards. Just like you cant today and never could the last 10 years.

[naokaji]

Let Intel save ridiculous amounts of money by not seeing so many CPU's RMA'd because of amateur OCers?

why? the warranty is allready void when you oc even 1 mhz and they can offload any cost it causes to detect that it was ever oc'd on the one doing the fraudulent rma, so no real saving there, just one they are leaving untapped at the moment.

This is basicly why articles like FUD or theinq creates more bad than good. Now some are OMGG!!!!!!!!!!!! WE CANT OC ON MAINSTREAM INTEL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yet, reality is you cant OC on mainstream Intel boards. Just like you cant today and never could the last 10 years.

QFT!


Besides, if intel would be successful with preventing any sort of oc amd would suddenly be choice number 1 again among enthusiasts.

[shiznit93]

I called it and people said I was paranoid. They could easily start deriving CPU frequency as a multiple of the PCI-E controller frequency, with the locked multipliers we would be screwed.

[Kingcarcas]

[fanboy]ZOMG, Oh well bye bye Intel[/fanboy]

[HKPolice]

This is completely possible. Restrict OCing to the high end 'extreme' parts with triple channel memory and charge $999 for the initial CPUs, maybe release a $500 part later on.

Mainstream Nehalems will have the ENTIRE northbridge integrated into the CPU, both PCIe controllers and memory controllers, there won't be a need for a separate northbridge chip at all, and therefore no need for an external clock generator.

Sure, enthusiasts will be pissed but we only make up like 3% of the market anyways, and if we can't afford the extreme CPUs, we could always stick to OCing penryns which will still outperform the stock 'mainstream' dual channel nehalems.

Of course, there's always hope of getting around this block, much like the i875 chipset "PAT" vs tweaked i865.

[railer]

Fud and BS.

[informal]

This seems highly unlikely(Fudo's informations).I see no reason intel would lock out such a big base of consumers,unless Nehalem is a lot harder to "OC" the standard way we use today(by bios or 3rd party software).It could be a complexity/design issue but it is a very slim probability that this is a case.
This "news" just sounds wrong(maybe Fudo misunderstood his source?)

[Jimmer411]

Anyone know what happened to the thing about intel not giving nvidia licensing for the new chipsets?

If nvidia can't make intel chipsets then what? Even if any of this is true

[Serra]

why? the warranty is allready void when you oc even 1 mhz and they can offload any cost it causes to detect that it was ever oc'd on the one doing the fraudulent rma, so no real saving there, just one they are leaving untapped at the moment.

You say that like they ever deny a warranty to overclockers. They must sometimes, but no, I've seen a number of dead procs from OCing and they've taken them all (not mine, mind you - if I broke it, I'd pay for it).

Besides, if intel would be successful with preventing any sort of oc amd would suddenly be choice number 1 again among enthusiasts.

You say that as though anything but a heavily OC'd AMD would have any chance against a stock Nehalem.


Personally, I really do hope that AMD at least stays afloat... if they don't, there is *no* reason for Intel not to lock out overclocking.

[gallardo]

Actually quite wrong.

I never said the majority of the E2xxx sales are from overclockers. I said "a lot of". Yeah, the vast majority of the sales are from OEMs. I know.

[Donnie27]

It seems to me if anything Intel has become more receptive to overclocking. Just look at that recent video of Fugger onstage with Intel's CEO, busting records. Even if they have the capacity to "lock" many of the settings we've grown accustomed to tweaking, Intel would be hacking off a lot of "enthusiasts" who are important for generating marketing buzz. I think Intel is smarter than that (not to mention, I can't see Intel deliberately handing marketing opportunities like that to its competitors).

Scratches head and wonders why? Let's see, Nehalem will be faster than Current Intel moderately overclocked. Then AMD's best even at stock speed or overclocked=P So we should dump or skip Nehalem because it will be faster but can't overclock?????? Many folks will be happy with Nehalem's stock performance. Overclocking is fun but it is not going to break the deal IMHO. Told you guys FSB was more flexible

[Donnie27]

I never said the majority of the E2xxx sales are from overclockers. I said "a lot of". Yeah, the vast majority of the sales are from OEMs. I know.

QFT!

[Bobsama]

I never said the majority of the E2xxx sales are from overclockers. I said "a lot of". Yeah, the vast majority of the sales are from OEMs. I know.

Again, quite wrong. Now with the "a lot of". As I said, maybe 1% of consumers will overclock their computers themselves. If you look at the number of overclockers, which I'd estimate to be about 200,000 people at a maximum, you also have to consider non-overclockers too, which accounts for many millions of users. Maybe the entire base of people who will build computers is 3%--I find that quite likely and very believable. Not everyone who builds a computer...
1) Knows what they're really doing
2) Chooses the best components
3) Plans to overclock
4) Overclocks
5) Has a limited budget or a lust for 100+% overclocks

You see a lot of people who do things we may consider stupid. I consider buying high-end OEM computers to be stupid. I'm a computer enthusiast--I know enough about computers to know about overclocking, and I know enough about overclocking to overclock.

Really, 1% of the market is not "a lot". We are a niche--and we will buy computers nonetheless. Intel would feel very little recoil if they decided to disable most overclocking--they'd still have a fraction of the overclocking market who will spend $1000 on a CPU and $350 on a motherboard. Arguably, those are the people you'd rather serve, as the profit margins are extraordinary. Intel's real cash cows are the OEMs and "Extreme-edition" enthusiasts. Intel really makes little money directly off of non-"Extreme-edition", especially compared to OEMs.

As I have said before--I highly doubt that Intel will lock all overclocking on non-enthusiast processors.

[villa1n]

It could be simply something to do with the new architecture. That lower binned chips pushed like we push core2's might be more prone to malfunction, and breakdown. If a slew of those happened upon launch... bad press = stock damage. I think it is probably pre-emptive damage control, we ve already seen voltage sensitivity from penryn's 45nm, so add in an on die mem controller, etc, and you just make it that more vulnerable. Just speculation, but would make sense, especially since atm we are a very small market share for them.

[WRC]

i still think it is possible to OC, of course not like the current dual and quad cores which can run at much higher frequency than the rated speed. All the extra stuff integrated in the chip will create high temps for sure

[safan80]

hahaha watch nvidia make boards that overclock nehalem just to piss them off

as long as it doesn't kill hard drives I'm game.

[Jikiri]

The number of 'enthusiasts' grows everytime someone gets pissed enough at the OEM's to come looking for these pages I only started looking 3 weeks ago and heres what you've all been able to acomplish on a noob in that short time so thank you guys... anyone know where i can find a e8500 in stock
Never under estimate the power you have to sway the market
Under Construction:
Case: SilverStone Temjin TJ10
CPU: Intel e8500
MOB: NVIDIA nForce 790i Ultra
Ram: OCZ Platinum 4GB(2 x 2GB) 1600mhz
GPU: B.F.G. OSXE 9800gtx 512mb (prob x2 later)
PSU: Silverstone da 750
OS: 64bit vista ultimate
HDD: 2x500gb Seagate Barracuda's 7200.11
HS: TH120ex