Intel to Stunt Overclocking on Sandy Bridge CPUs

[Poisoner]

Gonna need a .5 usb multiplier

 

[FHDelux]

[citation][nom]one-shot[/nom]They said the same about Bloomfield/1366 i7s being unable to overclock, too.Does anyone remember this?http://news.softpedia.com/news/Int [...] 4019.shtmlI'll believe it when I see it.[/citation]

^^^ this

 

[saint19]

Let see if that is true but even if that is true still exist Intel fan boys that prefer buy a $900 locked CPU just because is Intel :lol:

 

[captainnemojr]

Sounds like a marketing gimmick to me. They'll come out with K series that will unlock Sandy Bridge later on and charge $100 more for "overclocking". Or force anyone who wants to to buy an Extreme.

I have faith in the motherboard companies though. They turn dual and tri cores into quad cores by unlocking the sleeping cores, I'm sure they'll figure something out!

 

[ta152h]

The people complaining don't seem to understand Intel is making the right moves, because they are so self-absorbed they fail to see the bigger picture.

This should simplify motherboard design, and make it slightly cheaper and simpler. This will work out better for the 99%+ people who don't overclock, or even know what it means.

So, for most people, it's a good thing. They will almost certainly offer a version that allows overclocking as well, for only slightly more, or for specific models.

So far, AMD isn't an option anyway. You can run a base i7 930, and it will still beat an overclocked AMD processor, and use less power doing it. Sandy Bridge should be faster (although, nothing is ever certain), so, until AMD comes out with something faster, looking at an AMD platform for overclocking still won't make any sense, except where it does now - below where Intel sells their Bloomfields.

 

[scook9]

Sounds like they are tired of people getting more performance out of the $200 i7 920 (if bought at MicroCenter ) than the $1000 i7 965/975 lol

There may still be overclocking people....it will just have to all be multiplier based

 

[fozzie76]

I totally hope Intel does it. They will just be shooting themselves in the foot. All the enthusiasts will flock back to AMD in droves.

 

[scook9]

[citation][nom]ta152h[/nom]The people complaining don't seem to understand Intel is making the right moves, because they are so self-absorbed they fail to see the bigger picture.This should simplify motherboard design, and make it slightly cheaper and simpler. This will work out better for the 99%+ people who don't overclock, or even know what it means.So, for most people, it's a good thing. They will almost certainly offer a version that allows overclocking as well, for only slightly more, or for specific models.So far, AMD isn't an option anyway. You can run a base i7 930, and it will still beat an overclocked AMD processor, and use less power doing it. Sandy Bridge should be faster (although, nothing is ever certain), so, until AMD comes out with something faster, looking at an AMD platform for overclocking still won't make any sense, except where it does now - below where Intel sells their Bloomfields.[/citation]

Good point about the chipset and a version that will allow it.....

x68 anyone?! With separate clock generators!

 

[quanticfx]

[citation][nom]utengineer[/nom]What the article didn't say, was that the stock line-up of Sandy bridge will DESTROY any overclocked AMD product yesterday, today and tomorrow.[/citation]

Can I borrow your time machine?

 

[drwho1]

[citation][nom]kokin[/nom]That's a big claim you have there. I hope you have the balls to say that same statement 5-10 years down the line.[/citation]
he only said: yesterday, today and tomorrow.... nothing about next week

 

[hundredislandsboy]

They can stunt away all they want. More reasons for enthusiasts to switch AMD.

 

[cadder]

With an adequate implementation of turbo boost, overclocking would not be missed so much. We like to overclock, and for some things it will improve performance, but for the gamers the cpu's are already faster than the games need.

I built some i5-750 machines and during overclocking tests I discovered that the builtin turbo boost would work as well for some apps as a moderate overclock. If Intel would build in an aggressive turbo boost then that would be just as good as overclocking. IOW if they would let turbo kick the speed up as far as it could go without overheating, isn't that what we do with overclocking anyway? The problem will be that Intel will want to put those chips at the top of their pricing ladder and sell them for higher prices than enthusiasts are used to paying.

 

[pmac1328]

Let's get big picture here people!! None of this matters!! AMD's Fusion products are right around the corner and are going to revolutionize computers as we know it!! I'm looking forward to 2011!!!

err, 2012...

2013 you say?

Wait... they just canceled it...

Wait... we're back on for 2018... but only in cell phones? What the...?

 

[lradunovic77]

If they come with unlocked multiplier then it's all good

 

[Dkz]

Nice Job! I hope the offices and not knowing users are well enough to keep up with Intel's pocket

 

[Sabiancym]

So they're trying to force people to buy the fast chips instead of buying the slower and just overclocking.

That will backfire and people just won't buy their chips at all. I'm one of those people who will gladly switch to AMD if Intel stops overclocking.

 

[dgingeri]

I'm glad I got my Core i7 920 when I did. It's going to have to last a long time now. At least, as long as it takes Intel to see the error of their ways. That could take a few chip generations.

 

[Trueno07]

AMD is probably hauling ass in their research lab right now. If this is true, i'll be excited to see what AMD does to try and appeal to the enthusiast market.

 

[zaixionito]

This is really a chance for AMD to start a campaign sometime soon, demonstrating that their chips are not locked. If they take the opportunity,some people might move to AMD...

 

[geossj5]

[citation][nom]welshmousepk[/nom]hear that? thats the sounds of 10 million people suddenly becoming AMD buyers...[/citation]

ya rite cuz there are 10million intel consumers who know how to overclock successfully or even know that overclock stands for

 

[Guest]

it's not that the damn chip wont OC, it will, but in doing so it's going shaft bus sensitive ports like USB and SATA..... whats the bet lightpeak wont be affected

 

[edilee]

[citation][nom]welshmousepk[/nom]hear that? thats the sounds of 10 million people suddenly becoming AMD buyers...[/citation]
What this guy said. If AMD's Bulldozer series ends up being impressive then Intel might have have just cut it's own throat. Intel chips are top dog because of their ability to be overclocked to values way above stock and some base performance advantages over AMD chips..without this their popularity might slip off a bit.

 

[slm_casper]

Who care about the P67 chip-set?

What about the X68 chip-set?

Personally I only overclock my X58 chip-set and my i7 920 CPU. My other computers run stock speed.

 

[kartu]

[citation][nom]CTPAHHIK[/nom]There is always option two -> AMD[/citation]
So far there is option two, right. But it's very nice of them, to hint us what will happen, if there'd be no option two.

 

[ern88]

Well, my next CPU might be AMD. Hopefully they won't lock down O/C without screwing up the rest of the system.