For all you Intel fanboys

[Thatguy]

So you buy your $250 Q6600 and think to yourself "Man, Intel is so stupid. They don't realize that I can just overclock this Q6600 to match the speed of this $500 processor, and all I have to do is buy this $40 heatsink and overclock the crap out of it! My Q6600 will run at 3.4ghz no problems! So glad I can buy these low-end processors and overclock them to match the high end ones!" Well Intel is stupid, and they just realized it. Guess what you can't do here pretty soon with Intel processors? That is right. They are taking away the ability to overclock. The only processors that are going to have overclocking unlocked on them will be the expensive high-end ones, such as the Core 2 Extremes.

http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=6965&Itemid=35

Looks like future hardware costs just got a little more expensive. No more cutting budget by buying the cheap processor and overclocking it with Intel. Gunna have to shell out the extra cash for the speed instead of cutting corners on budget. (This is usually the one area people look at to save money for a better video card when they have a spending limit.)

However, AMD has revealed no plans to do such a thing. Just thought I'd mention that little part.

 

[tiddy]

There are no citations in that article and the only reference to an outside source even existing is the first two words: We've learned.

This whole post seems like an excuse to bash intel and it's users.

 

[Ryael]

...Tiddy pretty much sums it up. Plus, there will always be some way to overclock processors. Whether it's third party software or hardlining it yourself.

 

[pillar]

also i noticed that the article said that intel would make overclockin only req on the 1366 socket cpu's. they never said anything bout stopping it on the 755 sockets, so i can overclock it if i want.

 

[Lafinass]

Yeahh...

 

[Nemo]

I dont trust Fudzilla or The Inquirer. However, Intel would be stupid if they did this. People still shell out the $$$ to get the super processors and not that many people overclock. AMD revealed their plans that their next generation processor will be a completely different architecture. I only switched to Intel because Phenom was delayed and delayed and the Core 2 Duo was awesome compared to the X2. I'm glad to see AMD is starting to be competitive again, and I'm sure my next computer will probably run AMD. But it all depends on how that integrated memory controller makes Nehalem awesome or not.

New AMD [link=hyperlink url]http://www.tomshardware.com/news/amd-phenom-opteron,5252.html[/link]

 

[-nocturne=-]

Well... they've done it before... but they'll do it again, learn their lesson, and then it'll all be fine.

It's not exactly a secret that many different model cpu's are made off of the same die, but limited by hardware to only perform at a lower level (especially prevalent with the new AMD 3-cores, which are 4 core dies with a core disabled). You're probably wondering 'why take a high-performance cpu, dumb it down, and sell it for less?', but when you're talking about modifying a fabrication line, you're talking millions of dollars to switch to producing a lower-clocked cpu.

Right now, Intel probably feels they're in the perfect position to pull this move again, but if they're not careful it'll just be A64 vs P4 all over again.

 

[Doobs]

I agree with nocturne. And, I would actually prefer "A64 vs P4 all over again" because at least there would be some competition in the market again, leading to lower prices for the consumer and more spending in the market (spending of our tax rebates or whatever the government is giving out amirite?). Right now, admittedly, Intel has quite a lead on AMD and it shows in benchmarks.

 

[jdcskillet]

Thanks arstechnica for being so awesome with processor testing....

http://arstechnica.com/reviews/hardware/amd-phenom-x3-review.ars/4

This is page 4, you might want to jump back a page to see some of the gaming benchmarks for the Q6600, E6850, Phenom X4 9850, and the Phenom X3 8750. The review was meant to be on the X3 and compared to the others, but its pretty sweet to see how AMD and Intel hardware differ in general and which gives you faster browsing, photo manipulation, gaming, etc.

 

[-nocturne=-]

Well, if you compare a $300 AMD to a $250 Intel it might be a little more even, as it's usually the case that Intel boards cost at least 50 bux more for some reason...

Personally, I make my decision with expandability in mind, of which Intel always seems to block. Sure, the LGA775 is pretty expandable, but you still need a new mobo to get the FSB boost every time.

 

[jdcskillet]

I noticed a similar thing a couple years back when I built my machine. Although at that time it was a pain finding a decent mobo that supported dual core (yay early adoption).

 

[Rogue Sniper]

im going with an e8400 core 2 duo cpu for my next comp in a month or so
imma OC it whether intel says i can or cant