• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

Intel to drop overclocking for mainstream Nehalems

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.
I don't think this is true. Remember when Nvidia said they wouldn't allow overclocking on their 8800s? No you don't because it never happened. Fudzilla lives up to its name.
 
AMd time to shine! if this happens, AMD will be on top again, i know the ethusiasts are a small crowd, but it would mean %100 more sales to AMD from all the intel O/C'rs... or people simply wont buy intels new socket processors.


problem is, intel could do this, and finaincially it wouldnt phase them because the ethusiast market is non-existant compared to the joe blow six pack crowd...

but it would affect sales i guess for those of us who build systems for friends and recommend parts..
 
Lol this is just funny to me....maybe they wont OC well because of all the cores...but i doubt they will restrict it....cmon even the good old P2's were OCable < my new word =)
 
Sndm3mny said:
Lol this is just funny to me....maybe they wont OC well because of all the cores...but i doubt they will restrict it....cmon even the good old P2's were OCable < my new word =)
Click to expand...

I said I'd stay out of the thread, but I just wanted to point out: there has been CPU overclocking ever since there have been CPU's.

My first overclocking adventure was with the crappiest 386 created -- the 386SX16mhz. With the flip of a jumper, you had 20mhz at your disposal, or 25mhz for short periods of time. I didn't get ballsy enough to do "chilled water" cooling until the 486 era, in which I would use a ziplog baggie with ice cubes and a tiny bit of water to run my 486DX33 at 50mhz long enough to spank my across-the-street neighbor's benchmarks on his Pentium 60.

Back when there weren't even jumpers, you could desolder the 4.77mhz crystal from your 8088 motherboard and solder in an 8mhz replacement. I wasn't old enough to have those kinds of skills, but I did own an IBM 8088, complete with the phosphor-yellow monitor :)
 
ahahahahah you just took me back in time.....oh man the good old days of jumpers...i said P2 because that was my 1st computer.....it was 333mhz p2.....ahhhh (tear) with the PCI Cpu.....i think it was pci i dont even remember...but the CPU was on a sound/video card like Board that would go in a slot and the heat sink was bigger then then anything they have now a days....and the voodoo video cards and when the nvidia TNT1,2 was the best....wow....lol...i think i still have that computer somewhere in my house...i was what @ that time 16 i think
 
It really doesn't mean a thing to me to be blatantly honest, as my Intel chip on the two months I ran it stock blew any AMD chip clocked to any crazy amount out of the water by far.

I think it still would :D

That being said, while I'd like to see another company challenge Intel, AMD is far from being able to do it even with this announcement. After all, they stagnated their own progress when they were on top, and are in the hole right now. By the time they finally get out Intel will simply use whatever vast amounts of cash they've built up to one-up them again.

No, I'm not an Intel fanboi, far from it, they're just on top now, I was an AMD man back in the AMD64 days.
 
God I hope this is just a bunch of rumored garbage. I'd hate to no longer be able to build inexpensive systems that scream. I personally wouldn't make a move to AMD, I'd just stop building.
 
yea im not much of a amd fan either my computer i use for my business is a AMD 64 @ 2000ghz with 1 gig ram and my old P4 1.8 was quicker with less ram.....funny huh...
 
Sndm3mny said:
yea im not much of a amd fan either my computer i use for my business is a AMD 64 @ 2000ghz with 1 gig ram and my old P4 1.8 was quicker with less ram.....funny huh...
Click to expand...

2000ghz eh?

Your problem is software related somehow (or drive related), because that A64 would blast the socks off that P4 1.8 even if you clocked the A64 below 1.8GHz. Considering socket A blew by the P4s of that time period, socket 754/939 would have destroyed it. Don't be silly. Slowness would literally HAVE to be an external cause. That's not fanboyism either (look at my sig), that's pure numbers.
 
Random thought: Let's consider this as if it were verifiable information for a minute, and assume that Intel doesn't care about the tiny percentage of people who overclock (and spend loads of money on CPUs anyway.) Maybe there's a reason for them to restrict it? For example, what if they are looking at 22nm (or whatever the next shrink is) samples and figuring out that the silicon can't handle any more voltage than they are planning to put through it at stock speeds? In that case it would make sense to start weening us off in advance to lessen the shock later. There would be no market risk (AMD) because they are subject to the same physical limitations as long as they don't have some ridiculously advanced technology.

Probably a nutty thought, but mostly logical.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

mackerel
Intel Foundry update - April 2024
Replies
0
Views
119
mackerel
mackerel
mackerel
Arrow Lake leaks
Replies
14
Views
383
Flamethrower1972
Flamethrower1972
L
Looking for DDR3 2x16GB RAM
2
Replies
25
Views
502
LordLiverpool
L
mackerel
HT perf and power scaling on 12100F
Replies
0
Views
69
mackerel
mackerel
V
Lenovo Yoga 7i 2-in-1 14" - good price or pass?
Replies
2
Views
946
Viper69
V
Back