[Bobnova]

You'll get more memory multipliers.

[thideras]

Personally I liked where they said "UP TO 56X MULTI". With a 100mhz "FSB" (bite me, I'm on LGA775), that maxes out at 5600MHz if you can't change the "FSB". That seems pretty lackluster, in my opinion.

[Dolk]

I noticed that but it didn't click. I'm betting they will have something available for highest end so that you can attempt to get to 7ghz again.

The real problem I see is that, its always been showed that straight Multi OCing has limits. At one point or another, things stop clicking and you need to push the Clock ref.

I'm only looking at this from a Benchers perspective.

[thideras]

From my understanding, that was their "super high end ultra unlimited $1,000,000,000 processor that only two people can afford" line. But maybe I read it wrong.

[jason4207]

Originally Posted by Dolk

So question... How are you going to OC your memory now? Are the K series going to allow Intel users to use the BCLK or is it fully locked to 100mhz across the board?

Originally Posted by Bobnova

You'll get more memory multipliers.

More mem multis, but it looks like you'll basically be locked into standardized speeds. No tweaking to get that little bit extra, and it looks like an absolute max of 2133 on socket 1155 unless mobo manufacturers have some leeway there.

Originally Posted by thideras

From my understanding, that was their "super high end ultra unlimited $1,000,000,000 processor that only two people can afford" line. But maybe I read it wrong.

I thought that the middle/low end SB stuff (Socket 1155) was going to be locked down, but the higher-end stuff (Socket 2011) would use an external clock and be fully OCable? Details are obviously still fuzzy, though.

[thideras]

I still say this is a marketing ploy. "Leak" information that may hint towards your products being locked down and BOOM, threads explode everywhere and everyone knows that a new processor is coming out. Coincidence that it happens 3-4 times in a row now? No way.

[wingman99]

Originally Posted by Randyman...

We're a drop in the bucket - but Intel doesn't want that drop to end up in AMD's bucket

Overclocking is not a small market.

Intel, Discussion on CPUs and Overclocking LINK:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U62lC...eature=channel

Watch the whole intel video above and pay vary close attention to what the intel engineer says, some of the video is vary boring for some of us and he points that out too, however he hits all the points.

[wingman99]

Originally Posted by thideras

I still say this is a marketing ploy. "Leak" information that may hint towards your products being locked down and BOOM, threads explode everywhere and everyone knows that a new processor is coming out. Coincidence that it happens 3-4 times in a row now? No way.

We never had a Anandtech preview 3-4 times.

The Sandy Bridge Preview

LINK: http://www.anandtech.com/show/3871/t...ins-in-a-row/5

QUOTE:With Sandy Bridge, Intel integrated the clock generator, usually present on the motherboard, onto the 6-series chipset die. While BCLK is adjustable on current Core iX processors, with Sandy Bridge it’s mostly locked at 100MHz. There will be some wiggle room as far as I can tell, but it’s not going to be much. Overclocking, as we know it, is dead.

[thideras]

I'm talking about older processors. I remember this happening when i7 came out, i5 came out, Core2...

[wingman99]

Originally Posted by thideras

I'm talking about older processors. I remember this happening when i7 came out, i5 came out, Core2...

What I meant, we never had a any previews 3-4 times in the past.

The i7 i5 and core2 there was no actual product testing, like the sandy bridge at Anandtech.

[Randyman...]

I'm not worried in the slightest. I'm prepared to stick with my $199 i7's for at least a year - and then I would simply switch to AMD if Intel is jacking up the cost of Overclocking. Problem solved

Let the market decide and Intel will eat crow soon enough. Or (as I believe to be the case) there WILL be ways around these limitations. Or you can pay more to Overclock your Sandy Bridge "K" CPU and Intel will "win" this battle. I think the consumers should vote with their wallets since the Overclockers are such a HUGE part of Intels' bottom line like you keep getting at (I really don't believe that - even if the Intel engineer says otherwise ).

OEM makes "us" look like ants. Just look at Intel's onboard graphics dominace over AMD/Nvidia's discrete offerings (COMBINED) amungst "Enthusiasts". That's only a tiny part of the story...

[RJARRRPCGP]

Looks like it may make the motherboard operate like Via KT133! (OMG, going back 9 years!)
Wouldn't that mean the PCI has to be at 40 mhz when at 120 mhz for the bus?!

That may mean that I can't OC any better than a PC with a POS 250W Deer PSU! (that I had in 2001 and 2002)
(and also has overheating PCB!)

Looks like I may be going to AMD. I may have to boycott the P67 chipset.

You might as well go back to a Via KT400 chipset with that stuff.

[Randyman...]

Originally Posted by RJARRRPCGP

Looks like I may be going to AMD.

And that's what it would take to make Intel eat crow *IF* this is more than pre-mature crying wolf (I really think that's all it is)...

Overclocking is all about cost effective parts opened up to a whole new level of performance. If you have the cash for high-end parts - then more power to you - but I've always stuck with ~$200 CPU's and ~$200 MoBo's - and I have no intention on changing that because Intel wants to rake us over the coals to make some extra cash...

Again - I'm not worried. I'm actually a bit curious to experiment with my first AMD system if it comes to that (but it won't )

[Killador]

I just want a Core i7 12core with HT running cool @ 4.0GHz for a good price. Is that too much to ask?

[wingman99]

Originally Posted by Randyman...

I'm not worried in the slightest. I'm prepared to stick with my $199 i7's for at least a year - and then I would simply switch to AMD if Intel is jacking up the cost of Overclocking. Problem solved

Let the market decide and Intel will eat crow soon enough. Or (as I believe to be the case) there WILL be ways around these limitations. Or you can pay more to Overclock your Sandy Bridge "K" CPU and Intel will "win" this battle. I think the consumers should vote with their wallets since the Overclockers are such a HUGE part of Intels' bottom line like you keep getting at (I really don't believe that - even if the Intel engineer says otherwise ).

OEM makes "us" look like ants. Just look at Intel's onboard graphics dominace over AMD/Nvidia's discrete offerings (COMBINED) amungst "Enthusiasts". That's only a tiny part of the story...

The intel Engineer said that desk top users are switching to mobile and what you have left is a desktop hyper segmentation and a big component of that is the enthusiast overclokers.

He said that the traditional market is moving to mobile so whose left, it's people that really care about these products and overclockers are big piece of that.

The word is BIG not HUGE not a drop in the bucket.

He is part of the market analysis for enthusiast, what more do you need to hear he has been working for intel for 4 years as marketing enthusiast engineer.

Also he or intel reads the overclocking forms on the net and compares and looks at overclocking data clock speeds and general overclocking data, he also said that.

He also said intel does not want to do things that would make overcloking fizzle out they feel overcloking is a key component to keep the market strong.


What part of the video did intel says otherwise.

[Bobnova]

It is worth noting that if he "discovers" anything else during his market research he'll research himself right out of a job.

[Randyman...]

I'm absolutely a gung-ho overclocker. And I'm an ABSOLUTE Intel Fanboy - probably more so than most on this thread (every single PC I've built in my lifetime has used Intel CPU's and Chipsets - no joke). No doubt at all about that. If Intel raises the price of Overclocking because they can - I'm going to AMD. I'm not the only one

I'm pretty sure the Intel guy knows this, too...

Of course some will stick with higher priced Intel CPU's and still overclock on the Intel side - but part of what drives me to overclock is 1) Limited Budget and 2) Performance. I want to have a solid grasp on BOTH - if Intel removes one of the two - AMD will gladly fill the void...

Intel won't let that happen after the P4 spanking AMD gave them IMO - and there WILL be a way to overclock "base" Sandy Bride chips in the near future IMO. A broken record: "I'm not worried in the slightest"...

And we are just a drop in the bucket. Intel's attempt to make us feel otherwise is simply good marketing on their part (they have to justify their higher priced unlocked CPU's to US somehow - right?) OEM dwarfs any and all overclockers on the planet by a HUGE margin (H-U-G-E!).

[wingman99]

Originally Posted by Randyman...

I'm absolutely a gung-ho overclocker. And I'm an ABSOLUTE Intel Fanboy - probably more so than most on this thread (every single PC I've built in my lifetime has used Intel CPU's and Chipsets - no joke). No doubt at all about that. If Intel raises the price of Overclocking because they can - I'm going to AMD. I'm not the only one

I'm pretty sure the Intel guy knows this, too...

Of course some will stick with higher priced Intel CPU's and still overclock on the Intel side - but part of what drives me to overclock is 1) Limited Budget and 2) Performance. I want to have a solid grasp on BOTH - if Intel removes one of the two - AMD will gladly fill the void...

Intel won't let that happen after the P4 spanking AMD gave them IMO - and there WILL be a way to overclock "base" Sandy Bride chips in the near future IMO. A broken record: "I'm not worried in the slightest"...

And we are just a drop in the bucket. Intel's attempt to make us feel otherwise is simply good marketing on their part (they have to justify their higher priced unlocked CPU's to US somehow - right?) OEM dwarfs any and all overclockers on the planet by a HUGE margin (H-U-G-E!).

Why would that be good marketing overclockers like to feel elite, correct. why are you debating the truth from what he says? He was talking about oveclocking is big, he is not inflating market data for sales.

If he said we are a small number of people that overclock, that would probably do better for sales. People like to feel they are in a elite club or group they do something that allot of people don't. This form is a club.

I feel ovecloking is vary easy to do and anyone can do it. Do you know how mad some enthusiasts get when i say that. And intel said there not going to take away are overcloking because we are to important for there sales.

Do you truly believe he is lying or have you just not considered he is telling the truth and overclockers are important for the market and sales.

Just consider the ida that overclocking is big like he says what would it change? most people do it and there done, they don't post they don't join the forms they just do it.

I feel they are locking up the BCLK because there is a big enough market and they feel we will pay them to overclock and I think the market will bare it.

And intel did not put the PLL in the cpu so motherboard manufactures can probably find a way to bypass intel.

The DIY overcloking community is big, that is all intel boxed cpu sales around the world and the intel engineer talked about it, anyone of those boxes now can be overclocked, if people want.

Where are the websites on the net that are for non overclocking enthusiast. At one time i wanted to get out the oveclocking forms, just to deal with regular pc problems and I could not find any sites, it's all about overclocking on the net and always has been.

We are not a drop in the bucket.

And they tried to sell those unlocked high priced cpu's and know there locking the BCLK

I think intel is experimenting to see if people will pay the price to overclock with there unlocked k chips.

[Bobnova]

There is some OCing allowed, just not much.
"A few" extra multis. Sounds like ~500mhz to me.
We are a drop in the bucket. A decent sized one, and one worth exploiting, but a drop nontheless.

[x509]

Originally Posted by Randyman...

Overclocking is all about cost effective parts opened up to a whole new level of performance. If you have the cash for high-end parts - then more power to you - but I've always stuck with ~$200 CPU's and ~$200 MoBo's - and I have no intention on changing that because Intel wants to rake us over the coals to make some extra cash...

Basically I agree with you. But consider this.What if you have to spend say $400 more to water-cool than to air-cool, to achieve a higher overclock? From an overall "systems" perspective, at some point you simply take all that extra cash for your "overclocking budget" and spend it on faster components? No?

Just wondering. And no, I'm NOT trolling.