Sadly, this doesn't look like the case anymore. Some Bartons will still be unlocked, but some of the newer ones will be locked. Not even the NF7-S can unlock these new locked chips (as yet)
this doesnt make any sense, AMD said when it launched the AthlonXP it wouldnt stop Enthusiasts from changing the muliplier, and now they have gone back on their word? I just ordered a 2500+ retail from newegg and a K7NCR18D Pro II Deluxe Limited, Ill let everyone know how it goes... god i hope i dont get a locked one...
Well, i seriously hope that amd made no changes to the L1's that would prevent unlocking. not that im complaining to have a locked barton really. I dont think i should be ****ed as i got a 1.83 ghz cpu for $112 cdn. buuuut i hope i can unlock it like my pali. I was really hoping to push for 2.5 ghz.
I might take it back though. get a tbred 2100 or 2400. not sure which, what would you guys suggest?
I know ... it just doesn't make sense to chase away the enthusiasts ... we the "spend-thrift-speed-seeking" people!
I just found an AQZEA week 32 chip ... they're holding it for me now. I've seen a bunch of good stuff written about this batch ('cept 1 poor fella who seemed to have a faulty chip).
It'll go on my ASUS A7N8X Rev.2 board with OCZ PC3500 512mb dual channel Platinum Ltd. Edition (BH5 I might add).
I, like everyone else I suppose, want to try for top o/c results with stock cooling. Hmmm how high can I go with that CPU and ram?
well you can say its a good move for AMD to make money but i'm not sure it will work. I was just about to go buy a Barton and then i find this out so i'm sayin @$#! it. they can lose more money for all i care.
Yeah I think someone with a supposed locked cpu should be testing the resistance over the L1's to verify if this is the case - it seems bizarre that a stepping with an earlier week number is locked whereas a later model is not.... Also I cant see how they would make fundamental changes to the manufacturing process such as this (disconnecting of L1's) that are not time related - it just doesnt make sense from an operational viewpoint unless they were merely doing some testing.
(AQZFA week 40 not locked AQZFA week 39 locked? Or was that a typo c627627?)
I can see no discoloration that would indicate a cut of any kind on my l1 bridge. i took my cpu out and the bridges look very similar to what my xp1600 pali did. the difference however, is that if you look close, you can see what looks to be bridged circuits between the l1 copper points. they look almost like what a bridged l1 would look like. anyone see somthing different?
If the L1's are cut as would have to be the case in order to make multi changing impossible then wiremodding wont make any difference - thats why its important someone checks the L1's bridges with a multimeter to 100% confirm if indeed they are cut.
well. its weird. my kt400 wouldnt simply not post if the multi was improper. this one does, if i try to change the multi sometimes, and others it doesnt. regardless, it will always read 11 in the bios. im going to test this thing a little more rigerously tonight.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.