- Joined
- May 25, 2003
- Location
- galesburg illinois
dwschoon said:
intels tinkered with this as eveidenced by the 915 chipset
-
Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!
Why are we allowed to overclock?
- Thread starter Jakalwarrior
- Start date
intels tinkered with this as eveidenced by the 915 chipset
- Joined
- Apr 25, 2005
covana2244 said:
Ever heard about software sharing being illegal. I agree with you though. Also it would cost than more money and time than their will to spend since w'ere just a small faction of the cpu market. The point about us breaking cpus and buying new ones is probably also true.
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2004
- Location
- UNK Nebraska
Yea, but we have no way of sharing a processor with our friends. That is stealing, not modifing.-maddog- said:
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2001
- Location
- Shasta Lake, California
It is more difficult, since the FSB is controlled by the motherboard, and even if they lock the board, we can replace the crystal that is used to generate the reference frequency for the pll. As I mentioned, I believe intel has (and have had for quite some time) some patents (amd may as well) designed to combat this, but they haven't implemented them.dwschoon said:
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2001
- Location
- Shasta Lake, California
Here's the patent I was talking about, filed in 1999:
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...,535,988.WKU.&OS=PN/6,535,988&RS=PN/6,535,988
Here is arstechnica's take on the patent:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20030325-434.html
http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-...,535,988.WKU.&OS=PN/6,535,988&RS=PN/6,535,988
Here is arstechnica's take on the patent:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20030325-434.html
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
I would say that from a buisnessman stand point, we will be able to overclock until the chip makers deem that the cost of implementing measures to stop us is outweighed by the profit gained. That is when we'll see the end of overclocking.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Location
- irc.zirc.org - #octeams
David said:
Sshh, David! You're about to give my secret operation away.
Hardware would be driven anyway without overclockers because there will always be the n00bs that want something shiny, the "Ooooh, whoa man you have one of those computers with an LCD monitor, they are fast..." brigade for example. Just it would probably cost the same to lock FSBs etc and then maybe the CPU companies would lose a couple of consumers that want the newest CPUs and seem to have them overclocked and prime stable, 3d marked etc before I'm even aware of their existance, such as a few members on this board I can think of.. That and in enabling overclocking to exist, an economy of specialist overclocking tools is flourishing. Who would want a DFI board or a Mach II if you couldn't overclock? Not many people..
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2001
- Location
- Shasta Lake, California
I would agree with the corection that it will be the end of easy overclocking. The hardcore may still find ways, but it won't be easy or safe (for the hardware).Jcollins82 said:
- Joined
- Mar 7, 2005
I suppose, to look on the bright side, I don't see it going away any time soon. As mentioned above, there is indeed money to be had in allowing us to overclock. There's obviously a considerably large market, otherwise you would not see boards being not only advertised as overclockable, but that being one of the main selling points. Also, I've noticed in a few articles at Anandtech that many motherboard makers are actually moving into other areas of overclocking-enthusiast interest such as watercooling. The memory market itself is a huge business and the fact that they can sell high performance memory at a premium price is further incentive for them to continue allowing it, as well as incentive for the memory makers to "encourage" the chip makers to turn a blind eye to it. And by encourage, I mean to imply a scenario like this:
Memory MFG #1: Gee, that sure is a shame you decided to circumvent overclocking.
Memory MFG #2: Sure is. By the way, since we're losing a bit of our pie, we're going to have to raise the prices on our standard memory. A guys got to eat, you know.
Now the chipmakers know, higher prices in even one segment of the market is going to result in fewer people willing to upgrade their systems, buy new ones, so forth. And that's bad business anyway you look at it.
Obviously, this is just one of the many things they'd take into consideration before making any serious changes.
Memory MFG #1: Gee, that sure is a shame you decided to circumvent overclocking.
Memory MFG #2: Sure is. By the way, since we're losing a bit of our pie, we're going to have to raise the prices on our standard memory. A guys got to eat, you know.
Now the chipmakers know, higher prices in even one segment of the market is going to result in fewer people willing to upgrade their systems, buy new ones, so forth. And that's bad business anyway you look at it.
Obviously, this is just one of the many things they'd take into consideration before making any serious changes.
- Joined
- Jun 11, 2005
- Location
- Chicago, IL
My guess is that they know we're OCing. I think the OCing community around the world is much bigger then we think.
For an example, let's take the FX-57. I highly doubt they made that chip to go into Dells or HPs. I'm guessing not a single Dell or HP or other big manufactor uses an FX-57. The only one I can think of is probably Alienware. The only people that would buy an FX-57, imo, is about 80% overclockers. The OEM manufactors still use 3700+ and such, the higher end ones use X2 4200+ at times.
For an example, let's take the FX-57. I highly doubt they made that chip to go into Dells or HPs. I'm guessing not a single Dell or HP or other big manufactor uses an FX-57. The only one I can think of is probably Alienware. The only people that would buy an FX-57, imo, is about 80% overclockers. The OEM manufactors still use 3700+ and such, the higher end ones use X2 4200+ at times.
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2004
- Location
- irc.zirc.org - #octeams
Darksparkz, I wouldn't be surprised if more overclockers than non overclockers own FX-57s. Think of all the people on here who have San Diego 3700s up to FX-57 speeds and then think of the select few who can afford an FX-57. IMO there are a lot more rich people out there who want the latest toys and the most powerful computer they can get and will see the FX range and want one. Whereas most of the people here will overclock a cheaper processor for the fun and to gain the most performance out of what they have.
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2003
rseven said:
I also agree. Apart from the fact that we buy and fry and buy again, we also push a lot of CPUs (etc.) to their limits on a lot of different platforms.
And then we come out here and post our results. We're just a bunch of unpaid hardware testers...
- Joined
- May 12, 2005
- Location
- Home... again
haha yes we are
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
Okay
everyone stop
THINK of how many markets could potentially die if overclocking stopped?
everyone stop
THINK of how many markets could potentially die if overclocking stopped?
- Joined
- Jul 5, 2004
- Location
- UNK Nebraska
what are we stopping?Mr.Guvernment said:
