Ya, Intel overclocking seems SO boring... Just up the multiplier, up the voltage, don't touch anything else... Overclocking AMDs has always been an adventure. Tweaking voltages and frequencies and all that.
It sounds like you've never really overclocked any Intel. If you raise multi and voltage but nothing else then you are missing about 95% of OC options.
I can't see that AMD ever had more interesting options than Intel ... they're only different. You can't say that limited bclk range is the only reason why AMD is so much fun and it's so much more interesting than Intel.
Most clocks on AMD are not helping in anything and there are many limitations so you stuck at something all the time. Intel boards have more OC options, many more memory tweaking options ... and many are actually affecting performance or overclocking in some way. On AMD, even in these best boards is less options and many are not helping in anything so you leave them at auto. Not to mention that many AMD boards have some issues and manufacturers don't care to solve them.
I play a lot with memory OC and on AMD it's simply no fun at all. Memory is barely scalling, CPU-NB clock is totally limited at not much above stock, HT clock is useless. There are problems with stability when you try to tweak many options. On some memory kits you simply can't pass 250 FSB or memory won't run.
Many things are only theory what doesn't work in real.
I had 2 FX rigs , got bored of both after about ~2 months and sold them some time later. In this time I made 2 guides for Gigabyte and Micron forums and one more somewhere else as Gigabyte couldn't solve issues with their own hardware.
I hit a wall in everything in about 2 weeks playing with FX. Hard to call it fun. Later I got FM2, killed 1st board in 2h and maxed out all options on 2nd board in about 1 week including memory clock. I sold it one month later as it was collecting dust and was worse for gaming than i3 ( at least titles which I was playing ).
Really the only AMD rig in last ~10 years which I liked and gave me some more fun was Kabini. I still have 2 of them, one in NAS/home server and one I gave my mother.
I see that many users are saying that AMD is more interesting for overclocking than Intel ... but really in what ? I just can't get it. Actually I see that most who say that are only raising cpu multi and cpu voltage ( not saying about guys in this thread but in general ) ... so what they can know about overclocking fun ?
I also can't get how you can support company which is releasing the same crap for 5 years and say it's great product. It's like you know they're cheating you but you are still paying them.
I like to support interesting and less popular products but AMD has nothing to offer for longer in both CPU/mobo and graphics cards. Last graphics card series are total mistake, even fanboys are not buying them.
If you want to have some more fun and be forced to use more OC options on your rigs ( regardless if it's AMD or Intel ) then you can check our competitions:
http://www.overclockers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php/247-The-Overclocktagon
Right now there is PCMark7 which requires many various tweaks.
Btw. I don't hate AMD regardless how it looks like. All who know me can say that I'm overclocking everything ( or you can simply check my hwbot profile with 3k+ results ).
