| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
kls85
I post too much
 Reputation: 22
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 2757
Location: Under ur bed
|
 Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 11:17 am Post subject: unlock cpus for the masses! (Core i5/i7 655/875K) |
 |
|
So much for Intel "extreme edition"...
article
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Hero
I'm a spammer
 Reputation: 79
Joined: 16 Sep 2006
Posts: 7154
|
| Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 11:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| So now intel is making a few cpu with OC ability on purpose? Sounds good actually. Makes their expensive CPU more worth their price.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kls85
I post too much
Reputation: 22
Joined: 18 Jul 2008
Posts: 2757
Location: Under ur bed
|
| Posted: Fri May 28, 2010 11:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
How can the expensive cpus be more worth their price, when these cheaper cpus also have the same feature? The purpose of those extreme edition cpus along with its heavy price tag ($999) is because its unlocked.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phox
I post too much
 Reputation: 110
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 2034
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 10:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
I don't understand why they charge so much for unlocked multiplier. After all, it doesn't cost anything not to lock it in place, does it?
Last edited by Phox on Mon May 31, 2010 6:35 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Clairenix
Grandmaster Cheater
 Reputation: 5
Joined: 19 Dec 2007
Posts: 715
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 11:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Pho/x/ wrote: | I don't understand why they charge so much for unlocked multiplier. After all, it doesn't cost anything not to lock it in place, does it? Also, overclocking the front side bus heeds a more rewarding and powerful overclock, since the FSB speed is an actual thing that's doing something. The multiplier is just you saying how many times faster than the FSB speed you want your processors clock speed.
What I just said is of my (as far as I know) limited knowledge of what the multiplier is and how it works. Don't kill me if I'm wrong. |
Sell because people buy.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hcavolsdsadgadsg
I'm a spammer
![]() Reputation: 26
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 5801
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 4:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pho/x/ wrote: | I don't understand why they charge so much for unlocked multiplier. After all, it doesn't cost anything not to lock it in place, does it? Also, overclocking the front side bus heeds a more rewarding and powerful overclock, since the FSB speed is an actual thing that's doing something. The multiplier is just you saying how many times faster than the FSB speed you want your processors clock speed.
What I just said is of my (as far as I know) limited knowledge of what the multiplier is and how it works. Don't kill me if I'm wrong. |
because it makes it easy as shit to get your raw clock speed numbers up and you don't have to worry so much about the board hitting a fsb wall.
basically if you just sat down and read something, you'd get similar results anyway for a little more effort. there is a noticable benefit from actually bumping the fsb up versus pure clock speed.
2 cpus at the same speed, one overclocked via fsb and another via multiplier, the fsb one will be faster. probably from bandwidth benefits.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phox
I post too much
Reputation: 110
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 2034
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| slovach wrote: | | Pho/x/ wrote: | I don't understand why they charge so much for unlocked multiplier. After all, it doesn't cost anything not to lock it in place, does it? Also, overclocking the front side bus heeds a more rewarding and powerful overclock, since the FSB speed is an actual thing that's doing something. The multiplier is just you saying how many times faster than the FSB speed you want your processors clock speed.
What I just said is of my (as far as I know) limited knowledge of what the multiplier is and how it works. Don't kill me if I'm wrong. |
because it makes it easy as shit to get your raw clock speed numbers up and you don't have to worry so much about the board hitting a fsb wall.
basically if you just sat down and read something, you'd get similar results anyway for a little more effort. there is a noticable benefit from actually bumping the fsb up versus pure clock speed.
2 cpus at the same speed, one overclocked via fsb and another via multiplier, the fsb one will be faster. probably from bandwidth benefits. |
That wasn't the important part of my post. Forget I said anything about FSB overclocks vs multiplier overclocks, thanks for reminding me that all you people do with a post more than one sentance is try to root out the parts that you can nitpick at in an attempt to try and make the poster feel stupid. I'm actually not that stupid. I know what the multiplier does, but on a really advanced level I don't know what it really is. In the off chance that I might me missing something about what it is, I added that last sentence. Forget about it. I deleted it out of my post.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hcavolsdsadgadsg
I'm a spammer
![]() Reputation: 26
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 5801
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 9:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i answered your question, i don't know why you're getting butt hurt for no reason.
there's no black magic behind it. it's locked because it makes it easy as shit to ramp up the clock speed. faster clocked processors would become borderline obsoleted if anyone could just ramp up the clock speed for free / with no risk. that's why there is a cost premium.
FSB overclocking requires some kind of know how. you probably won't get far if you're cluelessly changing settings. what sounds easier, changing a multiplier from 8 to 9 or ramping up the fsb, potentially having to adjust the divider, timings, and other shit that may or may not cope well with your motherboard depending on its quality.
the multiplier technically is a much safer bet for getting the pure clock speed up without issues, and in the extreme cases of overclocking, you don't have to worry about fsb limits. in some ways it caters to both enthusiasts and the budget aware.
AMD has their black series processors
Intel has this now
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phox
I post too much
Reputation: 110
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 2034
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 9:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| slovach wrote: | i answered your question, i don't know why you're getting butt hurt for no reason.
there's no black magic behind it. it's locked because it makes it easy as shit to ramp up the clock speed. faster clocked processors would become borderline obsoleted if anyone could just ramp up the clock speed for free / with no risk. that's why there is a cost premium.
FSB overclocking requires some kind of know how. you probably won't get far if you're cluelessly changing settings. what sounds easier, changing a multiplier from 8 to 9 or ramping up the fsb, potentially having to adjust the divider, timings, and other shit that may or may not cope well with your motherboard depending on its quality.
the multiplier technically is a much safer bet for getting the pure clock speed up without issues, and in the extreme cases of overclocking, you don't have to worry about fsb limits. in some ways it caters to both enthusiasts and the budget aware.
AMD has their black series processors
Intel has this now |
So does not locking the multiplier cost money? Or is the multiplier a value that is by default static, and they have to make it change-able? Or what? Last time I checked, that was my question. I just made a comment on the fact the upping the multiplier wasn't even the most effective way to overclock. You seem to think I had a question about that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hcavolsdsadgadsg
I'm a spammer
![]() Reputation: 26
Joined: 11 Jun 2007
Posts: 5801
|
| Posted: Mon May 31, 2010 11:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i'd imagine locking it costs basically nothing complexity wise, and does nothing to the actual price wise costs. the actual logic to lock it is on the cpu itself.
basically it's just locked so people can't reap it's obvious benefits.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phox
I post too much
Reputation: 110
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 2034
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 9:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| slovach wrote: | i'd imagine locking it costs basically nothing complexity wise, and does nothing to the actual price wise costs. the actual logic to lock it is on the cpu itself.
basically it's just locked so people can't reap it's obvious benefits. |
So it's another one of these "charging more because they can" rackets. I'm not going to support that.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shota
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
 Reputation: 6
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 1798
Location: Mainland, China
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pho/x/ wrote: | | slovach wrote: | i'd imagine locking it costs basically nothing complexity wise, and does nothing to the actual price wise costs. the actual logic to lock it is on the cpu itself.
basically it's just locked so people can't reap it's obvious benefits. |
So it's another one of these "charging more because they can" rackets. I'm not going to support that. |
Tell that to everyone who buys the Black Edition Phenom II
_________________
Officially gay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phox
I post too much
Reputation: 110
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 2034
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 9:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Shota wrote: | | Pho/x/ wrote: | | slovach wrote: | i'd imagine locking it costs basically nothing complexity wise, and does nothing to the actual price wise costs. the actual logic to lock it is on the cpu itself.
basically it's just locked so people can't reap it's obvious benefits. |
So it's another one of these "charging more because they can" rackets. I'm not going to support that. |
Tell that to everyone who buys the Black Edition Phenom II |
The 955 and 965 cost more because they're faster. If you think about it, AMD isn't charging anything for the unlocked multiplier. the 955 costs $15 more than the 945 for the .2 ghz extra clock speed, just like the 945 costs $15 more than the 925 for the same .2 ghz of extra clock speed, even though the 945 is not BE.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Shota
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme
Reputation: 6
Joined: 18 Aug 2008
Posts: 1798
Location: Mainland, China
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 01, 2010 10:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pho/x/ wrote: | | Shota wrote: | | Pho/x/ wrote: | | slovach wrote: | i'd imagine locking it costs basically nothing complexity wise, and does nothing to the actual price wise costs. the actual logic to lock it is on the cpu itself.
basically it's just locked so people can't reap it's obvious benefits. |
So it's another one of these "charging more because they can" rackets. I'm not going to support that. |
Tell that to everyone who buys the Black Edition Phenom II |
The 955 and 965 cost more because they're faster. If you think about it, AMD isn't charging anything for the unlocked multiplier. the 955 costs $15 more than the 945 for the .2 ghz extra clock speed, just like the 945 costs $15 more than the 925 for the same .2 ghz of extra clock speed, even though the 945 is not BE. |
Derp. I pay more so i can join the kool kids klub and enjoy the Black Edition. Just like the Intel __extreme series
_________________
Officially gay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phox
I post too much
Reputation: 110
Joined: 11 Nov 2008
Posts: 2034
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 02, 2010 6:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| By the way, the i7 875k is on sale for $300 right now at microcenter. It's beyond me why this unlocked processor is approaching half the price of it's locked counterpart.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
