• Competitor rules

    Please remember that any mention of competitors, hinting at competitors or offering to provide details of competitors will result in an account suspension. The full rules can be found under the 'Terms and Rules' link in the bottom right corner of your screen. Just don't mention competitors in any way, shape or form and you'll be OK.

screw intel

hedgey

hedgey

hedgey

Permabanned
Joined
30 Jan 2003
Posts
1,525
Location
Cardiff
remember when oc'ing started with the celeron 266a? it was the cheapest cpu. basically kick started this whole cottage industry. did a 90% oc.
now with sandybridge, its the reverse. the oc'able cpu's are the most expensive. i dont know how we ended up in this situation, but this really is the end of overclocking. for one i am not dropping £275 on a cpu just so i can oc it. if amd goes this route, with locked buses..well its all over. what created the "pc enthusiast" segment is the ability to get a low end cpu and oc it past high end. intel just dont understand they are killing this segment.
 
hedgey said:
remember when oc'ing started with the celeron 266a? it was the cheapest cpu. basically kick started this whole cottage industry. did a 90% oc.
now with sandybridge, its the reverse. the oc'able cpu's are the most expensive. i dont know how we ended up in this situation, but this really is the end of overclocking. for one i am not dropping £275 on a cpu just so i can oc it. if amd goes this route, with locked buses..well its all over. what created the "pc enthusiast" segment is the ability to get a low end cpu and oc it past high end. intel just dont understand they are killing this segment.
Click to expand...

as far as i have read, etc. AMDs Bulldozer processors have no such locked bus or anything of the sort, could be another area for AMD to hit Intel, low priced, many cored and good overclocking CPUs, waiting for Bulldozer personally, have good feeling about it and the microarchitecture diagrams are facinating. but back to cheap and cheerful CPUs, had a Celeron D years back that overclocked like nuts, those were the days! :D could rely on Netburst for crazy overclocks, wonder what Netburst would clock to with todays 32nm technology if it was still around? 5, 6, 7Ghz?
 
hedgey said:
intel just dont understand they are killing this segment.
Click to expand...

this segment is pretty much meaningless to Intel, it's serviced purely for bragging rights & marketing kudos, compared to the bulk brown box shifters, the enthusiast market is but a tiny percentage. eventually ( a few years down the line ) i expect there to be pretty much zero in the way of overclockable chips.
 
as said the o/c community is that small it wouldt even pay the tea bill at intell. Most people want it all for free, i have no problem paying £200-300 for a decent cpu if it o/c it a bonus theres more to life :p:rolleyes:
 
Last edited:
Lets all cry because the big nasty Intel won't let us have an awesome overclocking chip for £50 any more. :p You make it sound like they're depriving you of a basic right to be able to overclock any chip, it's their product, they can make it any way they want to. It was just a nice bonus that you used to be able to overclock any nice cheap little CPU. I'm guessing the i5 2500k will eventually come down to around £150 which is still a decent price for an overclockable gaming CPU.
 
AMD still has some nice budget CPUs which can be unlocked and overclocked and the motherboards are not too expensive too.

TBH,for most budget builds with a CPU under £80 I have mostly recommended AMD CPUs for years.

So,hence budget overclocking is still around and if AMD keep this for their newer budget CPUs then it simply will mean a few more sales for them.

AFAIK,even the ASRock E350M1 which uses an AMD Zacate CPU can be overclocked so this means that AMD Llano probably will be able to be overclocked too.
 
Last edited:
Also,the people who are against budget overclocking are those who think that spending £150 on a CPU is not much,ie, those who can afford or want to spend a decent amount on their PC.

TBH,if I am spending over £100 on a CPU nowadays I expect it to have decent performance at stock speeds anyway.
 
Overclocking is great for those (myself included) getting big gains from a cheap chip. It doesn't help Intel's bottom line though. They would like to be able to charge more the faster the chip, and you can't really blame them.

If they wanted to kill overclocking completely though, we wouldn't have the 'K' chips.
 
Blue160 said:
Overclocking is great for those (myself included) getting big gains from a cheap chip. It doesn't help Intel's bottom line though. They would like to be able to charge more the faster the chip, and you can't really blame them.

If they wanted to kill overclocking completely though, we wouldn't have the 'K' chips.
Click to expand...

They make more money out of the K chips and can make more money out of the enthusiast motherboards too.
 
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
They make more money out of the K chips and can make more money out of the enthusiast motherboards too.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. The k chips mean they can lock down everything else and force overclockers to pay for the privilege. AMD being so far behind in performance terms means helps as well.
 
hedgey said:
remember when oc'ing started with the celeron 266a? it was the cheapest cpu. basically kick started this whole cottage industry. did a 90% oc.
now with sandybridge, its the reverse. the oc'able cpu's are the most expensive. i dont know how we ended up in this situation, but this really is the end of overclocking. for one i am not dropping £275 on a cpu just so i can oc it. if amd goes this route, with locked buses..well its all over. what created the "pc enthusiast" segment is the ability to get a low end cpu and oc it past high end. intel just dont understand they are killing this segment.
Click to expand...

At the end of the day, if all Intel chips overclocked to as fast, or faster than their most expensive models, then they would lose lots of money from people buying cheap and OC'ing the hell out of the chips. It's a bit like how AMD have suffered in recent years by offering chip OC'able chips at the expense of losing sales of the high end ones, basically getting by in recent years by money ironically granted to them by Intel (Yey for Anti-Trust suits eh AMD?)!

AMD may be more popular with the "enthusiast" (Read: cheap-ass) community by allowing CPU core unlocks, and cheaper OC'able chips, but in the long run, it hasn't helped their bottom line. Also, frankly, I was more than happy spending £180 for my i5 2500k and getting it to 4.4Ghz, not exactly top dollar for some frankly incredible performance.
 
So you're upset because Intel are no longer manufacturing lower-end chips that should be in a much higher bin so you can avoid spending more money with them.
 
dave_beast said:
So overclocking an i7 2600k £275 past the performance of an i7 980x £792 is not worth it then?!
Click to expand...

Who cares TBH?? Once you overclock the Core i7 980X it will be faster in anything that can use all six cores which is the whole point it exists.

A £200+ processor should be so super fast that over-clocking is not really a necessity.

Even a CPU over £150 should be fast enough TBH at stock speeds.

The vast majority of DIY PC builders are not going to buy a £200+ CPU.
 
Last edited:
CAT-THE-FIFTH said:
Who cares TBH?? Once you overclock the Core i7 980X it will be faster in anything that can use all six cores which is the whole point it exists.

A £200+ processor should be so super fast that over-clocking is not really a necessity.

Even a CPU over £150 should be fast enough TBH.

The vast majority of DIY PC builders are not going to buy a £200+ CPU.
Click to expand...
Frankly, the i5 2500k and i7 2600k ARE already very fast, the overclocking capability is just the icing on the cake.

If this move by Intel is "killing" the enthusiast market, why are tech sites and forums across the world alight with reviews waxing lyrical about the overclocking capabilities of the k series chips and forums full of people pushing frankly insane clocks out of these chips?

Doesn't seem to me like this move has harmed Intel, or their standing with the proper enthusiast community (The community who buys more expensive hardware to really get some incredible things out of them) one bit, only their standing with people who do not contribute much to Intel's bottom line in the first place.
 
Stop It Rawr said:
Frankly, the i5 2500k and i7 2600k ARE already very fast, the overclocking capability is just the icing on the cake.

If this move by Intel is "killing" the enthusiast market, why are tech sites and forums across the world alight with reviews waxing lyrical about the overclocking capabilities of the k series chips and forums full of people pushing frankly insane clocks out of these chips?
Click to expand...

Loads of tech sites like Anandtech have actually lamented that the overclocking of low end parts has been restricted.

In fact I know a few people who actually could have bought a Core i5 2500k based rig and have been put off by Sandy Bridge TBH.

A lot of them are waiting to see what AMD can bring to the table.

Also the Sandy Bridge clocks are not insane consider that 45NM Core i5 and Core i7 quad cores could hit 3.8GHZ to 4.4GHZ.

The new CPUs can hit around 4.7GHZ to 4.9GHZ at most if you have a good chip and in many cases less since the chips are more sensitive to voltage.

Stop It Rawr said:
Doesn't seem to me like this move has harmed Intel, or their standing with the proper enthusiast community (The community who buys more expensive hardware to really get some incredible things out of them) one bit, only their standing with people who do not contribute much to Intel's bottom line in the first place.
Click to expand...

These are actually a small but vocal percentage of the DIY PC building community. They are the same people who would have spent loads on a CPU anyway so nothing has changed IMHO.

In the last 11 years I have met only a few DIY PC builders who will spend £150 to £300 on their CPU for example.

OTH,forums tend to concentrate like minded people so they are not necessarily an indication of how most DIY PC builders will think.

There are other tech forums which are not even like OcUK for example. OcUK seems to attract DIY PC builders with bigger budgets who upgrade more often.

BTW,you are coming across as very elitist with all your "proper" nonsense and seem to have forgotten how the modding community started in the first place.

Being a PC enthusiast is not determined how big you wallet is!
 
Last edited:
as said overclocking is done by a small % of PC owners, most chips are sold to OEM's who put in there PC's with most not knowing anything about overclocking.

As long as Intel sell and make money they won't care about a small % buying cheap and unlocking the performance of one of there higher prices chips as it gets them more profit
 
I think the general point is that it's disappointing that cheap overclocking has gone, but it's entirely understandable why Intel have done it.
 
Like I said AMD is still offering this option so not all is lost.

Those who want massive e-peen can spend more on an Intel CPU and overclock that.

Anyway,if the demand is there Intel probably could launch a K series Core i3.

Intel did launch the Pentium 6500K which was under £100 AFAIK.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom