If it actually comes to pass then I hope AMD takes huge advantage of the situation and strike a serious blow to Intel. In my personal opinion I think somewhere around 50% or more of people overclock their CPU's, etc. Not being able to do that would certainly turn off a lot of customers, and if AMD played it smart and started basing their advertising around their overclocking abilities then they could gain a serious foothold in the cpu race.
E7200, I would have picked that if I actually knew about it coming so soon and being in the 100€'s before purchasing my CPU...GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
QFT. Damn this CPU will be remembered as the "best bang for buck for overclocker ever" now that the cheap future nehalems will be OC non-friendly...
main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg
I would guess more like 10%BeerzGod wrote:
In my personal opinion I think somewhere around 50% or more of people overclock their CPU's, etc.
main battle tank karthus medikopter 117 megamegapowershot gg
Reynold Johnson..Sup wrote:
Dude who invented HDD?mikkel wrote:
You can't be serious. People, ideas and concepts, not companies, are brilliant. If IBM hadn't been there, another company would have been..Sup wrote:
Without IBM we would still be in tech stone age.
By the same token, you could say that without Ibn Al-Haytham, the Internet would be all copper. Even if that was true, you wouldn't go to Iraq for your fibre optics.
Ur not too fast with Wiki. And he worked for...?mikkel wrote:
Reynold Johnson..Sup wrote:
Dude who invented HDD?mikkel wrote:
You can't be serious. People, ideas and concepts, not companies, are brilliant. If IBM hadn't been there, another company would have been.
By the same token, you could say that without Ibn Al-Haytham, the Internet would be all copper. Even if that was true, you wouldn't go to Iraq for your fibre optics.
Why does it matter who he worked for?.Sup wrote:
Ur not too fast with Wiki. And he worked for...?mikkel wrote:
Reynold Johnson..Sup wrote:
Dude who invented HDD?
Lol defeat.mikkel wrote:
Why does it matter who he worked for?.Sup wrote:
Ur not too fast with Wiki. And he worked for...?mikkel wrote:
Reynold Johnson.
Defeat? Answer the question..Sup wrote:
Lol defeat.mikkel wrote:
Why does it matter who he worked for?.Sup wrote:
Ur not too fast with Wiki. And he worked for...?
You answer first.mikkel wrote:
Defeat? Answer the question..Sup wrote:
Lol defeat.mikkel wrote:
Why does it matter who he worked for?
Are you here to have a reasonable discussion, or to be childish? We both know who he worked for. Why does it matter?.Sup wrote:
You answer first.mikkel wrote:
Defeat? Answer the question..Sup wrote:
Lol defeat.
It doesn't, i was just playing with you. No seriously i like what IBM did for PC technology.mikkel wrote:
Are you here to have a reasonable discussion, or to be childish? We both know who he worked for. Why does it matter?.Sup wrote:
You answer first.mikkel wrote:
Defeat? Answer the question.
Right..Sup wrote:
It doesn't, i was just playing with you. No seriously i like what IBM did for PC technology.mikkel wrote:
Are you here to have a reasonable discussion, or to be childish? We both know who he worked for. Why does it matter?.Sup wrote:
You answer first.
It's just a matter of the name of the company, which happens to be IBM. IBM has made some signifigant things for the computer industry. If it's named IBM, XVR, KLZ or Ron Paul doesn't matter. It just happens to be IBM.mikkel wrote:
Right..Sup wrote:
It doesn't, i was just playing with you. No seriously i like what IBM did for PC technology.mikkel wrote:
Are you here to have a reasonable discussion, or to be childish? We both know who he worked for. Why does it matter?
Last edited by Freezer7Pro (2008-05-13 10:26:58)
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
Yes. That's what I've been saying.Freezer7Pro wrote:
It's just a matter of the name of the company, which happens to be IBM. IBM has made some signifigant things for the computer industry. If it's named IBM, XVR, KLZ or Ron Paul doesn't matter. It just happens to be IBM.mikkel wrote:
Right..Sup wrote:
It doesn't, i was just playing with you. No seriously i like what IBM did for PC technology.
It's too early to tell with any of this.ghettoperson wrote:
I don't mind a new socket; what I do object to is creating two different new sockets solely for the purpose of extracting more money out of people that want to overclock.The#1Spot wrote:
You can only do so much with 775socket untill it does not become cost effective to work on thus using more pins. With that said I am interested in what amd has to offer.ghettoperson wrote:
Fuck LGA1160 then. How many times more expensive is LGA1366 going to be? Why can't they just keep it all to one socket, and make cheaper un-OCable chips?
Thinking about it though, that'd make sense with two sockets. That way, they can force mobo manufacturers to make mobos for LGA1160 that have a fixed FSB.
If they start making some decent chips that OC well, Intel can get fucked.
It could be that Intel want an extreme budget CPU socket for the bulk of purchases and a higher end socket for enthusiasts and suchlike. Such a solution would make a lot of sense.
In any case, there could be huge revisions quickly. Look at the launch of the Athlon 64. Sockets 754 and 940 didn't last long.
I think this is possibly being blown out of all proportion.
Indeed it might be, hopefully it is.Bertster7 wrote:
I think this is possibly being blown out of all proportion.ghettoperson wrote:
I don't mind a new socket; what I do object to is creating two different new sockets solely for the purpose of extracting more money out of people that want to overclock.The#1Spot wrote:
You can only do so much with 775socket untill it does not become cost effective to work on thus using more pins. With that said I am interested in what amd has to offer.
The idea of any hi-fi system is to reproduce the source material as faithfully as possible, and to deliberately add distortion to everything you hear (due to amplifier deficiencies) because it sounds 'nice' is simply not high fidelity. If that is what you want to hear then there is no problem with that, but by adding so much additional material (by way of harmonics and intermodulation) you have a tailored sound system, not a hi-fi. - Rod Elliot, ESP
Overclocking?? I havent O/C'ed anything since the time I oc'ed my old Intel 2.8 to 3.2.... I seriously fail to see the point nowadays.
In best scenario... 100% performance increase?-101-InvaderZim wrote:
Overclocking?? I havent O/C'ed anything since the time I oc'ed my old Intel 2.8 to 3.2.... I seriously fail to see the point nowadays.
3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8
Yeah seriously, what a stupid thing to say.GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
In best scenario... 100% performance increase?-101-InvaderZim wrote:
Overclocking?? I havent O/C'ed anything since the time I oc'ed my old Intel 2.8 to 3.2.... I seriously fail to see the point nowadays.
Exactly!GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
In best scenario... 100% performance increase?-101-InvaderZim wrote:
Overclocking?? I havent O/C'ed anything since the time I oc'ed my old Intel 2.8 to 3.2.... I seriously fail to see the point nowadays.
I got my E6300 up to 3.5GHz from 1.8 stock. That's a 94% improvement. When I got it, the best CPU available was the X6800. My cheap E6300 was benching as well as a stock X6800 by 3.3GHz (in the few benching utils I checked in, including 3DMark). So for 6x less money I was getting a CPU that outperformed the best thing you could buy.
Overclocking is great!
But what if you had the best thing you could buy.. ..and overclocked that?Bertster7 wrote:
So for 6x less money I was getting a CPU that outperformed the best thing you could buy.
I need around tree fiddy.
DonFck wrote:
But what if you had the best thing you could buy.. ..and overclocked that?Bertster7 wrote:
So for 6x less money I was getting a CPU that outperformed the best thing you could buy.
http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/4912 … rigkb0.jpg
3930K | H100i | RIVF | 16GB DDR3 | GTX 480 | AX750 | 800D | 512GB SSD | 3TB HDD | Xonar DX | W8
GC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
http://www.upgradetravelbetter.com/wp-c … /money.jpgDonFck wrote:
But what if you had the best thing you could buy.. ..and overclocked that?Bertster7 wrote:
So for 6x less money I was getting a CPU that outperformed the best thing you could buy.
http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/4912 … rigkb0.jpg
mikkel wrote:
http://berlinjobcenter.com/images/exterior.jpgGC_PaNzerFIN wrote:
http://www.upgradetravelbetter.com/wp-c … /money.jpgDonFck wrote:
But what if you had the best thing you could buy.. ..and overclocked that?
http://img158.imageshack.us/img158/4912 … rigkb0.jpg
I need around tree fiddy.