View Full Version : Intel locks overclocking features
Didn't know where to put this, since I'm not an Intel person, but this seemed like worthy news. I don't know if its been discussed already, but it seems Intel is putting ever more anti-overclocking measures into their chipsets.
http://www.tomshardware.com/hardnews/20040619_110346.html
dalek2.0
06-20-04, 11:10 PM
Send them a message. Stop buying their stuff. I have never owned a Intel myself. I like AMD and it overclocks pretty well. Stable, cheap and easy to get. What more can you ask for?
Seems companies like Intel makes decisions for its users. That ain't good.
Wonder why AMD sales are rising? Hint hint Intel.
Funny how when I read the link, there was a Intel add in the middle. How funny!!!
Later
:D :D :D :D
DJ Switch
06-21-04, 01:17 AM
However, we know of two motherboard makers that have already managed to override the overclocking limiter successfully: Asus and Gigabyte. And it isn't really difficult, but it's a shame to think that smaller manufacturers simply don't have enough manpower make such a venture possible.
Nice try AMD fanboys. :clap: I applaud you.
Intel is making a huge mistake as far as bidding for the enthusiast. The heat issue alone is enough for me to raise my eyebrows...60 celcius!!! That's unacceptable. I am counting on Abit to come through with some nice bios though!
And as he says in the conclusion, at the end of the day the 775 doesn't perform much greater than its predecessor... I hope to see more benches.
Nice try AMD fanboys. :clap: I applaud you.
I don't see anything posted that would be consider fan boyish. They were simply bringing a subject that we all should take into account. Liking a company doesn't automatically make you a fan boy.
I'm just worried about things like this because it might stop people from posting information that could be very valuable to all of us.
Nice try AMD fanboys. :clap: I applaud you.
I don't consider this post very fanboyish at all. As Droban mentioned, this is a very important subject, and relates to all of us here, regardless of whether we use AMD or Intel right now.
If Intel succeeds in placing an "OC Lock", then it severely limits purchasing options for all of us later on, regardless of what we us today.
Granted, it looks like Asus and Gigabyte have been able to bypass it, but Tom's article still mentions that due to the lock, the full potential of the chipset looks to be unrealized.
Hardocp's ABIT board was totally unlocked and reached a FSB of 250+.
DJ Switch
06-21-04, 02:33 AM
Send them a message. Stop buying their stuff. I have never owned a Intel myself. I like AMD and it overclocks pretty well. Stable, cheap and easy to get. What more can you ask for?
Seems companies like Intel makes decisions for its users. That ain't good.
Wonder why AMD sales are rising? Hint hint Intel.
Funny how when I read the link, there was a Intel add in the middle. How funny!!!
Later
:D :D :D :D
Looks like typical company bashing to me. A simple "hey intel'rs check out this unfortunate bit of info, as oppose to extra company-biased comments, ect. Nontheless, it is a very important matter, however the assumed/noted 20% headroom for performance gain is not uncommon for most of us anyways.
Good day.
dalek2.0
06-21-04, 03:06 AM
I'm not bashing Intel. I am saying that if you buy it they are deciding what you do with the chip, not you. You should be able to overclock if you want. They want to get as much money as they can at your expense. At least AMD doesn't seem to care. The only time I have seen AMD take such action is when people were selling slower chips as faster ones and not telling the purchaser. Basically ripping people off.
At least AMD lets you decide. Intel appears to take that away. What will they take away next?
I don't want companies telling me how to use a product, period. When I by it, it is mine. If I want to buy a BMW and push it off a cliff, that is between me and the bank. BMW as no say in it.
Hope that clears that up.
:D :D :D :D
DJ Switch
06-21-04, 03:11 AM
This is understandable, but who is Intel to accuse you of what you did to ruin the chip and why you are returning it (newbs and cheats would only do this). At least your BMW's cause of death would be clear, however with electronics justifications like that aren't so easily attained. Intel is doing it to deter overclockers, yes, however we do have several other big corps. on our side to counteract such actions. For the name of this forums sake, we will overcome it as easily as a memory voltage deficiency.
Good day.
I'm not bashing Intel. I am saying that if you buy it they are deciding what you do with the chip, not you. You should be able to overclock if you want. They want to get as much money as they can at your expense. At least AMD doesn't seem to care. The only time I have seen AMD take such action is when people were selling slower chips as faster ones and not telling the purchaser. Basically ripping people off.
At least AMD lets you decide. Intel appears to take that away. What will they take away next?
I don't want companies telling me how to use a product, period. When I by it, it is mine. If I want to buy a BMW and push it off a cliff, that is between me and the bank. BMW as no say in it.
Hope that clears that up.
:D :D :D :D
He's got a point. Why should I, as an enthusiast, who typically buys the lowest denomination of a new CPU batch and attempts to overclock it as far as possible, buy into a new platform that requires a new CPU, motherboard, RAM and memory (at a substantial cost) if I can't overclock it?
As enthusiasts, we're always looking for the greatest bang-for-the-buck out of our CPU's. Now, Intel wants to limit that. Instead of purchasing a Pentium 4 520 (2800/800/1024 L2) and pushing it towards 3.4 - 3.6 GHz, like many have been doing on the Socket 478 Northwood's and Prescott's, you're now limited to a measly 3080 MHz. What kind of bang-for-your-buck is that? Even with the 20% overclock maximum unlocked by Asus/Gigabyte, that's still only a maximum of 3360 MHz.
Don't think we can hit that on air? What about us overclockers who own water & phase change cooling systems that want to push CPU's to the limit? Essentially, we can't do that anymore and it's all thanks to Intel.
Even dud P4C 2400's that wouldn't do 3000 MHz still overclocked further than we're allowed to push the new LGA775 CPU's on Intel's newest chipsets.
I know overclocking isn't guaranteed in any application, but taking away the ability to overclock only hurts consumers. We can live with the inability to change our multipliers, but take away the ability to modify the FSB and Intel O/C'ers are left with 4 choices:
1) Wait until a motherboard manufacturer can completely bypass this O/C lock.
2) Don't buy 925X/915 chipset-based motherboards.
3) Go the AMD Athlon64 route.
4) Push current MPGA478 as far as it will go and wait for dual-cores.
I've bought Intel CPU's for all but 3 computer system's I've owned (and I've had 20 systems in my life), and as staunch a supporter I am of Intel, taking away the ability to overclock has me seeing the greener pastures of the land of AMD 64-bit.
If I pay for it, I'll use it how I want. A company will NOT dictate to me how I will use MY hardware that I purchased with MY money.
dalek2.0
06-21-04, 03:29 AM
But they are working on stopping it. At some point, if nothing is done, they may be able to do it. Then where will you be?
I'm glad Intel is there. It keeps AMD in check. I'm sure AMD would do things different if Intel was not there.
If you overclock a chip and it burns out, you should not send it back. I'm sure BMW won't be replacing the car either nor should I file a warranty claim, though some likely would.
They need to let the customer decide what they want to do with what we, or you, purchase. I don't want AMD to do this either. I would be upset. I would consider some other chip then. Maybe some new start up for people like us will come along.
I am a firm believer in letting money talk. If people let Intel know they are not happy with their actions and then stops buying their products, they will get the message. They will change when it affects their bottom line. As you said, it will not keep anyone from doing it for long anyway. Why should they spend more money, and make you pay for it, just so you will override what they did?
Not chewing on people. I just HATE when companies try to control what we do. I can also leave the windows down on my car if I want. I should not complain when the electric switches stop working though. Where did freedom go? First the DMCA now this!!
Later
:D :D :D :D
DJ Switch
06-21-04, 03:45 AM
This is true you guys. Things we must consider however:
1) Chipzilla is comprised of many multi-millionaires trying to suck the pennies out of the bottom of every recreational water fountain available
2) US enthusiasts are nothing when put into a ratio, things that only benefit the underground OC'rs are the first things to go at Intel. We can complain as much as we like, but in the end we are not enough market share to make a difference.
3) Look at the trend of the world, control. This indirectly relates to privacy, and how the government is placing cameras everywhere to control what you do. It was only a matter of time before it got introduced into this industry.
4) Money. Newb overclocks, newb does not have proper knowledge of overclocking. Newb kills $1000 piece of silicon. Newbs mom calls Intel and complains her way into a new $1000 piece of silicon. And repeat. Intel's shrink goes through the roof. Most all OC'ers get put into this generalization, and the bottom line is, they don't want to deal with it. End result, we get screwed.
dalek2.0
06-21-04, 04:04 AM
People need to be honest with what they do. I'm not made of money. As a matter of fact I'm disabled. I would not even try to get a replacment if it was my fault or I did something the manufacturor didn't make it to do. I even bought OEM since I knew I would be overclocking anyway.
It seems that companies are using their power to take our rights away. They are slowly getting it to a point where we have very little control over anything we buy.
Next, Intel may tell you, and make it so you have to, use ONLY their mobo and their chip set. Then they have you right where they want you. THEY have control even though you paid for it. Don't say it can't happen. It can. Apple does it. Try to get their chip set.
Think these things can't happen. Look at the DMCA. You lost your "fair use" rights when that passed. What else are they going to take. They have already tried to make it so we can not buy generic ink for inkjet cartridges. It took a court battle, something me and you can't afford, to get that back. They are still working on ways to prevent it though. Give them time. They want your money.
If we sit back and say nothing and do nothing they will control us. We will HAVE to buy what they want us to have and do what they want with it. Like it or not.
I just get tired of companies screwing us on what we buy. Then MAKING us pay for it to boot.
:D :D :D :D :D
Next, Intel may tell you, and make it so you have to, use ONLY their mobo and their chip set. Then they have you right where they want you. THEY have control even though you paid for it. Don't say it can't happen. It can. Apple does it. Try to get their chip set.
If we sit back and say nothing and do nothing they will control us. We will HAVE to buy what they want us to have and do what they want with it. Like it or not.
I just get tired of companies screwing us on what we buy. Then MAKING us pay for it to boot.
If I pay for it, I'll use it how I want. A company will NOT dictate to me how I will use MY hardware that I purchased with MY money.
Intel is responsible for a large portion of processors sold worldwide, a few months ago I looked at one and intel supplies somewhere around 86% of the processors worldwide. Out of all these, how many do you think are getting overclocked? very little.
How is a company screwing us by not letting us overclock it? If I look on the intel box, i see "3ghz". Believe it or not, it runs at 3ghz like it says. The buyer gets exactly what they paid for. Say you were going car shopping, and you buy a mustang. You can't expect to "overclock" it and have it turn into a farrari.
For the past few years people have gotten accustomed to buying something a little cheaper and overclocking it to higher speeds at a cheaper cost. Slimguy said that Intel is "telling him to use his hardware", how so? They manufacture a processor rated at a certain speed, you buy it, you use it for whatever you want.
There is no law that says processor manufacturers have to let you overclock. My bet is that AMD will soon follow Intel like they have done in the past.
You have to realize that overclockers are a VERY small portion of the computer users in the world, intel does not have to cater to you.
Maybe we can hope for the rise of a new processor company.
Although I agree that the majority of users don't overclock or don't know about overclocking, as the microprocessor develops, so does the general publics knowledge of computers. It is more and more common that the average joe know a LOT about computers. So much so that a few years ago they would be considered a computer nerd(which is by no means an insult, and I consider it a compliment).
But this is what companies do. This is what I'm afraid of governments doing.
dalek2.0
06-21-04, 01:17 PM
Say you were going car shopping, and you buy a mustang. You can't expect to "overclock" it and have it turn into a farrari.
Go buy that car and see if you can. You can redo the heads and make the pistons larger. You can add a turbo charger. You can make it a Farrari if you want. You can make that thing just as fast as one too. Ford would not stop you from doing so. Thay actually like that sort of thing. It makes them look good to have something they made do better even if most people don't go to the trouble. Void your warranty, yep. You assume the risk, not Ford.
For the past few years people have gotten accustomed to buying something a little cheaper and overclocking it to higher speeds at a cheaper cost. Slimguy said that Intel is "telling him to use his hardware", how so? They manufacture a processor rated at a certain speed, you buy it, you use it for whatever you want.
No. They are telling you can not overclock THEIR chip. THEY want control over what YOU do with YOUR stuff that YOU bought.
There is no law that says processor manufacturers have to let you overclock. My bet is that AMD will soon follow Intel like they have done in the past.
There is no law that says they can stop us, yet. That will likely be next. I don;t think AMD cares. I actually saw a interview once where that was discussed. The guy was thrilled that some could go so fast because it showed how 'good' their product was. They did step in when people were selling the chips as something they were not. That was fraud though. They can help prevent that. I don't mine that at all. If it is a 2500+, sell it as such.
You have to realize that overclockers are a VERY small portion of the computer users in the world, intel does not have to cater to you.
We are today. They want it to be even smaller. They want to STOP you from overclocking at all. THEY want it to be zero. Linux started out small too. Look at it now. It is growing really fast. M$ didn't used to worrry about Linux. Now M$ is worried. It is growing especially on servers. Someone built a better mousetrap and M$ tried to stop it just like Intel is doing. We should be free, not restrained. We buy something, it is ours. Real simple.
Later
:D :D :D :D
Ok, here's the analogy I made.
microsoft:linux::intel:overclockers
Microsoft and intel have nothing to worry about....how many home computers you see are running AMD w/ some form of linux on it? Probably about .001% The average family computer, work computer, etc. is never going to be switching over to something different. Out of all the family and work computers, how many do you think are overclocked at all? probably 1 in a million.
And for the record, i'd rather have a p4 3.0 @ 3.0 than an AMD.
Go buy that car and see if you can. You can redo the heads and make the pistons larger. You can add a turbo charger. You can make it a Farrari if you want. You can make that thing just as fast as one too. Ford would not stop you from doing so. Thay actually like that sort of thing. It makes them look good to have something they made do better even if most people don't go to the trouble. Void your warranty, yep. You assume the risk, not Ford.
Last time I looked at my moms ford expedition, there is no menu that lets her overclock the engine for more horsepower. Your theory about making a ford into a farrari really makes no sense. Of course anyone can do that, but you have to pay for a turbo charger and everything else to do so. On a processor you hit DEL when u boot, go into one menu, click enter, put in a new number, hit enter, after u hit F10 you have a faster processor, this is free, but converting a ford into a fararri isnt
dalek2.0
06-21-04, 07:35 PM
Last time I looked at my moms ford expedition, there is no menu that lets her overclock the engine for more horsepower. Your theory about making a ford into a farrari really makes no sense. Of course anyone can do that, but you have to pay for a turbo charger and everything else to do so. On a processor you hit DEL when u boot, go into one menu, click enter, put in a new number, hit enter, after u hit F10 you have a faster processor, this is free, but converting a ford into a fararri isnt
But they don't do anything to stop you do they? There are tons of catalogs with the stuff to do it with. Some are not that expensive either.
Actually overclocking does have some expense. I bought this mobo because of the overclocking. I spent money on it. I may could have bought one cheaper that didn't have the options. I just put my money on the front end not on the back end.
I also bought a CPU heatsink so that I could overclock. I spent money on that to. I have bought better thermal paste some heatsinks to go on other components as well. All things considered, I spent money to overclock. If I bought a Intel, I may not, depending on the mobo and chip, have that option becuase of what THEY did.
Microsoft has plenty to worry about. I ONLY use Linux. This is a home rig. I am a prime example of what you say doesn't exist. I overclock and I use Linux only. See my sig below. NO WINDOSE HERE. I have never had windoze on my system. I never will. It is not that good. Bill Gates and other M$ reps have admitted that Linux worries them just because of the growth in the past few years. The viruses are not helping. I have said this before, I know of companies that are switching just because of the viruses and security issues, not just the money anymore.
Think I am that rare. Go to Linuxquestions, Justlinux, Linuxsolved, linuxcult and a whole bunch of other Linux forums. There are a lot of us out here. Most dual boot but a lot have gotten used to the stabilty of Linux and then removed windoze. It takes time to learn Linux but once you do, you don't need windoze anymore. I can do anything on my Linux system that can be done on windoze, only much cheaper, more stable, and more secure to boot.
I just recieved a virus from somebody that is infected. It doesn't do anything. This is what I like about Linux. Even if it were a Linux virus, which is very rare, it would only affect the user I am logged in as. No big deal. No harm. Here's a little proof:
root@smoker /home/dale # f-prot.sh /home/dale
Virus scanning report - 21 June 2004 @ 18:21
F-PROT ANTIVIRUS
Program version: 4.3.1
Engine version: 3.14.7
VIRUS SIGNATURE FILES
SIGN.DEF created 16 June 2004
SIGN2.DEF created 16 June 2004
MACRO.DEF created 14 June 2004
Search: /home/dale
Action: Report only
Files: Attempt to identify files
Switches: <none>
/home/dale/Mail/inbox/cur/1087858287.15619.a991c->content.pif Infection: W32/Zafi.B@mm
/home/dale/Mail/sent-mail/cur/1087858526.15619.qyTr0:2,S->content.pif Infection: W32/Zafi.B@mm
Results of virus scanning:
Files: 9997
MBRs: 0
Boot sectors: 0
Objects scanned: 10233
Infected: 2
Suspicious: 0
Disinfected: 0
Deleted: 0
Renamed: 0
Time: 0:35
root@smoker /home/dale #
'
There are two because It bounced the message back.
Microsoft is worried. They have admitted that Linux is a threat to M$.
Don't let Intel fool you. They want to control what you do with what you buy. They are saying that even though you bought it, it is still theirs, they only rent it to you. I do NOT support that. That is the same basis for the DMCA. You buy a CD and you can only do what we tell you with it. That's not right either. You should not be able to share with friends or sell it but that was already taken care of before the DMCA. Copyright, remember.
We are slowly loosing our freedoms. If we do nothing, we deserve to loose them.
Later
:D :D :D :D
You sound like one of those people that worries about government conspiracies all the time.
Anyways, think of all the schools. Before almost all computers in school systems were macs, now their almost 100% pentium4 dells. When you said that "you are rare for using linux" like i said, think about this. I know for a fact that nobody in my school besides maybe 1-2 people even knows what linux is.
As for getting a virus, it has little to do with the operating system, and more to do with your habits. On IRC every few weeks theres a virus going around, only the people dumb enough to click the link get it. (I call this natural selection). I have never gotten a virus in about 2 years, not sure why people blame windows for that.
The accessories you bought to overclock more are similar to stuff you would need to "convert a ford to a farrari". The stock stuff that comes with everything is perfectly fine unless you want to overclock.
This is my general opinion on this issue in one sentence.
In a global market worth billions of dollars, Intel and Microsoft don't care about your opinion.
DJ Switch
06-21-04, 11:57 PM
In a global market worth billions of dollars, Intel and Microsoft don't care about your opinion.
This signifies my exact outlook. In all reality, Intel has made this executive decision and no 1 or 10 forums will reverse it. If 3rd party board makers or some lone soul at Intel enlightens us on how to totally circumvent it, then so be it.
Good day.
. My bet is that AMD will soon follow Intel like they have done in the past.
.
AMD would only loose from doing this. if intel puts a lock on OCing then alot of Intel OCers might switch to AMD just to be able to OC. it would make no sense business wise for AMD to do this.
dalek2.0
06-22-04, 12:37 AM
You sound like one of those people that worries about government conspiracies all the time.
Based on the history, we should watch them closely. But I am really getting concerned over what companies do. They are getting bigger and strong enough that the government can't do much with them or to them either.
Anyways, think of all the schools. Before almost all computers in school systems were macs, now their almost 100% pentium4 dells. When you said that "you are rare for using linux" like i said, think about this. I know for a fact that nobody in my school besides maybe 1-2 people even knows what linux is.
If they use Macs, they should. They are sitting behind it. Macs don't run windoze, it is a clone of Linux. It has from, what I have read, a very similiar file structure and all.
I also seem to recall that M$ gave a lot of systems to schools as part of the settlement in the antitrust case. You don't think he would give them Macs do you?
As for getting a virus, it has little to do with the operating system, and more to do with your habits. On IRC every few weeks theres a virus going around, only the people dumb enough to click the link get it. (I call this natural selection). I have never gotten a virus in about 2 years, not sure why people blame windows for that.
It has a lot to do with the OS as well as the user. If you sit behind a firewall then you are protecting the OS with the firewall. If there were not so many security holes in windoze you would not have to worry about viruses to begin with. Campare the number of viruses for Linux to ones for windoze. There are some 10,000 for windoze compared to a dozen or so for Linux. Sure there are more windoze machines for them to attack but they are also easier to attack. Find a hole and walk right in. Linux is more difficult than that, not impossable but way more diffacult.
The accessories you bought to overclock more are similar to stuff you would need to "convert a ford to a farrari". The stock stuff that comes with everything is perfectly fine unless you want to overclock.
If you want to take the chance of overheating that chip. You made the Farrai comparison, not me. Re read your post. I took what you said and made a fair comparison. Ford doesn't weild the engine together so you can't modify it either. Intel basically is do that though.
This is my general opinion on this issue in one sentence.
In a global market worth billions of dollars, Intel and Microsoft don't care about your opinion.
And guess what. Since I don't buy their products, neither do I. I just would like to protect people, like you, from loosing their right to use what they buy for whatever they want. I don't want Intel telling you what you can and can not do with their product. Simple. I'm not fighting for me because I don't buy their stuff. YOU do.
Later
:D :D :D :D
DJ Switch
06-22-04, 01:18 AM
Intel is not TELLING you what you can do with their stuff. Intel does in fact not allow overclocking, however by the same token does your TV maker allow you to open up your tv and "flip the switch" that many have in order to support HDTV broadcasting, the answer is no. Intel will still allow you many things, but those things that affect such a small community they could careless about, they lose noticably nothing by doing this.
dalek2.0
06-22-04, 01:59 AM
Intel is not TELLING you what you can do with their stuff. Intel does in fact not allow overclocking, however by the same token does your TV maker allow you to open up your tv and "flip the switch" that many have in order to support HDTV broadcasting, the answer is no. Intel will still allow you many things, but those things that affect such a small community they could careless about, they lose noticably nothing by doing this.
I don't think HDTV will work on a regular TV. The CRT is different, so is the circuitry. I used to work on TV's so I know how they work. They did not MAKE it so you can't its just that they are to different to switch. The difference is Intel is doing something with the specific intent to prevent you from doing something with the chip. Its the intent that bugs me.
Then why are they going to the expense of doing it if it doesn't matter? I'm sure making the changes in manufacturing were not cheap. So much for them not caring about what you do with THEIR chip. All that expense yet they don't care.
I know now why I like AMD. Works and it is MINE. I can overclock if I want too. AMD doesn't care. I support that.
Later
:D :D :D :D
Question, is the FSB lock in the chipset on the mobo, or the CPU?
If it is the Chipset, i can see VIA or SiS or even nVidia taking advantage of the situation and making chipsets that dont have the overclocking limitation... therfore geting major boost in the the enthusiast market share....
if i were VIA i would make chips that would allow all sorts of overclocking options.
dalek2.0
06-22-04, 09:07 PM
I think it is done inside the chip. That is why it is hard, not impossible, to work around. The people that make the chipsets, Nvidia, VIA and others would likely not prevent overclocking. What do they care anyway.
It is Intel that wants to stop you from overclocking, not the chipset makers. Actually, I think the cipsets makers like the idea. I think there are more people that buy mobos with the option to overclock weither they use them or not.
I bought the NF7 for just that reason. I wasn't sure if I would overclock or not, but I did want the option. It is also a very good mobo. I just wish it had better sound drivers than it has for Linux.
Later
:D :D :D :D
seamadan000
06-24-04, 05:23 PM
just for the record, most are saying that the lock is in the chipset, from what I have heard at least.
Second, even if there is a way to get around the lock, Intel just lost my buisness. If they want to restrict my hobby I will go to someone who is not currently doing so, even if there is a workaround buying Intel at this point would be confirming to them that they can do this sort of thing with no reprocussions. I may be one consumer, but I can choose with my money.
The lock is on the chipset for sure. The "chipset maker" is Intel itself by the way.
It is the board makers who buy Intel's chipset that are creating workarounds when they put that chipset on their boards.
While the lock is disappointing, similar steps have been taken in the past by both Intel and AMD alike- just think about the multiplier lock. The lock is just one step further, not a new idea.
DrunkenCat
11-17-05, 08:59 PM
AMD ALLL THE WAY INTEL = NOOB OVER CLOCKERS AMD = l337 OVER CLOCKERS
^_^ that the diffrence haha
Captain Newbie
11-17-05, 09:01 PM
Just a few points:
1) This wasn't a surprise
2) This should not be a surprise
3) Macs run Berkeley Software Distribution aka Berklix + DarwinPPC, NOT a 'linux clone'. There are very fundamental differences.
*reads date stamp*
Whatever became of this anyway?
Folks, this thread is nearly 1-1/2 years old. It's quite obvious from looking at the overclocks that Intel people are making on the new generation chipsets that all this was merely false doom and gloom. I was just reading about a stable 4.6 O/C and there was a couple threads recently where people have hit 5 gig.
speed bump
11-21-05, 09:38 PM
Well all it was is Intel had a really low stock northbridge Voltage as soon as it was bumped up well good bye lock.
These boards clock very well by the way. So all you AMD fanboys I dont you wish you had a chipset like the 925xe/955?
dreammmatt
11-21-05, 10:24 PM
So all you AMD fanboys I dont you wish you had a chipset like the 925xe/955?
no? lol :p It's all about the DFI NF4, baby :cool:
pik4chu
11-22-05, 05:45 PM
Holy thread resurection batman!
Holy thread resurection batman!
i would banish this thread if i could <_<
vBulletin® v3.8.4, Copyright ©2000-2009, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.