Intel Might be Forcing Ban on Non-K OC Feature on Skylake Motherboards

[-BirdiE-]

This is an interesting one. I think Intel has the right to sell CPUs with enabled/disabled features as the please. I also think consumers have the right to do as they please with their product once they purchase it.

I think I'm landing on the side of Intel here (if this is true). While I think consumers have the right to do as their please with the products they purchase, Intel has the right to prevent motherboard manufacturers using their chipset, created for their processors from building in ways to circumvent locks they've put on their less expensive products.

Another way to think of it is you've created software. You have a basic version with half the features for $100, and a premium version for $200. You give your software to Best Buy to sell for you, and they start giving people who buy the $100 version of the software a crack that unlocks the premium. You'd probably be pretty upset about that as a company.

[Castdeath97]

4 hours ago, Jstone said:

The majority though have intel. Intel has been the dominate force, look at what happen to apple. They use to only have AMD but then they switched because AMD was not working well for them. Intel may have made a miss step here but at the end of the day how many people are overclocking their cpu's The average Joe isn't going to and thats ok. Overclocking is nice but how many people actually overclock their CPU's other than enthusiasts. In the average market not many people do.

I don't remember Apple ever using AMD, got any source for this?

[suicidalfranco]

45 minutes ago, Castdeath97 said:

I don't remember Apple ever using AMD, got any source for this?

they never did, only CPU that isn't intel that Apple used was the PowerPC

Edited February 2, 2016 by suicidalfranco
typo

[Jumper118]

they physically cant do that

1) you would have to update your bios

2) none of the bios's that currently unlock bclk are official, so................. yeah thet are banning something which doesn't exist

[Master Disaster]

25 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

they physically cant do that

1) you would have to update your bios

2) none of the bios's that currently unlock bclk are official, so................. yeah thet are banning something which doesn't exist

They can push a CPU Microcode update over Windows Update that blocks it entirely, there's no need for a UEFI update at all.

Of course you can always block Windows Update but eventually it will filter through to almost everyone.

[Jumper118]

15 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

They can push a CPU Microcode update over Windows Update that blocks it entirely, there's no need for a UEFI update at all.

Of course you can always block Windows Update but eventually it will filter through to almost everyone.

no they cant it has to be done at a bios level to lock this. octv were talking about it for a good half hour the other day. it is not possible to do this through the os. 

[Master Disaster]

7 minutes ago, Jumper118 said:

no they cant it has to be done at a bios level to lock this. octv were talking about it for a good half hour the other day. it is not possible to do this through the os. 

Really, explain this then...

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2493989

[Master Disaster]

Sorry for the double post, can edit on my tablet...

Intel can release a microcode update to the CPU through Windows which blocks it at a CPU level. The uefi will still have the functionality to OC but the CPU will just block it from happening.

[Jumper118]

14 minutes ago, Master Disaster said:

Really, explain this then...

https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/2493989

it isnt the same as that and also i dont think it will work for me ever with my windows xp and windows 7 with no updates. also why would they spend money to stop a tiny bit of profit from disappearing . they can get a lot a good market research from this without having to do anything themselves.

[NateGSR117]

this will be a sad day indeed if this happens

[SuperCookie78]

Intel making only certain chips unlockable is just a money grab. Fight for the right to overclock #UnlockTheClock

[stconquest]

Pandora is out of her box, sadly for Intel:  It is too damn late suckas!

[patrickjp93]

6 hours ago, valdyrgramr said:

Zen isn't even out yet, so that's quite the assumption.   Now, in the OC sense...how exactly is Intel better when the world record for an OC is an AMD?

You honestly care about the liquid helium benchmark world record on an architecture that is such crap it can't even keep up with Lynnfield?

[Guest Kloaked]

12 hours ago, patrickjp93 said:

People don't know jack. This is a pure speculation article with no sources for any of the major claims.

90% of the tech news posts are just that, yet everyone wants to go ahead and believe them.

[IgnorantBastrd]

Intel has to protect their interests, I don't really blame them for blocking Non-K OCing but it is sad to see it go.

[patrickjp93]

32 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

We're talking about OCing not application performance.  You brought up application performance.

BS!!! No one sane gives a rat's rear end which company in the world has the world overclocking record on liquid helium (which by the way is neither AMD nor Intel. It's actually MIT with a 450 GHz processor made of graphene that was announced in 2014, but hey, details). Which one leads the world in performance? For most workloads, it's Intel. For a few rare cases it's Oracle (Sparc) and IBM (Power 8).

[patrickjp93]

Just now, valdyrgramr said:

Actually, there are plenty of OCing forums that use AMD's for the sake of high OCing.  You sound like a lunatic and an elitist.  Yes, Intel's have better application performance, but they can't OC as high which is something that competitive OCers do care about.  Just because you don't have interest in something doesn't mean others don't.  Your next posts are probably going to be the following, "Everyone is like me!  Everyone doesn't like it because me!  ME!  ME!"  In fact, my main rig uses an Intel CPU, 4790k.  I'm just not going to sit back and fanboy like you.   I've already addressed that Intel is better in application performance.  You instead ignore that like a rabid fanboy to bitch because people find higher OCs interesting.  The world doesn't revolve around you.

The difference between the two is less than 300 MHz. No one sane outside that circle cares...

[patrickjp93]

28 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Then why do people do it, and why do people attend events for it?  You're not supporting your case, and again!  The world doesn't' revolve around you.  People have different interests than you, so no need to be a dick because they do.

That doesn't change the fact those enthusiasts are a tiny sliver of an already tiny part of the world population. Who cares if it clocks higher if no one has a practical use for it? The winners don't even get much money from it. It's just incredibly pointless.

[patrickjp93]

4 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Other OC enthusiasts?  They do exist, and I was strictly originally talking about a higher OC only.  Not application performance.  For example, I was originally interested in OCs so I got a 9370, but when I needed the performance for editing stuff I switched to a 4790k.  I do miss my 9370 for the higher OC, but the 4790k, while having a lower OC, has better application performance.  There are forums that do favor AMD's over Intel's for their higher OCs.  But, they do use both.  The point is that they have an interest in it over what you have interests in.  That would be like them telling you that your major is utterly pointless because they don't have the same interest as you.  Telling them what they do is pointless makes you an elitist.  You feel superior to them, but you're really not.  It's just an elitist mentality.  So, there's no point in arguing when you have such a childish mindset about someone having a hobby.

I already played in that sandbox and was in the same league as 8-Pack, but it was just a money pit. At some point you have to be an adult and be practical.

[patrickjp93]

Just now, valdyrgramr said:

Adults have hobbies too, so that makes no sense.  If they can afford it, let them.  It's their money.  Might as well call every car enthusiast a child while we're at it since they spend far more on that, talk about a money pit.  Why should people program?  Why fly drones?  Why game?  Why do anything other than work and bitch about work?  Point is, people are happy when they unlock cores and OC to high clocks as that's their hobby.  It's not childish to have a hobby if you have the money to spend on the hobby.  Now, ruining your life and going into debt!  That's a different story.

I didn't say "they can't have a hooby." I merely asked why anyone around here gives a crap who has the highest overclock speeds commercially. Since no one around here is rich enough to support that hobby, why bother bringing it up?

[patrickjp93]

15 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

It's not that expensive, and I doubt everyone here has the same income level.  You don't have to be rich to support this sorta hobby.  AMD isn't exactly the most expensive platform.  

Liquid N2 overclocking? Are you insane? On water Intel and AMD both get around the same top speed of 5.5 GHz.

[azurezeed]

I think everyone saw this coming

[patrickjp93]

3 minutes ago, valdyrgramr said:

Oh, I thought you meant overclocking in general.   

NO! That is the only place AMD has any real advantage. On water both companies achieve about the same peak overclocks. Heck even on Chillers they're about the same.

[MageTank]

Windows update is disabled through group policy, and I have my bios archived. If they can "force" me to update my BIOS, then clearly I do not deserve to overclock.