Intel plans to deliberately limit Sandy Bridge overclocking - Hardware & Software

those benchmarks put a stock 965 on par with a stock i7 930, are you saying a Q9650 is better than an i7 930?

in some games with the i7 having HT on, yes

looking through benchmarks on various sites, I can't find any to support your claim.

[QUOTE=>VLN<;23548355]And then I have to buy a new motherboard? [b]And a new case?[/b] And new ram? [b]And a new power supply?[/b] Nope. :downs:[/QUOTE] :what:

this thread pretty much demonstrates why this section is utter shit now

[QUOTE=ButtsexV3;23606037]those benchmarks put a stock 965 on par with a stock i7 930, are you saying a Q9650 is better than an i7 930?[/QUOTE] [url]http://forums.vr-zone.com/news-around-the-web/533738-core-i7-860-4-0ghz-vs-q9550-4-0ghz-43-benchmarks-single-ati-5850-1ghz.html[/url] Maybe not always better but there just 7% (maximum) of difference of performance between these two processors (even overclocked to 4Ghz).

[QUOTE=Odellus;23595826]because that totally shows in games right [/QUOTE] who cares about games vm servers are more important, fuck the x6 is awesome on a budget 4 fully running vm's with good load on each still doing fine [editline]03:50AM[/editline] [QUOTE=mblunk;23607055]this thread pretty much demonstrates why this section is utter shit now[/QUOTE] AGREE SO HARD something awful has a price, but worth it

[QUOTE=mblunk;23607055]this thread pretty much demonstrates why this section is utter shit now[/QUOTE] "Oh no I don't like when people criticize something I like"

[QUOTE=JohnEdwards;23609987]who cares about games vm servers are more important, fuck the x6 is awesome on a budget 4 fully running vm's with good load on each still doing fine[/QUOTE] VMs don't really give a shit about cpu performance, it's all about memory. So your point is pretty meaningless.

[QUOTE=ADT;23617239]"Oh no I don't like when people criticize something I like"[/QUOTE] Well, personally, I'd call blind defense of ati or nvidia; amd or intel without citations or sources as to why they are the better choice, downplaying the failures and boasting the success of the companies, in some kind of internet war over pieces of plastic and silicone what makes this board shitty. But I guess that's just me.

I am not in intrest of overclocking due to 2 things. 1. I dont know how. 2. I dont want to fry my CPU.

[QUOTE=that1dude24;23622556]Well, personally, I'd call blind defense of ati or nvidia; amd or intel without citations or sources as to why they are the better choice, downplaying the failures and boasting the success of the companies, in some kind of internet war over pieces of plastic and silicone what makes this board shitty. But I guess that's just me.[/QUOTE] If fanboyism about a company makes me rage often, I hate when the advices we gave to people are considered like shit (Like the example: No matter how I like AMD, their Phenom X6 are not worth it in technical way) [editline]11:23PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;23622895]I am not in intrest of overclocking due to 2 things. 1. I dont know how. 2. I dont want to fry my CPU.[/QUOTE] Except if you screwed up hard in the BIOS or/and if you don't have a good CPU cooler, the chances of having a broken (and burned) CPU are low.

I'll sum the thread up as [citation needed]

[QUOTE=liquid_phase;23620587]VMs don't really give a shit about cpu performance, it's all about memory. So your point is pretty meaningless.[/QUOTE] You can really tell when the CPU is better on a VM, especially if it has a good amount of cores/threads. Memory just gets the machine booted. Getting it running smoothly is a mix of enough memory, a great CPU, and fast disks.

[QUOTE=Fatfatfatty;23622895]I am not in intrest of overclocking due to 2 things. 1. I dont know how. 2. I dont want to fry my CPU.[/QUOTE] It's really easy. If you wanted to, you'd be able to figure it out.

[QUOTE=ADT;23617239]"Oh no I don't like when people criticize something I like"[/QUOTE] no he's right this section is fucking terrible now constant shitty advice, the amount of idiots and the constant fanboy circlejerking e.g this thread is just people getting moist over AMD if I had anything better to do I wouldn't even bother anymore, sadly I don't

even the Linux section sucks now, filled with threads about wubi breaking installations

It comes down to what you need, what you want and what you can afford. If you need more performance but you haven't got much money AMD has a cheaper lineup it's not the best but you can afford it. If you want more performance but haven't got a lot of money (like me) then AMD still has plenty of performance at a somewhat low cost. Now if you need more performance and you have some good money you can get Intel which does have pretty much the best shit right now. Same goes for just wanting more performance. AMD is good because you can keep your older socket motherboard a little longer due to backwards compatibility. You can't do that with Intel because they focus on performance. Lets see you put a 6 core cpu in a 3 year old intel motherboard that you used with a duel core previous. AMD focuses on saving the buyer money Intel focuses on giving the buyer the best of the best.

[QUOTE=liquid_phase;23620587]VMs don't really give a shit about cpu performance, it's all about memory. So your point is pretty meaningless.[/QUOTE] cool story bro

[QUOTE=gparent;23625771]You can really tell when the CPU is better on a VM, especially if it has a good amount of cores/threads. Memory just gets the machine booted. Getting it running smoothly is a mix of enough memory, a great CPU, and fast disks.[/QUOTE] Have you ever seen virtualization in a enterprise environment? Memory is everything, even with the memory ballooning esx does, large amounts of raw physical memory is most important spec a box can have. A fast cpu is always nice to have and the more cores the better sure, but when you say all a memory does is get a machine booted you're right - without that memory the vm is either going to refuse to boot (in virtualization platforms where memory ballooning isn't present) or page like hell and that's going to be a [B][I]far[/I][/B] bigger performance hit than cpu utilisation hitting 100%. We have many, many hp proliants here at work with dual xeon nehalems in them and 96GB of ram, they're pretty much all running at less than 50% cpu utilisation with over 40 vms on some of them, disk i/o isn't an issue as any serious esx environment uses shared storage, i.e. a san. The only limiting factor is memory. [QUOTE=JohnEdwards;23629872]cool story bro[/QUOTE] cool meme-derived retort bro

[QUOTE=Odellus;23605840]buttsex i want to love you but you're making it hard [editline]11:23PM[/editline] i mean my dick [editline]11:28PM[/editline] [IMG]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8914988/Captures/excelcapture-20100724-232711.png[/IMG] [IMG]http://dl.dropbox.com/u/8914988/Captures/excelcapture-20100724-232647.png[/IMG] And I know that a Q9650/Q9550 is better than a 965.[/QUOTE] 10fps for $100 more? Go fuck yourselves intel, I'm getting a Phenom 955. >:\

Having a Quad Core nowadays is only for people who still have a 775 socket with DDR2 memory.

[QUOTE=ADT;23643862]Having a Quad Core nowadays is only for people who still have a 775 socket with DDR2 memory.[/QUOTE] Uh, what? Isn't the majority of the market quad-core?

[QUOTE=Slithersoul;23640479]10fps for $100 more? Go fuck yourselves intel, I'm getting a Phenom 955. >:\[/QUOTE] You're an idiot. We were talking about upgrade paths for people who are on socket 775. [editline]03:15PM[/editline] [QUOTE=Odellus;23545913]it performs better than every phenom 2 there is, so they kind of can price it however they want[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Odellus]buy a Q9650 for $330, have i7 performance without paying >$500, and like I already said, they can price those quads like that because there isn't anything better[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=ADT;23643862]Having a Quad Core nowadays is only for people who still have a 775 socket with DDR2 memory.[/QUOTE] So the people with i5-750/60s, Phenom II X4s, and i7s are all wrong? Thats a huge chunk of the cpu market.

[QUOTE=Makuuta;23643960]Uh, what? Isn't the majority of the market quad-core?[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=Evilan;23646718]So the people with i5-750/60s, Phenom II X4s, and i7s are all wrong? Thats a huge chunk of the cpu market.[/QUOTE] Damn people, think before posting. We were talking about Core2 Quad (Quad COre from socket 775).

[QUOTE=ADT;23648843]Damn people, think before posting. We were talking about Core2 Quad (Quad COre from socket 775).[/QUOTE] We did think. You were generalizing "Quad Core" which could be any 4 core processor by Intel or AMD.

Sorry if I confused you all, that was not my plan.

Can we go back to theories about why Intel limits overclocking on an entry-level line of processors?

[QUOTE=liquid_phase;23638122]Have you ever seen virtualization in a enterprise environment?[/QUOTE] Obviously. [QUOTE=liquid_phase;23638122]Memory is everything[/QUOTE] Go ahead and run those VMs on a low CPU server. We tried it, it didn't work. Maybe you're not working on serious workloads, but here we actually try to get our servers to do things, and we got huge improvements from a CPU upgrade. Memory isn't even close to being fully utilized after studying the minimum requirements for our workload. Do you only run Windows servers? [QUOTE=liquid_phase;23638122]disk i/o isn't an issue as any serious esx environment uses shared storage, i.e. a san.[/QUOTE] "Disk I/O isn't an issue once you have sufficient disk I/O resources available". Thanks for the agree?