What is the point of CPU modification for you??

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It seems many people on Hexus don't have an issue with Intel removing overclocking on their sub £140 processors. However,they don't seem to mind paying Intel over £140 for the ability to overclock their processors.

CPU modding for most people has traditionally been about improving performance of cheap CPUs to match more expensive CPUs.

An early example is the Celeron 300.

Ignoring the financial implications to the companies involved what is the point of CPU modification for YOU??

[kalniel]

Simply to extend the use of an already purchased chip that would otherwise be limiting. If the chip isn't limiting or there are non-limiting chips available affordably then there's no need other than e-preening.

In the case of Sandy Bridge I think Intel have played it perfectly - you can now buy exactly the right chip for your purposes across the range.

[oolon]

I don't care, I don't over clock, everything I run it run at stock speeds. Most machines I buy have a 5+ year lifecycle as they are moved around various roles in my house. When i buy a machine I always give some thought to what I might do with it next. I never say just upgrade a process, as that will leave me with a processor which without a board is useless. OK I could ebay things but I just cannot be bothered. If I do have spares I often give away to friends/family.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Added poll.

[kalniel]

Added poll.

Poll is rubbish. Neither, and I don't appreciate being 'forced' into one of two biased catagorisations

I'm saying I buy a CPU to perform how I want it to at the time of purchase. I don't consider modification to enable me to buy a cheaper or more expensive system, nor would I say £100 is expensive - it's all relative and determined by your usage. In my example, OCing is much more important on an expensive system (my definition, so >£200 CPU perhaps), as you don't want to be replacing them as often.

[MaddAussie]

I used to buy cheap processors (durons and semperons) and I OC'ed my E6600 but now I just buy the quickest processor I can't and can be doing with all the faffing

[abaxas]

The days of easy overclocking are long gone.
Some examples from the past.

486sx 25 - a few jumpers later and you have a 486sx33
Cyrix 68x6 100 - all worked at 2x60 and most at 2x66
Celeron 2 533 - run at 100mhz instead of 66 for instant 800mhz

It's all too complex now with special coolers, mobos etc. Why bother.

[Flibb]

Things seem to have changed in the last couple of years, I havent found any of the stuff I do on my rig to be limited by a cheap CPU run at stock. In the past I tended to go for a CPU that could be easily over clocked or in some way unlocked. Despite only spending £50 on my current CPU and around the same on the MOBO, I haven't found any games or applications that need any more oomph. I don't tend to do anything with video, and the photo editing software I use works fast enough for me.

[Georgy291]

i bought a i5 because its the fastest / decently priced thing at the time. And the over clocked it because i can. and it can be done with out a fuss. I got it to 4.2 and it was fine. Decided i dont need that power yet and clocked it back to 3.8. When i will need a upgrade instead of upgrading right away, i can push it to 4.2 to give it a bit more life time

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

The days of easy overclocking are long gone.
Some examples from the past.

486sx 25 - a few jumpers later and you have a 486sx33
Cyrix 68x6 100 - all worked at 2x60 and most at 2x66
Celeron 2 533 - run at 100mhz instead of 66 for instant 800mhz

It's all too complex now with special coolers, mobos etc. Why bother.

Really??

It seems the e-peen overclockers have been sending out too much fud sadly.

Overclocking has gotten progressively easier over the years.

You don't need an expensive motherboard,CPU and cooler to overclock.

My 2.2GHZ E4500 which cost £90 in 2007 could be overclocked to 3.1GHZ with generic 800MHZ DDR2, a £50 motherboard and a £10 cooler. I still use an E4300 at the same speed in another computer now.

My mate unlocked a £60 Athlon II X3 440 to a Phenom II X4 with a £70 motherboard. The motherboard has USB3.0 and SATA3.0 and he had to press a button or two on the motherboard to unlock the processor. He wanted USB3.0 and SATA3.0 otherwise a £50 motherboard would have done the job.

I have had mates with £45 P31 motherboards,E5000 series processors and cheap coolers get decent overclocks.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

It is almost like people are making excuses for Intel to make more money.

Intel has not limited overclocking on their low end CPUs in the last 10 years and it has not affected their bottom line either.

They could have easily have added a few extra multipliers on top of the new Core i3 processors and it would have not cost them that much TBH.

At this rate what is the whole point of computer modding of any sort??

A Dell would probably be cheaper and do the job anyway!

[Singh400]

Poll is a bit crap. I don't purposely buy cheap or expensive. I set a budget. Then I work within that budget.

Then whatever I have I look at it's OC possibility, and decide if it is worth it to invest my time to get a stable OC. Got my Q9450 @ 2.6 GHz stock, now running at 3.6 GHz. Worth it? Absolutely.

[Random_guy]

I overclock because its a free performance boost. I would never rely on it or take it into account when budgeting for a new build (e.g. saying 'I can spend more on Gfx because I can buy this cheaper CPU and overclock it').

So if intel makes it difficult for me, then I won't overclock. Depending on the price difference I could be persuaded to spend a little more on a 'k' model, but only 10-15% more, not 30-50%.

Intel won't get significantly more money from me from this move, but it won't be a factor in deciding between intel and AMD for my next build either.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

So basically some people on Hexus are willing to pay for something which was free before. Very interesting.

Having said that that it seems many of the people who are against budget overclocking have quite expensive computers in the first place!

[Domestic_Ginger]

I feel a bit limited by the poll. The need to overclock has been blown out of all proportion by the proliforation of review sites and interent forums.

I know what you mean that intel should not be in a postion to effectively set out to block the ability to OC their chips. Unfortunately this is down to AMD not really being able to keep up. I think that no matter how good Bulldozer is going to be the replacement for the LGA1366 will allow for intel to again take control of the market.

[Max Tractor]

I said a few years ago that imo, overclocking will come built in. Intels lock out is just another enthusiast targeted buck, albeit with serious implications for the bang for buck overclocker, myself included. I have been voting with my feet for quite a while, the only new Intel cpu I bought in the past few years have been a E4300/Q6600. I have 3x1055T 2x95w/1x125w all hit 4.0ghz and with a total cost of about £460, I know where my money is going in the next 6 months or so.

cheers