1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

News Intel closes base clock loophole in latest microcode update

Discussion in 'Article Discussion' started by Gareth Halfacree, 10 Feb 2016.

  1. Gareth Halfacree

    Gareth Halfacree WIIGII! Lover of bit-tech Administrator Super Moderator Moderator

    Joined:
    4 Dec 2007
    Posts:
    17,066
    Likes Received:
    6,610
  2. David

    David μoʍ ɼouმ qᴉq λon ƨbԍuq ϝʁλᴉuმ ϝo ʁԍɑq ϝμᴉƨ

    Joined:
    7 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    17,398
    Likes Received:
    5,753
    What a shocker!

    I bet nobody saw that coming. :lol:

    If AMD were even remotely in the running, Intel would be happy to let this slide.
     
  3. Vault-Tec

    Vault-Tec Green Plastic Watering Can

    Joined:
    30 Aug 2015
    Posts:
    14,851
    Likes Received:
    3,654
    Only AMD are in the running because without overclocking the I3 6100 is quite slow when threading compared to the FX 6300 which overclocks to gain back some of the massive IPC difference and when threading still beats the overclocked I3 6100.

    When overclocked the I3 came close but still doesn't outright beat the FX 6300 and costs more. At stock speed? I think I will go back to recommending the FX 6300 with a £45 MATX board that does overclock some.

    If Intel wanted AMD gone completely? yeah, unlock an I3 job done game over. Without it though? it's either a lame 2 core Haswell that's practically useless in any of the more recent threaded games or straight to a fortune for the unlocked I5.

    I bought one of those Pentium Anniversary things and all it did in gaming was stutter like a dog. Most notably in GTAV, it was completely useless.
     
  4. Corky42

    Corky42 Where's walle?

    Joined:
    30 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    9,648
    Likes Received:
    388
    I know it's possible to mod BIOS firmware and swap out the option ROM's so wouldn't it be possible to replace the new microcode with one from an older BIOS, granted you'd lose out on the fixes from the newer microcode so you'd have to check and see what else the new microcode fixes, that is if you can find any details about what the newer code fixes.
     
  5. Phil Rhodes

    Phil Rhodes Hypernobber

    Joined:
    27 Jul 2006
    Posts:
    1,415
    Likes Received:
    10
    If it was designed to do it, it isn't overclocking.
     
  6. jinq-sea

    jinq-sea 'write that down in your copy book' Super Moderator

    Joined:
    15 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    8,823
    Likes Received:
    721
    Pardon?
     
  7. MrGumby

    MrGumby CPC 464 User

    Joined:
    27 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    1,437
    Likes Received:
    30
    I guess he is refering to overclocking of old. Such as the pencil mod.
     
  8. jinq-sea

    jinq-sea 'write that down in your copy book' Super Moderator

    Joined:
    15 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    8,823
    Likes Received:
    721
    Aha - I think you're right.
     
  9. xrain

    xrain Minimodder

    Joined:
    26 Jan 2004
    Posts:
    403
    Likes Received:
    21
    Well I think he is more referring to that overclocking is increasing the clock of a CPU past its recommended design point. So if you have a cpu that is designed to overclock, you technically aren't overclocking anymore since the cpu is designed to run at a range of clock speeds.
     
  10. jinq-sea

    jinq-sea 'write that down in your copy book' Super Moderator

    Joined:
    15 Oct 2012
    Posts:
    8,823
    Likes Received:
    721
    Ergo it's not designed to do it - so it's overclocking (by my understanding, anyway)
     
  11. Mr_Mistoffelees

    Mr_Mistoffelees The Bit-Tech Cat. New Improved Version.

    Joined:
    26 Aug 2014
    Posts:
    5,198
    Likes Received:
    2,433
    That is rather like tuning a car engine for more power but, not exceeding the engine's design limits and then saying it is not tuned.
     
  12. rollo

    rollo Modder

    Joined:
    16 May 2008
    Posts:
    7,887
    Likes Received:
    131
    Intel does not care for AMD period anymore, If they did they would of backed off a bit and let them fake catch up or breach some anti trust laws to give them some cash.

    ARM prevents Intel having a exploitable monopoly.

    Overclocking has always been about going beyond the limits, Thats the whole point. These K chips just made life easier.
     
  13. Dan848

    Dan848 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    25 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    31
    Likes Received:
    2
    This has been in the works by Intel for some time, hopefully it helps AMD. Competition is good!
     
  14. bawjaws

    bawjaws Multimodder

    Joined:
    5 Dec 2010
    Posts:
    4,266
    Likes Received:
    865
    Competition might be good, but this move from Intel is bad for consumers as they'll just end up having to give Intel more money for the equivalent level of performance they could have had from an overclocked i3 or i5.
     
  15. tiger-moth

    tiger-moth What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    26 Apr 2008
    Posts:
    54
    Likes Received:
    0
    Fully with you on this :)
    That's what I liked about this - it was more back to the roots of overclocking.
     
  16. TheMadDutchDude

    TheMadDutchDude The Flying Dutchman

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2013
    Posts:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    523
    Overclocking still works on the latest ASRock OC Formula BIOS with the new microcode. ;)

    I've not tested it, but it says to press X on boot and it enables their Sky OC feature. I guess it reboots and injects a different microcode ... I've not tried it myself.
     
  17. Guest-56605

    Guest-56605 Guest

    To be fair though B your not likely to be OC'ing a lesser chip with a board like that :p
     
  18. TheMadDutchDude

    TheMadDutchDude The Flying Dutchman

    Joined:
    23 Aug 2013
    Posts:
    4,739
    Likes Received:
    523
    There's an i3 6320 in mine at the moment. I'm going after that elusive 741/742 dual core XTU score. ;)

    So far I've got 740 with some extremely quick RAM training and tuning, but I have the weekend to get those scores up to where I want to be. :D
     
  19. Dan848

    Dan848 What's a Dremel?

    Joined:
    25 Sep 2009
    Posts:
    31
    Likes Received:
    2
    The only reason Intel began to permit motherboard manufacturers to allow a person to get more performance from CPUs was AMD. Intel does not actually care about giving their consumers more for their money - except for the presence of AMD.

    Remember the Intel 386 33MHz? It was around for at least 18 months. In those days AMD manufactured Intel CPUs. AMD decided to "one up" Intel and introduced their 386 40MHz. Intel responded by trashing the 386 series and produced the 486 and stopped their alliance with AMD. That move forced AMD to begin searching for a method to keep up with Intel - and so it is to this day.

    Back to the point. I agree that Intel should permit consumers to do whatever they pleased with their CPUs, including getting more performance, unfortunately Intel does not concur, except with their more expensive products.

    Intel wants your money.
     
  20. David

    David μoʍ ɼouმ qᴉq λon ƨbԍuq ϝʁλᴉuმ ϝo ʁԍɑq ϝμᴉƨ

    Joined:
    7 Apr 2009
    Posts:
    17,398
    Likes Received:
    5,753
    AMD produced 486 CPUs, as did Cyrix.

    Intel took the Pentium route, AMD went K5 and Cyrix produced the truly terrible 586.
     

Share This Page