Wonderful! We have similar frames of reference, I bought books and typed in BASIC programs on a TRS-80 as a kid, have etched boards\soldered\blahblah, and the first computer I could call my own was an Atari 800 - I still have it. I recall, and still have, some of that old DIP memory (they came packaged in neat plastic sticks with plugs on the ends) and my first overclocks were done with crystals meant for scanners at RadioShack on old 8088 clones. I cooled that thing and it's drives with a small 7inch personal fan and the added clock speeds really screwed up my DOS games like the one with the beers sliding down the bar. I fondly remember Desqview and DOS long before Windows. We thought CGA was awesome and I could tell what speed a modem synced by the tones it made. My first watercooling was fountain pumps, transcoolers, homemade heatblocks, and Peltiers that allowed me to drop below freezing and deal with dew point issues. ePeen established? We're both old farts?
Yes, after a process has matured nearly all of the parts coming off the line will bin high but are marked for demand. If something is binned in this manner the end user will never know it because it won't be marked in any way to indicate it - Intel isn't stupid. Only careful testing by an end user will allow them to find the full speed capabilities of the specific CPU.
Of course more can go wrong than simply heat but heat IS the primary issue and if it's kept to a minimum then you can push further. At some point the CPU will become unstable and you'll have hit the limit. No one with any brains rides at that edge because anything from a stray cosmic ray, to a blip in ambient temp, to wiggles in power will tip it over. If you're getting singular bug reports that can't be repeated by anyone else regardless of hardware I'd be inclined to skip them anyway and obviously someone clocked to the edge isn't going to get the same weight.
My point is that not everyone does that and that many who use heavily processor dependent software ARE overclocked because it saves time and slower parts clocked higher are cheaper - if you can even buy parts at the speeds you run (I can't). Done right overclocking is no different than running a factory binned part at it's rated speed. As I've already explained in this thread proper troubleshooting of a failure is required regardless and it's what anyone reporting a bug report should do anyway. My system is stable and only boots for patches or maintenance. Dismissing bug reports for the singular reason of being overclocked is foolish, particularly if the software being produced is CPU intensive enough (x.264...) that a large portion of the user base is going to want added speed.
Watercooling a stock speed CPU in an environment with normal ambient temps is pointless unless you're after silence and in the end the water still must shed it's heat which these days means fans. Being able to pipe that heat to another room is nice but also overly complex compared to a set of headphones. You're not buying any real stability at stock speeds and if the machine is unstable at stock speeds I'd be looking at other components long before I would heat....
Meh, I'd love to buy cheaper hardware for my needs - alas Intel gimped the i7 K CPU and I'm running what I must to get the job done. I'm honestly more peeved at the board manufacturers than I am Intel when it comes to overclocking, it's the board vendors who aren't providing.
My "toy" runs quite a few VMs and stores more than 30TB worth of data but nice attempt at a slight, run along now.
So let me get this straight - you want the folks reporting bugs to state their overclock (how else will you know?) and then wish to go through the reports and close those stemming from people who have just self-reported an overclock? Methinks you've not thought this through very well.
No, this isn't like someone who has hopped up their car bitching about poor MPG (I work on cars too). This is like someone bitching at the gas station because their car overheated - which in the case of an overclock is most likely what happened since video encoding can take hours to do at max load.
P.S. You might also want to look up the binning process that CPU manufacturers use and understand how it works. If Intel needs 1K of 2.8GHZ parts and have parts capable of 3.2 that are already fully stocked it's not impossible to get a 2.8 marked part that was capable of 3.2. Intel also doesn't take into account the heat shedding capabilities that many of us own when binning their stuff for worst possible use cases. My system sheds heat VERY well, your stock shitty heatsink in a crappy case likely not so much and it's for users like yourself that Intel designs parts. My system was built for overclocking...
Sorry to hear it but those bug reports aren't coming from me for sure. For starters my machine is rock solid for HOURS on end - primarily due to my not having added a ton of voltage to achieve my speed and from using watercooling to remove the heat. I haven't had an encode crash or fail in months and on those very rare occasions when it does happen my first response is to try it again and monitor peak temps. If it still fails I'd lower the clock and try yet again. Only if I had something repeatable at stock speeds and could be assured that my source files were good would I consider putting out a bug report and only then if I could find others with the same issue. That's all pretty much bug reporting 101 and it's a shame that people seem to have issues following that process. When I have a failure and my system has been stable for ages I don't immediately think it's my software, I know better.
So, are you writing code for x.264? If so pretty please give us some GPU speed ups:-) I know that you guys have hated on Intel for the crap instructions they've added and that you don't much like NVIDIA either but it's what I've got and every little bit helps!
Find me a GPU encoder that's worth a shit or hey maybe get GPU encoding added to x.264 and I'll be happy to leverage my GPU. As it stands now the only software I've seen to use the GPU outputs inferior results and has nowhere near the amount of flexability of use that software encoders do. I use x.264, sounds like you use something inferior.
Sorry but no, it's possible to overclock the normal CPU by bumping the clock speed rather than manipulating the multiplier and it has ZERO to do with turbo anything and is NOT something that Intel does out of the box. Also, K series CPU are completely capable of turbo just as any other - I'm typing on one now. This is often turned off when overclocking simply because when it turns on it can push clocks up past the realm of stability as few want the lower speeds very low.
No, I can see Intel doing it to be dicks. They know that this is a cheap CPU that could be pushed to allow people setting up home labs to get more performance out of cheaper hardware. I HAVE overclocked "locked" CPU since it's simply the multiplier that's locked and the clock can be pushed - ESX had no issues with it. However headroom was limited because I couldn't tweak the multiplier...
What's your point? I'd like more performance from the CPU and could use it - I'd be willing to overclock it. Must I have a million dollars riding on it to be qualified to buy and use the silly thing as I see fit? I think not... My needs are my own and I deem the exercise worthy and would do it, your definition of "need" doesn't suit me.
So "need" is defined how exactly? I use the box, it runs quite a few things, thus yes I need the silly thing to work and am not afraid of pushing the CPU past it's conservative binning.
Preaching to the choir man! I used to be hardcore AMD before they became slower clock for clock. Nowadays I have NO AMD in my house but do at least own stock - and am taking a bath. I agree that we need competition and I hope that AMD's use in the upcoming consoles helps boost them. If I were running servers that simply needed lots of cores and did nothing CPU intensive I'd likely be running an AMD ESX box. Hopefully AMD will catch a break and come close to parity with Intel in the near future, sadly I think that may be a pipe dream. At least Haswell wasn't a giant leap ahead in performance like some of the other previous releases...
Well, when trying to build such a lab as I did people will try to stretch their budget - like buying a CPU and overclocking it for more performance. I have a K i7 Sandy in my desktop and it clocks well over a gig higher than it's rated - that's the kind of bump an ESX server can really feel. After being bitten on my first ESX build I did finally build one that worked but I ended up spending far more to go with an older XEON CPU. Less of my money went to Intel though! Were it not for the fact that it's not just being used for play and replacing several other pieces of hardware I'd probably never have done it. Having the ESX experience helps with my job too so this wasn't just built for fluff and losing this capability on the cheaper CPU sucks.
I don't understand why they did this but for workstation use it really doesn't matter so much. VirtualBox and VM Workstation both work fine on my desktop thankfully. A shame I cannot push the edge with my server, overclocking a XEON should be possible too but most mobo are server geared and don't have the options for it:-(
Current CPU that aren't K rated can be overclocked though not to the same degree. I've never heard of issues from folks overclocking those and running them in virtual environments. Somehow I doubt that this is for our protection but they certainly haven't said one way or the other. If I could overclock my damned XEON I'd sure do it.
Go look up the spec sheets for Sandy CPUs. Or better yet Google 3570K and VT-d. Surprise! I found out the hard way myself when I built an ESX server and couldn't install, I found the feature greyed out in the BIOS. A quick Google on that model and I realized I'd been had too.
Bullshit - I would! I have a XEON now running an ESX server at home and hell yes I would overclock it without a second thought. Good luck finding a XEON board that supports both ESX and overclocking though! there's nothing magical or scary about overclocking if you have half a clue and don't try to run right over the bleeding edge. I've been doing it since the 8088 days when a damned crystal from RadioShack was required and it's never been a problem. This is Intel screwing with the market plain and simple.
Then you aren't doing it right. If you setup an overclocked machine correctly and don't try to push it right to the bleeding edge you'd get plenty of bang for the buck. My current Sandy machine is pushed to 4.5GHZ and I save a great deal of time processing video as a result - it's an i7 3770K. It process video for hours on end with no issues and reboots only for updates occasionally. Cooling is your biggest issues, water works best and don't push a ton of voltage through it. Start with the basics and work up to hat the CPU is capable of, it'll be stable.
Current K rated CPU lose this and possibly some other features. I didn't pay attention to this and found out the hard way when I couldn't run an overclocked ESX-i Sandy machine. Pissed is an understatement! There's no good reason to do this other than to screw with the marketplace.
I've switched to a XEON CPU of Ivy heritage and GL finding a board for one of those that runs ESX-i and can be overclocked. Nearly every machine I own is overclocked and has been for many years and it pisses me off to get jerked around like this by Intel.
Add to the list below rendering and those of us who compress and process video - of which I am one. Faster clock speeds can save me HOURS of time and is why I run an overclocked Sandy i7 at over 4ghz. It runs for hours at a time fully slammed with no problems.
So yeah, there are use cases for this outside of your sphere of knowledge.
I'm a Waze user and have corrected their maps a few times both with the online app and with textual reporting. I wouldn't say that they aren't a mapping company as they most certainly provide good tools for correcting maps and highlighting new roads.
Awww, the press is upset that someone checked over their phone records. At least they obtained a warrant. The FBI appears to think that no such thing is needed when it's a common citizen that they want records for. How come the press is upset when it happens to them but seems to ignore the FBI doing it to others?
You asked, I answered!:-) I do shop online a great deal and a large part of that is price but it's also convenience and the ability to get a far wider variety of goods than any local store is likely to carry. Online stores that are run well have the advantage of volume, something no brick store really has by comparison and often ends up with higher prices as a result. I shop local when it makes sense but just this week I had packages from multiple stores delivered to my home that I couldn't have gotten locally anywhere near as easily. Sometimes you just don't need any of the advantages I listed but they do exist...
I got screwed in a few different ways but in the end I'll have the last laugh and no I have pretty much zero contact with the loser. My father warned me and he was proven right:-(
That makes more sense to me. I believe you can still carry them in checked luggage but they must be declared, locked, and they search them. I also believe that ammo cannot go along for the ride. This is what I'm told anyway by owners, I own no firearms myself
Slashdot Mirror
MY Lizard Hindbrain is at LEAST 40! How dare you say something so offensive!
Yeesh, this PC crap needs to go...
Wonderful! We have similar frames of reference, I bought books and typed in BASIC programs on a TRS-80 as a kid, have etched boards\soldered\blahblah, and the first computer I could call my own was an Atari 800 - I still have it. I recall, and still have, some of that old DIP memory (they came packaged in neat plastic sticks with plugs on the ends) and my first overclocks were done with crystals meant for scanners at RadioShack on old 8088 clones. I cooled that thing and it's drives with a small 7inch personal fan and the added clock speeds really screwed up my DOS games like the one with the beers sliding down the bar. I fondly remember Desqview and DOS long before Windows. We thought CGA was awesome and I could tell what speed a modem synced by the tones it made. My first watercooling was fountain pumps, transcoolers, homemade heatblocks, and Peltiers that allowed me to drop below freezing and deal with dew point issues. ePeen established? We're both old farts?
Yes, after a process has matured nearly all of the parts coming off the line will bin high but are marked for demand. If something is binned in this manner the end user will never know it because it won't be marked in any way to indicate it - Intel isn't stupid. Only careful testing by an end user will allow them to find the full speed capabilities of the specific CPU.
Of course more can go wrong than simply heat but heat IS the primary issue and if it's kept to a minimum then you can push further. At some point the CPU will become unstable and you'll have hit the limit. No one with any brains rides at that edge because anything from a stray cosmic ray, to a blip in ambient temp, to wiggles in power will tip it over. If you're getting singular bug reports that can't be repeated by anyone else regardless of hardware I'd be inclined to skip them anyway and obviously someone clocked to the edge isn't going to get the same weight.
My point is that not everyone does that and that many who use heavily processor dependent software ARE overclocked because it saves time and slower parts clocked higher are cheaper - if you can even buy parts at the speeds you run (I can't). Done right overclocking is no different than running a factory binned part at it's rated speed. As I've already explained in this thread proper troubleshooting of a failure is required regardless and it's what anyone reporting a bug report should do anyway. My system is stable and only boots for patches or maintenance. Dismissing bug reports for the singular reason of being overclocked is foolish, particularly if the software being produced is CPU intensive enough (x.264...) that a large portion of the user base is going to want added speed.
Watercooling a stock speed CPU in an environment with normal ambient temps is pointless unless you're after silence and in the end the water still must shed it's heat which these days means fans. Being able to pipe that heat to another room is nice but also overly complex compared to a set of headphones. You're not buying any real stability at stock speeds and if the machine is unstable at stock speeds I'd be looking at other components long before I would heat....
Meh, I'd love to buy cheaper hardware for my needs - alas Intel gimped the i7 K CPU and I'm running what I must to get the job done. I'm honestly more peeved at the board manufacturers than I am Intel when it comes to overclocking, it's the board vendors who aren't providing.
My "toy" runs quite a few VMs and stores more than 30TB worth of data but nice attempt at a slight, run along now.
So let me get this straight - you want the folks reporting bugs to state their overclock (how else will you know?) and then wish to go through the reports and close those stemming from people who have just self-reported an overclock? Methinks you've not thought this through very well.
No, this isn't like someone who has hopped up their car bitching about poor MPG (I work on cars too). This is like someone bitching at the gas station because their car overheated - which in the case of an overclock is most likely what happened since video encoding can take hours to do at max load.
P.S. You might also want to look up the binning process that CPU manufacturers use and understand how it works. If Intel needs 1K of 2.8GHZ parts and have parts capable of 3.2 that are already fully stocked it's not impossible to get a 2.8 marked part that was capable of 3.2. Intel also doesn't take into account the heat shedding capabilities that many of us own when binning their stuff for worst possible use cases. My system sheds heat VERY well, your stock shitty heatsink in a crappy case likely not so much and it's for users like yourself that Intel designs parts. My system was built for overclocking...
Sorry to hear it but those bug reports aren't coming from me for sure. For starters my machine is rock solid for HOURS on end - primarily due to my not having added a ton of voltage to achieve my speed and from using watercooling to remove the heat. I haven't had an encode crash or fail in months and on those very rare occasions when it does happen my first response is to try it again and monitor peak temps. If it still fails I'd lower the clock and try yet again. Only if I had something repeatable at stock speeds and could be assured that my source files were good would I consider putting out a bug report and only then if I could find others with the same issue. That's all pretty much bug reporting 101 and it's a shame that people seem to have issues following that process. When I have a failure and my system has been stable for ages I don't immediately think it's my software, I know better.
So, are you writing code for x.264? If so pretty please give us some GPU speed ups :-) I know that you guys have hated on Intel for the crap instructions they've added and that you don't much like NVIDIA either but it's what I've got and every little bit helps!
Find me a GPU encoder that's worth a shit or hey maybe get GPU encoding added to x.264 and I'll be happy to leverage my GPU. As it stands now the only software I've seen to use the GPU outputs inferior results and has nowhere near the amount of flexability of use that software encoders do. I use x.264, sounds like you use something inferior.
Sorry but no, it's possible to overclock the normal CPU by bumping the clock speed rather than manipulating the multiplier and it has ZERO to do with turbo anything and is NOT something that Intel does out of the box. Also, K series CPU are completely capable of turbo just as any other - I'm typing on one now. This is often turned off when overclocking simply because when it turns on it can push clocks up past the realm of stability as few want the lower speeds very low.
No, I can see Intel doing it to be dicks. They know that this is a cheap CPU that could be pushed to allow people setting up home labs to get more performance out of cheaper hardware. I HAVE overclocked "locked" CPU since it's simply the multiplier that's locked and the clock can be pushed - ESX had no issues with it. However headroom was limited because I couldn't tweak the multiplier...
What's your point? I'd like more performance from the CPU and could use it - I'd be willing to overclock it. Must I have a million dollars riding on it to be qualified to buy and use the silly thing as I see fit? I think not... My needs are my own and I deem the exercise worthy and would do it, your definition of "need" doesn't suit me.
So "need" is defined how exactly? I use the box, it runs quite a few things, thus yes I need the silly thing to work and am not afraid of pushing the CPU past it's conservative binning.
Preaching to the choir man! I used to be hardcore AMD before they became slower clock for clock. Nowadays I have NO AMD in my house but do at least own stock - and am taking a bath. I agree that we need competition and I hope that AMD's use in the upcoming consoles helps boost them. If I were running servers that simply needed lots of cores and did nothing CPU intensive I'd likely be running an AMD ESX box. Hopefully AMD will catch a break and come close to parity with Intel in the near future, sadly I think that may be a pipe dream. At least Haswell wasn't a giant leap ahead in performance like some of the other previous releases...
Well, when trying to build such a lab as I did people will try to stretch their budget - like buying a CPU and overclocking it for more performance. I have a K i7 Sandy in my desktop and it clocks well over a gig higher than it's rated - that's the kind of bump an ESX server can really feel. After being bitten on my first ESX build I did finally build one that worked but I ended up spending far more to go with an older XEON CPU. Less of my money went to Intel though! Were it not for the fact that it's not just being used for play and replacing several other pieces of hardware I'd probably never have done it. Having the ESX experience helps with my job too so this wasn't just built for fluff and losing this capability on the cheaper CPU sucks.
I don't understand why they did this but for workstation use it really doesn't matter so much. VirtualBox and VM Workstation both work fine on my desktop thankfully. A shame I cannot push the edge with my server, overclocking a XEON should be possible too but most mobo are server geared and don't have the options for it :-(
Current CPU that aren't K rated can be overclocked though not to the same degree. I've never heard of issues from folks overclocking those and running them in virtual environments. Somehow I doubt that this is for our protection but they certainly haven't said one way or the other. If I could overclock my damned XEON I'd sure do it.
Go look up the spec sheets for Sandy CPUs. Or better yet Google 3570K and VT-d. Surprise! I found out the hard way myself when I built an ESX server and couldn't install, I found the feature greyed out in the BIOS. A quick Google on that model and I realized I'd been had too.
http://ark.intel.com/products/65520
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/356118-28-purchased-3570k-virtualization
Bullshit - I would! I have a XEON now running an ESX server at home and hell yes I would overclock it without a second thought. Good luck finding a XEON board that supports both ESX and overclocking though! there's nothing magical or scary about overclocking if you have half a clue and don't try to run right over the bleeding edge. I've been doing it since the 8088 days when a damned crystal from RadioShack was required and it's never been a problem. This is Intel screwing with the market plain and simple.
Then you aren't doing it right. If you setup an overclocked machine correctly and don't try to push it right to the bleeding edge you'd get plenty of bang for the buck. My current Sandy machine is pushed to 4.5GHZ and I save a great deal of time processing video as a result - it's an i7 3770K. It process video for hours on end with no issues and reboots only for updates occasionally. Cooling is your biggest issues, water works best and don't push a ton of voltage through it. Start with the basics and work up to hat the CPU is capable of, it'll be stable.
This can of worms has been opened awhile, you've obviously not tried to build a K based machine running virtualization. See my post below...
Current K rated CPU lose this and possibly some other features. I didn't pay attention to this and found out the hard way when I couldn't run an overclocked ESX-i Sandy machine. Pissed is an understatement! There's no good reason to do this other than to screw with the marketplace.
I've switched to a XEON CPU of Ivy heritage and GL finding a board for one of those that runs ESX-i and can be overclocked. Nearly every machine I own is overclocked and has been for many years and it pisses me off to get jerked around like this by Intel.
Add to the list below rendering and those of us who compress and process video - of which I am one. Faster clock speeds can save me HOURS of time and is why I run an overclocked Sandy i7 at over 4ghz. It runs for hours at a time fully slammed with no problems.
So yeah, there are use cases for this outside of your sphere of knowledge.
I'm a Waze user and have corrected their maps a few times both with the online app and with textual reporting. I wouldn't say that they aren't a mapping company as they most certainly provide good tools for correcting maps and highlighting new roads.
Awww, the press is upset that someone checked over their phone records. At least they obtained a warrant. The FBI appears to think that no such thing is needed when it's a common citizen that they want records for. How come the press is upset when it happens to them but seems to ignore the FBI doing it to others?
You asked, I answered! :-) I do shop online a great deal and a large part of that is price but it's also convenience and the ability to get a far wider variety of goods than any local store is likely to carry. Online stores that are run well have the advantage of volume, something no brick store really has by comparison and often ends up with higher prices as a result. I shop local when it makes sense but just this week I had packages from multiple stores delivered to my home that I couldn't have gotten locally anywhere near as easily. Sometimes you just don't need any of the advantages I listed but they do exist...
Yeah, but one can dream right?
I got screwed in a few different ways but in the end I'll have the last laugh and no I have pretty much zero contact with the loser. My father warned me and he was proven right :-(
That makes more sense to me. I believe you can still carry them in checked luggage but they must be declared, locked, and they search them. I also believe that ammo cannot go along for the ride. This is what I'm told anyway by owners, I own no firearms myself
Or you know maybe having those bridge guys goto another state that needs them when done in your state?