If there is any truth to this, it is a real slap in the face.  Or a kick to the groin.
 
I had just gotten over the cognitive dissonance of being completely happy with my e2180 purchase after a series of Athlons--but this will push my next new system build toward AMD again.
 
http://www.fudzilla.com/index.php? [...] &Itemid=35
 
When you hear pundits talk about "abuse of market power" or "monopoly", this is a tangible example of what can happen.   I really love my Intel, but we cannot afford to be Intel fanboys if this is what such brand loyalty (blind allegiance?) brings us.  With healthy competition from AMD, a scenario like this would never happen.

Lol, if this is true, all those people who held off buying until Nehalem comes out will be pissed. This is good,  it means my currently oced quad will be useful for a longer period of time pitted against the weaker stock Nehalems.  

Ahhh is it just me or does this make no sense at all..........................
 

Sure it does. How many people buy the "extreme" version cpus for $1000+ now? And how many people will if only those are capable of overclocking?

If its true, than my QX9650 will have a good life, while those who have been saying to hold off for Nehalem will need their crying towels.  
 
I do wonder if there might be good reason for holding off on the overclocking of Nehalem, as its a very complicated chip and may not overclock at all under any circumstance. As for Fud's statement that "a huge group of users will never be able to afford to buy an overclockable platform, from Intel", he forgets that the LGA775 platform will be around for awhile, and if Nehalem proves to be difficult, then that platform will probably live for longer than expected, and the Yorkfield chips will live as well.

It does make sense, in a short sighted, Machiavellian kind of way:
 
1) AMD poses little threat, so there is little additional market share they are going to get there (i.e., exponentially more expensive to convert hardcore AMD fanboys); so
2) must maximize profitability from Intel purchasers;
3) to do so, must reduce the number of guys like me who buy an $80 processor, and overclock the heck out of it to the point where there is little reason to want to spend $175 more for a materially better (higher margin) processor.
 
Makes logical sense, unless it in turn converts a higher % of those who otherwise would be willing to buy the higher margin processors, to hardcore AMD fanboys.  When enough of us become AMD fanboys, then it will be cheaper for them to win us back with superior, cheap high performance.
 
Until the equilibrium swings back in our favor (or until Intel legitimate completion from AMD), we are stuck.

It all depends on how much more performance and price those new cpu's  
 
offer. *If* they can get a 2.5ghz cpu to perform like an Oc'd 3.4ghz current  
 
cpu then it might not be that bad.  
 
As long as they keep the prices reasonable.

 
 
Well I know AMD's cpu's have fallen behind......but they offer unlocked cpu's and they are their higher end chips (if you want to call them that) and at some point if AMD gets back on track and they continue to offer sub 200 dollar chips that have an unlocked multiplier then..............
 
 
Ahhh who cares.....................

I care, a lot. It's wonderful news. This just means longer useful lifetime for those of us who brought current generation cpus that oc, which will perform better compared to Nehalems at stock for longer.

This is just a guess, but it's possible that Nehalems may not oc well even if they don't block it. It's just so complicated. Intergreted too many things into the chip itself. For people like us, flexability is more important than having everything in one package. I'd rather have the choice of a separate chipset.

It's an article published by Fudzilla without source reference on a Intel processor that is predicted by Intel to be released in Q4 2008.  
 
It's all **** to get you're panties in a knot.
 

Maybe Captain Fud: Lars-Göran Nilsson, gets their source information from the THG CPU forum!    
 
Quoting my own FUD post in the cpu forum to get knuckle heads' panties in a wad.
http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/ [...] m-opinions
 

1) Nehalem will be a big and disappointing paper launch in late September, October 2008  
2) Working processors will be available to OEM in December 2008. GO DELL GO!
3) The first available processors to OEM's will be server MP using the Xeon branding.  
4) The first available processors to consumers will be an Extreme Edition in January 2009 using Core 3 branding. Retail price between $1500 to $1800. Quad core at 3.2GHz.  
5) The second available processors to consumers will be in March 2009 with mass availablity by June 2009 with quad core architecture without HT enabled using Core 3 Quad branding. Retail price starting at $499 for a 2.8GHz processor.  
6) Windows 7 will be late. No way will Microsoft be ready for a Q4 2009 release. Intel will hold back on Nehalem higher clocked processors and Nehalem HT enabled processors will be delayed until Microsoft releases Windows 7 which we'll be lucky to see hit the consumer market in early 2011.  
7) Nehalem will overclock poorly because of its new architecture. The processors built using the 32nm die shrink with the revised hyper-threading technology enabled will crash Windows 7 when the cpu is overclocked.  
8) Intel doesn't give a crap about AMD today. They did give a crap about the green machine in 2000 when the one GHz clock race was on. Intel doesn't care what AMD put's out in the future because AMD is the little engine that couldn't.

 

Amd has a built in memory controller and limited OC compared to Intels OCs.  
 
Maybe Intel discovered this as well.
 
If they dont come with atleast a 3.0 stock clock and cant overclock at all, I doubt many will sell. Penrynns are great now, and if these new ones arent better; why upgrade?
 
Hopefully intel wont go a step backwards.
 
That would be gay to buy A new MOBO, DDR3 memory, and a Nehalem for little to no performance increase.
 
Only time will tell.
 
Technically Intel doesnt support overclocking now on non extreme CPUs. So it might be a bunch of BS since its from Fudzilla.

I like my panties in a knot. It feels funky that way. And go Fudzilla!

 
I don't think I needed to know that.    

i believe ive said it before (maybe not on this forum) and i'll say it again, intel is derived from the Devil. just like m$
 

Intel's are way too far over priced. I'll stick to my affordable AMD chips rather than spend 10x as much for less than 3x the performance. $1500 for a single processor is completely ridiculous this isn't the 70's any more computers shouldn't be that overpriced.

 
 
 
 
I'm pretty sure you're exagerating because I can think of plenty of scenarios where that isn't the case.

If this is true, I don't think much can be done. The OCing population is rather small, like 3% of all pc users, so I'm not sure this will effect Intel much.
 
This could be good news to AMD however. They can take advantage of this and continue to sell those "BE" to OCers. But then again, perhaps Intel's cpus would be so ahead of AMD that a 1GHz Intel = 10GHz AMD?
 
Ah well, there's always mods...

 
That I have to agree with.  Live on yorkfield....live on...