Why does Intel lock features
I just wondered what peoples opinions are on why Intel locks features on H6X boards. Is it even cheaper to make H6X than P67, do you think the OEMs want to make people who want to overclock pay the extra $s they are the main customers. Please let me know what you think.
every company has in their product line
fair better and best
with appropriate level pricing
Now if they gave the same features for overclocking on the H6X boards
then why would OCers (the reason OCing starting was to take cheaper parts
and get the performance of more expensive parts and save money)
ever buy the better board
Kind of goes against the idea of OCing
It is great to take a mainstream card (6950) and get the performance
of the enthusiast part (6970) while saving $75
So to get OCers to spend the extra money they lock OCing out of less expensive parts
since like you said the OCers are the main customers and will pay the extra money
Just my opinion I could be wrong......
You don't make record profits if you don't
Seriously though, it works out this way because they need a full range of processors, from the bottom of the low end ($20) up to the extreme top ($1000, if they are leading). To fully cover the bases takes a lot of different processors. However, the development cost, tooling, manufacturing, and marketing of any processor takes a ton of money. So they have worked out that it is cheaper to disable higher end (more expensive) processors and sell them for less than to develop a low end processor. Also in some cases (often for AMD Processors and AMD and NVidia GPUs) they disable sections of a chip and sell the chip cheap because those sections were defective, and some revenue is better than none.
simon12 said:I just wondered what peoples opinions are on why Intel locks features on H6X boards. Is it even cheaper to make H6X than P67, do you think the OEMs want to make people who want to overclock pay the extra $s they are the main customers. Please let me know what you think.
The majority of he H6X mobos will be OEM based and they don't like to allow anything, the BIOS is very limited there.
But as for the consumer H6X mobos, most people who will overclock will go with a higher end chipset and CPU. It could also be because the H6X mobos are basically made for the GPU inside the CPU. Most current H5X mobos will not overclock very well at all since they are marketed towards HTPCs and low end users. it would be like wanting to overclock a Atom CPU in a Netbook. pointless for the most part since even the lowest of Intel CPUs for SB can perform the tasks needed nd do 1080P.
For those who want mainstream overclocking and a discrete GPU, the P67/Z68 chipstes are there for that. Those who want extreme overclocking and super high end performance, LGA2011 will do that.
First thing you must know is that there is product binning.Quote:In semiconductor device fabrication, product binning is the process of sorting manufactured products based on tested levels of performance. Large variances in performance are condensed into a smaller number of marketed designations. This ensures coherency in the marketplace, with tiers of performance clearly indicated.
The immediate consequence of this practice is that, for liability reasons, products sold under a certain designation must meet that designation at a minimum. Individual products may actually be capable of somewhat higher performance than advertised. This practice is largely responsible for the ability to overclock computer hardware.
People who overclock are not the "main customers", they are a very small segment of the market place, and you pay a premium for advanced features. OEMS want cheap products that do just exactly what the customer pays for, nothing else. They don't want you upgrading and overclocking, they want you to buy a faster computer.
There used to be a sign hanging over the counter in an auto parts store in my hometown:
"Speed costs' money, how fast do you want to go?"
That pretty much holds true for PC building as well.
simon12 said:Thanks for the answers does anyone know if it would cost any more to make P67 boards? I mean for the components not does Intel charge Asus & others more?
For different criteria, you need beefier components than the "mainstream". In some cases this takes the form of better voltage regulation, in others it takes the form of better signal integrity on the I/Os.
More I/Os, for instance-- like the video port-- can drive more layers in the PCB, which raises cost. If you don't need video, you can go with a cheaper PCB and put in better inductors for OCing; vice versa if you go the other way. If your motherboard has to be built to accommodate both video and overclocking, you're going to have expensive motherboards across the entire product line. So you differentiate the featureset at the chipset level so every motherboard vendor doesn't overbuild and make your platform costs skyrocket across the board.
In doing this, you try to "package" features together that you think will go with a given market. This is more of a dark art than a science, IMO-- you have to make a judgement on whether, for instance, P67 customers will need RAID, and I will be honest and state I don't know the marketing guys' methodology. I am sure they have criteria for which features are activated and deactivated for a given segment of the market, I just don't know them.
As to why... keep in mind that validation is very intensive in both money and time (and complexity), and every feature needs to be validated on every platform, for every stepping, for every BIOS release, so if you shut off-- for instance-- VTd on one platform because your research has suggested no one who operates a Home Theater PC uses virtualization, you won't have to spend the resources validating this feature on platforms where it's been de-featured. You differentiate products at the CPU and chipset level based on market and and who is willing to pay for which feature-- designing, testing, and validating each of these features costs a finite amount of resources during development, and you want to be repaid for them if a customer is actually going to use them.
For something like QuickSync-- something which makes intensive use of graphics portions of the processor which are otherwise barely active during P67 operation-- I think you would have to validate lots of completely unrelated hardware on the CPU in order to ensure QuickSync worked on that platform. Hardware which could change the thermals and turbo characteristics since it's typically inactive during discrete graphics operation. This could be done, of course, but at costs of time and cash, which would drive up prices in general and possibly miss crucial product timeframes. If instead you postpone the dual featureset (which will only be sought out by a small subset of end users anyway) several months, you increase your time available for validation, get away from the driver thrash of an early platform, and can build momentum and OEM experience with your product before introducing a wildcard like the Z68.
Quote:why does it say on intels H67/61 chipset spec that the h67/61 chipsets are capable of overclocking, also some h67/61 motherboard companies say that their boards have overclocking features built in, (but wont let me use it eg asus).
really does my head in.
This is actually a good question however according to what i heard is that most manufacturers dont want you to overclock because they are afraid that you might damage and unstabilize the system.Even though they are willing to take the risk of you overclocking however they charge a higher fee in order so that if anything is damaged in the end the customers still do have to pay for the damaged boards.You RMA but because you paid a higher price for the board it still is like customers still pay for other customers fault.
Intel and AMD do not warranty the OC in all versions except for K series for intel and BE editions for AMD.
They might be capable of overclocking, but the Sandy Bridge CPUs offer two areas to overclock: the graphics core and the compute core. The technical spec sheets that people refer to don't make that distinction. They just say something about being able to use the "overclocking features" of the processor.
H61 is a business-oriented chipset, so lacks most of the good features.
H67 enables the graphics core and can overclock it, but cannot overclock the compute core.
P67 disables the graphics core, and can overclock the compute core.
Z68 enables the graphics core, and can overclock both the graphics and compute cores.