jmke

Enthusiasts have lost sight of the original purpose behind overclocking, which was made popular because it could make something slow become fast, thereby getting something more for your money. Then at some point the computer industry went from asking consumers to pay more for the faster products, to demanding you pay more for products you might be able to make faster. This article will focus on one of the lesser-known threats to the desktop PC platform: overclocking.

http://benchmarkreviews.com/index.ph...307&It emid=8

__________________

jmke

he must have been reading our forum
http://www.madshrimps.be/vbulletin/f...locking-73382/

__________________

leeghoofd

Well I'm having some issues here with his article title. He's blaming marketing and co for advertising enthousiast hardware. It's as deceiving as the article title..


Think he lost a bit the differences in OC'ing...

1) Getting more performance out of ya hardware, as you can't afford the higher specced components. It's not always the case if the extra performance is needed, just to be able to do it for free is a plus...

2) OCing the crap out of things just for the thrill of it, but...

OCing and PC gaming led to this evolution or revolution in all hardware... Many things have been improved. Not only in performance ( better CPU's, GPU's and other hardware ) but also in durability. Also debugging goes a lot quicker due to the amount of time a tweaker/Overclcoker puts into it...

Also it's not a requirement if eg Gigabyte brings out a 500 euro board that a mainstream user has to buy that board. Coz it's marketed as the best Ocing board... everyone buys hardware to suit his own needs, in case you get influenced by the marketing machine that's your problem...

I rest my case...

__________________

npp

I don't think that the whole problem has so much to do with overclocking as it stands as it has to do with PR talk in general. The obvious point is that hardware really has began to surpass the needs of the average user and therefore manufacturers need new buzzwords to sell their stuff. It is clear that a hexa-core CPU wouldn't crunch out significantly more FPS than a quad-core in any given game right now, nor would a "special" memory kit - but hey, what does this say about overclocking? I wouldn't blame manufacturers for using the o-word too often nowadays - if I were given the opportunity to rise my revenue this way, I wouldn't hesitate doing the same. After all, as properly noted above, it is up to the user to choose the right components for him/herself. One is free to overclock or not, and that's the fun about it

jmke

couldn't be more correct

__________________

Massman

One thing I'm a bit confused about is why the writer is referring to the 980X, UD9 and $300 memory kits as argument.

As far as I see, there is no one forcing you to buy the latest and greatest hardware. In fact, thanks to innovation people are now capable of buying $500 (and less) PCs that are strong enough for whatever you want to do daily. Isn't that a good thing?

Also, as said in the article, you don't need a 980X. So, why is that a problem? If you don't need it, you don't buy it ... it's as simple as that. And also, how come the original purpose of overclocking is so much 'better' than what is happening nowadays? The only argument I can see is that nowadays overclocking isn't so much relevant to daily usage anymore, but sure as hell it's fun to play around with hardware.

The overclocking game has just evolved from "I want to push to what I need" to "I want to push to see where I get". It's a different goal, it's a different style of overclocking.

__________________

Teemto

Yes, but the problem is that before no performance stuff was released by the manufacturers .So basically anyone (with the right knowledge/skills) could post a world record. Nowadays if you want to have a world record you need the manufacturer's performance stuff to be able to get it. Meaning your financial capability comes more into the picture than (or on top of) your skills.

It is off course still possible to buy a standard component and get lucky. But the chances of that happening are greatly reduced by the fact that the manufacturer has now done a pre selection for you and asks a premium price for it.

__________________
1999 First home made PC: Celeron 500 * Abit BE6 * Diamond Viper v770 32MB *Quantum Fireball KA 18GB ATA-66 * 64MB SDRAM * Philips 107SX 17" * 50x CD-ROM * Win98

Massman

Then again, isn't it a bit strange to assume or expect to be capable of breaking world records without the help of manufacturers? Also, is it truely so that in the past you didn't have to rely on luck to get a good overclocking CPU or VGA to reach the top of the rankings? And why is 'having luck' so much better than 'testing untill you find a good one', even at a corporate level.

I remember a few years ago, extreme overclockers were wondering how far technology could be pushed if manufacturers would bother to test samples to an extreme extent. Now that they do, and break world records, people are unhappy with the situation because it's impossible to beat those scores.

Also, I think that since hwbot.org, overclocking has become more than just world records. Whereas it used to be a scene where world records was all you could aim for, nowadays you can overclock for the benefit of your team, or even just see how far you can get within very specific categories.

__________________

Teemto

Having luck was accessible to everyone. Testing until you find a good one isn't unless you have the financial power or manufacturer/store sponsoring.

Not that that is necessarily wrong. It's just that these days it's more for the happy few.

Hwbot has indeed improved. They too must have seen the trend developing and are trying to counter it by making it more 'fun' for all, not just those with the big wallets.

__________________
1999 First home made PC: Celeron 500 * Abit BE6 * Diamond Viper v770 32MB *Quantum Fireball KA 18GB ATA-66 * 64MB SDRAM * Philips 107SX 17" * 50x CD-ROM * Win98

Massman

Just for the record, companies have been involved in world record attemps for many years. Even five-six years ago, when the ORB was home to mostly normal end-users, companies were handing out parts to get to the top spot in the ORB. The difference now is that it's much more visible.

You are more then right, however, that having a big wallet is at the moment necessity number one for extreme overclocking, especially if you want to have a top ranking. On the one hand that's more than normal: this is just a very expensive sport/hobby; on the other hand this necessity is killing the fun for those who want to compete on a much lower level ~ ambient cooling. That's one of the subjects that is currently being discussed and put into a concept at hwbot at the moment.

__________________