Are P67 & H67 enough to put you off the unlocked i5-2500K SB?

[Dufus]

Would somebody please explain why the unlocked multi's of 'k' series can not be used on H67.

 

[bupkus]

I thought you couldn't return motherboards or CPU's at Microcenter unless they are defective.

I checked before I made the purchase that an unopened box could be returned for a cash refund.

 

[bupkus]

Would somebody please explain why the unlocked multi's of 'k' series can not be used on H67.

Either it's blocked or the overclock is only available for the video portion of the chip. Personally, if given a choice, I would rather OC the cpu than the igp and install a video card should I want to upgrade the video. But that's just me.

 

[Dufus]

Unless I'm missing something the CPU multi is technically independent of the chipset. If it is being blocked then perhaps it's because of financial reasons and it can be unblocked. idk.

I would like to be able to play with both IGD and unlocked CPU multi without having to buy 2 boards or wait for a newer chipset.

 

[PreferLinux]

I think you may find that it is the BIOS stopping overclocking on H67. Zotac advertises (in the news items announcing it) a H67 Mini ITX board supporting up to 130 W for "overclocking headroom". Their website plainly shows the 130 W, but not the overclocking headroom part.

 

[Dufus]

Zotac H67

Umm, TDP is a design specification and not how much power the processor can use. Hard to say what they really mean.

With Turbo boost 2.0 the SB processors are able to exceed TDP for a short amount of time. Perhaps that's what they mean by headroom.

IMHO I don't see any indication of being able to use the higher unlocked multipliers but I don't mind being proved wrong.

 

[PreferLinux]

Could be right about that.

So, Intel finally got back with a proper answer

Our product engineer confirmed that there's an error in the pdf. We are fixing that.

So now you know, it's a mistake, so no, you can't overclock with the H67 chipset and you'll have to wait for Z68 which should be out between now and Computex...

I don't know why it is limited, though, but it is probably to make the P67 boards sell.

 

[ummduh]

it has stopped me from upgrading.

I have zero need for a discreet graphics card, and I like to play with OC'ing. I currently run an OC'd e21x0 with an nVidia IGP, which has been perfect for me. But I am giving this to my kids, and want to build a current gen comp for me now.

But having to buy the k series cpu to get the decent IGP, and then not being able to buy a mobo that supports the cpu properly has plain pissed me off. Since I have to wait till Q2 or so to get the Z chipset mobo, I might as well consider what AMD has got to offer. Actually, at this point, it's more like, "we'll see if there is any reason to reconsider going back to intel after bulldozer comes out". Cuz at this point I don't want anything to do with intel.

Intel won't listen to my comments, but I can vote with my $$.

 

[ummduh]

Would somebody please explain why the unlocked multi's of 'k' series can not be used on H67.

They CAN be used, AFAIK, it's just that by putting a k series cpu on an H board, you lose the benefit of buying a k series to begin with. Even though the cpu supports unlocked multipliers, the chipset won't allow you to do anything beyond the originally programmed info. The ONLY benefit you end up with is the better IGP.

 

[dougri]

it has stopped me from upgrading.

I have zero need for a discreet graphics card, and I like to play with OC'ing. I currently run an OC'd e21x0 with an nVidia IGP, which has been perfect for me. But I am giving this to my kids, and want to build a current gen comp for me now.

But having to buy the k series cpu to get the decent IGP, and then not being able to buy a mobo that supports the cpu properly has plain pissed me off. Since I have to wait till Q2 or so to get the Z chipset mobo, I might as well consider what AMD has got to offer. Actually, at this point, it's more like, "we'll see if there is any reason to reconsider going back to intel after bulldozer comes out". Cuz at this point I don't want anything to do with intel.

Intel won't listen to my comments, but I can vote with my $$.

I'm basically in the same boat (need fast processor, minimal graphics and would prefer low power/cost), but I don't hold a grudge, as I do not feel Intel is doing this intentionally to screw anyone. I believe with all the delays to BD, intel was just pushing SB along to compete and let the chips fall where they may (no pun intended). I believe they had a strategy to get the chips out as fast as they could and Z68 was just not ready. Once they had all these chips laying around, might as well sell them... even if the best chipset won;t be ready for 4-6 more months. Having said that, I'd be a fool not to check out the best the competition has to offer once Intel is offering something appealing to me. I just think they were trying to get it to market ASAP over the course of a multi-year development, and that strategy focused on which features were quickest to market, which turned out to be the features on P67 and H67, while putting a chipset really designed for SB a few months behind the chip.

 

[AkumaX]

i figure for sure, i would be upgrading to sandy bridge. either the i5-2500k or i7-2600k. as far as the limitations that the Z68 will eliminate, i figure buying the cheapest P57 (or H57) now, then selling it when the Z68 comes would be more manageable.

 

[Dufus]

They CAN be used, AFAIK, it's just that by putting a k series cpu on an H board, you lose the benefit of buying a k series to begin with. Even though the cpu supports unlocked multipliers, the chipset won't allow you to do anything beyond the originally programmed info. The ONLY benefit you end up with is the better IGP.

The question was "why the unlocked multi's could not be used" not "why the cpus could not be used themselves".

Lets put it another way, what has the H67 got to do with which multi is selected by the CPU? Technically nothing i can think of.

 

[bupkus]

The question was "why the unlocked multi's could not be used" not "why the cpus could not be used themselves".

Lets put it another way, what has the H67 got to do with which multi is selected by the CPU? Technically nothing i can think of.

If we go on the assumption that intel is not really screwing with their customers then maybe there's another explanation.

If in early development the H67 chipset reflected a reluctance to accommodate a CPU OC version of SB then I would be prone to guess that the H67 chips do not provide controls to change the multiplier. If the development teams for SB and H67 were later told to demonstrate SB's video capabilities in the most favorable way-meaning a higher clock- then perhaps an unlocked (K) version would be the best choice even though the Ks would offer a superset of what H67 can control.

It is possible that Intel is just a little concerned that the IG of SB will be compared unfavorably to BD?

Riddle me this... do any of the non-K chips allow an OC of only the video portion of SB? No?

 

[psycho_driver]

it has stopped me from upgrading.

I have zero need for a discreet graphics card, and I like to play with OC'ing. I currently run an OC'd e21x0 with an nVidia IGP, which has been perfect for me. But I am giving this to my kids, and want to build a current gen comp for me now.

But having to buy the k series cpu to get the decent IGP, and then not being able to buy a mobo that supports the cpu properly has plain pissed me off. Since I have to wait till Q2 or so to get the Z chipset mobo, I might as well consider what AMD has got to offer. Actually, at this point, it's more like, "we'll see if there is any reason to reconsider going back to intel after bulldozer comes out". Cuz at this point I don't want anything to do with intel.

Intel won't listen to my comments, but I can vote with my $$.

Exactly how I feel. I had been looking forward to the SB release for months. I wanted to upgrade my HTPC platform, which is still running on an amd x2 w/ nvidia 7150 chipset.

I need the integrated graphics from SB, and of course I want the more powerful version only included in the K series, but I'll be damned if I buy an H67 with a K series only to be artificially locked out of overclocking.

To those saying that this probably wasn't an intentional move by Intel, BS. Intel wants those of us needing this functionality to have to spend more on a Z68, but then to add further insult to injury, it's not even available and won't be for a while.

I'm now looking into zacates and, if AMD can get their act together, Llano's.

 

[coffeejunkee]

Yeah, putting the best igp on the K version is an insult to customers. What kind of thinking is this? Make a chipset that supports the igp but not overclocking, then put the best igp only in the cpu's that can overclock (which demand a price premium because of this feature)...just put the good igp in the regular 2500/2600 models as well.

A reason I could think of why H67 doesn't support overclocking is to not have regular pc users call support to ask why their cpu stopped working when they used the x57 multiplier. Because, hey it was unlocked right? But it seems farfetched.

 

[bryanW1995]

Not to mention the best igp is on the K models...but hey, that's Intel for ya.

yeah, that makes no sense whatsoever.

 

[bryanW1995]

Yeah, putting the best igp on the K version is an insult to customers. What kind of thinking is this? Make a chipset that supports the igp but not overclocking, then put the best igp only in the cpu's that can overclock (which demand a price premium because of this feature)...just put the good igp in the regular 2500/2600 models as well.

A reason I could think of why H67 doesn't support overclocking is to not have regular pc users call support to ask why their cpu stopped working when they used the x57 multiplier. Because, hey it was unlocked right? But it seems farfetched.

Most likely they figured that people would be willing to pay $20-$40 extra for overclocking potential but that they wouldn't pay that for better igp. this way they force all the overclockers to pay the cost for the improved igp that the htpc crowd wants. plus intel gets the added benefit of looking much better in igp vs fusion even though many/most of their better igp chips will never use that functionality. Honestly I think it's a very good strategy, it just would have made more sense to have the higher end mobos available on release.

 

[Tanclearas]

I have had my Q6600 for over three years and actually have not overclocked it. Crazy, I know. So, getting the K series with the H chipset wouldn't be an issue for me...

But wait! Intel also disabled VT-d on the K series processors. Huh. I frequently use my system for virtualization. So, Intel has put the best IGP on the K series, which can only be taken advantage of on the H chipset, but to get VT-d, you have to go with the non-K series CPU, which has the worse IGP. WTH!

I know. VT-d might not be all that important right now (and support limited), but as I said, I had my Q6600 for over three years.

Well. I've waited this long, so I have no problem waiting to see what AMD can do with BD.

 

[coffeejunkee]

Most likely they figured that people would be willing to pay $20-$40 extra for overclocking potential but that they wouldn't pay that for better igp. this way they force all the overclockers to pay the cost for the improved igp that the htpc crowd wants. plus intel gets the added benefit of looking much better in igp vs fusion even though many/most of their better igp chips will never use that functionality. Honestly I think it's a very good strategy, it just would have made more sense to have the higher end mobos available on release.

Good strategy for Intel maybe. For the consumer, not so good.

Why not let the overclockers pay for overclocking and the htpc crowd for the better igp? Would a htpc builder not cough up a little extra cash for an i5 2500 with a better igp? Would an overclocker not buy a K model because he has to pay for the better igp as well?

But the actual question was if there was any reason (technical or not I assume) why you can't overclock on H67, apart from financial interests?

And the VT-d issue ofcourse. I had already forgotten it but that's a nice little extra dimension to this situation.

 

[cparker]

I was all excited, ready to pick up a brand new set of components for a new SB based pc. Get some better integrated graphics with a fast chip that can be made faster with it's overclockability feature. Then I watched the Newegg SB video where they interview the Intel guy on SB. And he drops the bomb! The K series, he says, is great. It has the better integrated graphics AND it overclocks like a bunny. Except you have to choose which you want. You can't get one with the other! I was in disbelief. This can't be true. How can they be so stupid, create so much ill will towards the company because of this blatant manipulation of customers? It's like the right hand giveth while the left hand taketh away. Net result, in my case. I changed my way of thinking altogether. No SB. Real easy decision as I don't need it for anything, actually. But I was about to buy one of the Ks, just to play with and feel good about being on the cutting edge. But I won't do it now because frankly I don't like being had.

 

[Mellman]

meh...i got over it. Does it suck i can't use the IGP with my p67? yup...was i really gonna use it anyways? nope...QS is the only thing lost, but i'm a quality whore, and the tests i saw from AT I wouldn't have used it anyways. I'll wait twice as long for a better quality transcode...

Sure you could use it as a 'backup' GPU when you're between GPU's or RMAing one, but really? how many of us overclocker geeks don't have a GPU laying around our basement or our office? The K series chips are just for enthusiasts, some enthusiasts will buy them for the IGP for a HTPC using the H chipsets where they don't need discreet graphics.

When I first found out about it i had a similar reaction, but then when i looked at what i was actually losing...a poor quality Quick Sync feature, and a on die backup GPU i realized it didn't matter since it wouldn't see any use anyways.

I dunno...this all seems like a whole lot of noise about....nothing. If you don't like what you see, move along, as always something better will be out in a few months. For me? From an E6400 Core2Duo with 4gb Mem and a 8800GTS 320MB ; my 2500K sandy bridge build is pretty spectacular and exceeded my expectations of what i was waiting for.

Was it a dumb move by intel? Sure, in our opinions, but they're the ones raking in the cash aren't they...A better argument than P vs H is the fact that they took away VT-d from K sku's...but can't have it all.

 

[Tanclearas]

Sure you could use it as a 'backup' GPU when you're between GPU's or RMAing one, but really? how many of us overclocker geeks don't have a GPU laying around our basement or our office? The K series chips are just for enthusiasts ...

Actually, given that the highest end IGP is in the K series chip, and enthusiasts generally won't use the IGP, it means the K series is also for people wanting the best IGP SB has to offer. Once again, sadly the VT-d is unavailable to either of those groups.

Overclocking = K + P
Best SB IGP = K + H
VT-d = non-K

You can only choose one from those options, and there doesn't seem to be any logical reason for it.

 

[sxr7171]

Well, what if you want to use QuickSync? Don't you need to enable the IGP? That's a good reason.

 

[PingSpike]

I'm sort of a little stuck on this. I have a bunch of amazon gift cards and am currently rocking a ip35 + e2160 @ 2.93ghz. I bought 8GB of that super talent ram from hot deals on impulse there other day. Initially I was just going to grab an i3 540 or an AMD PII 955 or something, run it at stock and call it a day. But I saw this sandybridge was coming out so I say on my hands.

I think I'm done overclocking since I just don't feel like the effort is really worth it anymore. But never say never...these chips seem like they have a lot of head room and it might be nice if a year down the road I want more performance I can crank it up. That said, I ALSO have a desire for the intel IGP. Some older games don't get along with new ATI or nvidia hardware, and it would be nice if I could just reboot using the intel IGP when I want to play them. I currently have two video cards, but buying crossfire capable boards just to run a x1300 in one of them is kind of an expensive proposition going forward.

So I'm a little stuck. Some one suggested buying the H67 and the 2500K and then just buying a better chipset board when it comes out...but swapping motherboards is a pain in the ass and if I'm doing it I may as well upgrade my CPU too which means I might as well just go H67 + 2500 nonK and just ride it until something better comes out. I feel like the IGP on either chip should be good enough to run Dungeon Keeper II.

I think either one of them would be a nice upgrade, I don't even have much of a performance complaint with my current setup honestly so I'm kind of sitting on my hands thinking it over.

 

[VirtualLarry]

I'm heartened to hear that several of you are voting with your wallet, and saying NO to SB, because of the inane shenanigans that Intel is pulling. Not providing a "deluxe" solution, in which you can "Have it all", is stupid. Why is Intel making users choose one of several options, without providing an "Ultimate" (as in, like Windows Ultimate) SKU that includes everything.

IMHO, Intel is really stupid. They have started to let marketers run the show, rather than the engineers, and this is what they give you. Major ThumbsDown.

I'm skipping SB myself, too, and waiting for what BD has to offer. AMD has always been very fair as far as features go, and has avoided much of the artificial market segmentation that Intel practices. That's one reason that I like AMD, they are much more consumer-friendly.