Moral dilemma over CPU QX9650 price

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: taltamir
God I hate the fucking state of medical care in the us... horrible.

What you hate is that it costs money to access superb quality...but if you merely want the level of healthcare options available to the other 95% of the planet's population then you can get that here in the US for free too.

The perception of the existance of superb quality healthcare tends to decrease the perceived quality of inexpensive healthcare.

To put it mildly, the healthcare industry has done an equisite marketing job on US citizens. We all believe that unless you buy (or more likely, you insist your employer buys for you) the "QX" version of healthcare then you have been given a Via C7 chip.

Intel couldn't be so lucky to convince everyone that anything less than a QX is a total POS. But the healthcare system has succeeded in doing just that. With the discovery/invention of $1M life-saving operations it is no longer good enough to have the $10,000 version of the operation.

Nothing but the absolute best for each and every one of us, on someone else dime of course.

 

[Eris23007]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: taltamir
God I hate the fucking state of medical care in the us... horrible.

What you hate is that it costs money to access superb quality...but if you merely want the level of healthcare options available to the other 95% of the planet's population then you can get that here in the US for free too.

The perception of the existance of superb quality healthcare tends to decrease the perceived quality of inexpensive healthcare.

To put it mildly, the healthcare industry has done an equisite marketing job on US citizens. We all believe that unless you buy (or more likely, you insist your employer buys for you) the "QX" version of healthcare then you have been given a Via C7 chip.

Intel couldn't be so lucky to convince everyone that anything less than a QX is a total POS. But the healthcare system has succeeded in doing just that. With the discovery/invention of $1M life-saving operations it is no longer good enough to have the $10,000 version of the operation.

Nothing but the absolute best for each and every one of us, on someone else dime of course.

OUTSTANDING post.

What the OP also hates, I imagine, is the requirement that many states place on insurance companies that all policies shall cover various extraneous services. Why can't I buy a high-deductible policy that only covers the really nasty stuff? I don't need mental health coverage, chiropractic coverage, drug & alcohol treatment coverage, maternity coverage, etc.

Regulators force people to buy the Lexus coverage when all many people really want or need (or can afford) is the Geo coverage... then complain about how expensive health insurance is. What's up with that?

 

[TuxDave]

I think you need to consider expanding the scope of your inquiry beyond CPUs. $500 is chump change if you consider how much money extra money people spend on getting the "best" stuff. There are many luxury items that demand a premium. You can by a BMW or a Toyota. Do you really need the performance and the added accessories? You can get by with a cheaper car. You can get by with a slower chip.

Also, I like the Health Care argument that was posted. We also have this fallacy that "because it costs more, it must be better".

 

[taltamir]

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: taltamir
God I hate the fucking state of medical care in the us... horrible.

What you hate is that it costs money to access superb quality...but if you merely want the level of healthcare options available to the other 95% of the planet's population then you can get that here in the US for free too.

The perception of the existance of superb quality healthcare tends to decrease the perceived quality of inexpensive healthcare.

To put it mildly, the healthcare industry has done an equisite marketing job on US citizens. We all believe that unless you buy (or more likely, you insist your employer buys for you) the "QX" version of healthcare then you have been given a Via C7 chip.

Intel couldn't be so lucky to convince everyone that anything less than a QX is a total POS. But the healthcare system has succeeded in doing just that. With the discovery/invention of $1M life-saving operations it is no longer good enough to have the $10,000 version of the operation.

Nothing but the absolute best for each and every one of us, on someone else dime of course.

incorrect. I have lived and traveled all over the world. While the US healthcare is better then any developing country, most other first world countries have it beat.

Not only are the prices an issue, but the fact that the system is corrupt and encourages wrongful practices. Due to legal reasons things are given when they are not needed and risk doing harm, drugs that wouldn't be approved anywhere else get approved by the FDA because 2/3 of the FDA is made up of people who are payed by the drug industry (not bribes, their paycheck... it saves us taxpayers money...)
The fact that when screening for harmful effect a new drug can repeat the experiment over and over, and select the desired results from multiple tests...

And many other such issues.

The system is corrupt, defunct, and retarded. The high end in the US is to be rich enough to say fuck the HMO and get private medical care you pay for YOURSELF. The poor get sub par medicaid that both they and the middle class pay for (percentage of your paycheck). The middle class pays for medicaid AND their own crappy HMO plans... and the rich pay for neither of those and get good medical care by paying for quality private doctors (which also requires them to know what they are doing and who they are consulting)...

This isn't a class issue, the rich get shafted just as much if not MORE then the poor...
those rich have to pay much MUCH more then they should due to messed up liability laws causing more then half of a doctor's income to go towards liability insurance.

It is pathetic when american's have to go to india, puerto rico, etc to get quality medical care at prices they can pay for.

Oh and just one more thing, if its really not a problem how come every senator and president the past decade or so has been promising "healthcare reform" on their platform? its an issue and the polytics (poly = multiple, tic = blood sucking parasite) keep on promising improvements which they can't deliver.

 

[docmilo]

Originally posted by: Eris23007
Why can't I buy a high-deductible policy that only covers the really nasty stuff? I don't need mental health coverage, chiropractic coverage, drug & alcohol treatment coverage, maternity coverage, etc.

Regulators force people to buy the Lexus coverage when all many people really want or need (or can afford) is the Geo coverage... then complain about how expensive health insurance is. What's up with that?

LOL. I'm a chiropractor. And by the way, I hate all the regulatory crap as well.

And trying to get back on topic. If you're looking to build a system that is going to last a couple years, then buying top end components is a good idea. OC'ing tends to be a little tough on CPU's, ram, Mobo's and power supplies if you push your system on a regular basis. Spend the extra $800 on the 0.4 GHz and to make yourself feel better donate $34 a month for the next 2 years on a charity of some sort to make it up. Then you'll be happy and feel good about yourself as well.

 

[Soubriquet]

Not a bad idea doc! I might just do that, its got to be easier than making my mind up. lol

Originally posted by: TuxDave
I think you need to consider expanding the scope of your inquiry beyond CPUs. $500 is chump change if you consider how much money extra money people spend on getting the "best" stuff. There are many luxury items that demand a premium. You can by a BMW or a Toyota. Do you really need the performance and the added accessories? You can get by with a cheaper car. You can get by with a slower chip.

Also, I like the Health Care argument that was posted. We also have this fallacy that "because it costs more, it must be better".

Thats an interesting point Tux, people spend an awful lot on that extra 10% wherever you look. I get the feeling a lot of it is not about the performance but about the feeling you get when you know you have the best and there is none better. But with luxury items that can only be about being competitive and not about being effective, like being king of the castle. How much it that really worth? I recognise that feeling in myself so I am not pointing fingers here. I think it might really be worth something, as self-confidence/status and health are intimately linked I once read, cant rememeber where, something to do with bosses not getting as many heart attacks as employees.

(I even took a look at skulltrail and that has to be pretty impractical! Mind you if it could take 8400s it might almost save money over a QX9650, it cant - I believe it has to be Xeons).

But why we have to feel like that (about self confidence and status I mean) I am not sure, maybe it is just about appearances and is superficial, maybe we are chumps. But on the other hand it is a fact of life, which you can see has a real basis when you consider the alpha male in the average chimpanzee colony in the average nature show, that kind of thing. All the lady chimps love him though dont they? lol So maybe it is less stressful to bug other people than to be bugged, but then again we arent like chimps, are we? Nevertheless we have to use a free market because people are not fully motivated unless they are working for themselves, like I say its a fact of life. So maybe the premium we pay for premium goods is the result of that and likewise a fact of life because we cant all be king of the castle, can we? Doesnt someone have to play the part of dirty rascal?

US healthcare I only know from what I read, I live in the UK and citizens here pay for the NHS through the nose with high taxes. Here though the NHS has to refuse certain top dollar treatments because they are too expensive and would mean that it couldnt afford to provide the basics. But still a minority of (seriously ill) patients get the medias attention because their plight attracts peoples sympathy. There the notion of obscenity tends to land with the pharmaceutical companies, but on the other hand they have to make good on their research investment, just as Intel have to make good on theirs. The difference between US and UK is not one of standard IMHO, in fact people in the UK often purchase treatment in the USA as it is regarded as a source of excellence and innovation, its more about how we organise the insurance cover. Here we all pay into the kitty and share the cost as a nation. In addition the kitty is governmental and more to the point non profit making. The motivation for those involved in doing the work does not seem to be harmed by this and I can only construe it has something to do with the vocation of healing that it is not compromised by issues of status and control and that helping a fellow human is its own reward.

Wow you guys have got me thinking. So how does that tie in with chips ?

Not sure I need lunch, will have to get back to this one later .... ttfn

 

[zsdersw]

My biggest problem with our "healthcare" system is that it's not. It's a "diseasecare" system. Think about it: there's no money in healthy people, and there's also no money in dead people... but there's A LOT of money in keeping you somewhere in between. When anti-depressants are prescribed before diet and exercise are tried as "alternative" treatments, it's a very big sign that dollar signs are what's really at stake here, not your health.

But, all of that is neither here nor there.

 

[Soubriquet]

While I appreciate the reality of that appraisal as things stand zsdersw, in theory shouldn't there be money in keeping people healthy for the insurance companies? If they reduce payouts then providing the cost is less than the savings then they are making money. In that sense its all to the good if treatment costs more than prevention as it makes prevention worth doing. That idea may take time to impact the insurance companies' business strategies though.


So after my lunch break (this thread is becoming a full time job!) I reckon I got to the point where helping other people is as potentially rewarding in its own way (even when seen from a self interested perspective) as having the best, most competitive, enduring chip I can afford. Which I already knew since that is why I am ambivalent, so right back where I started, but the journey was productive as it occurred to me that if one uses the extra cores on a quad to fold (distributed computing) and other medical projects that would make a quad a more conscientious choice despite the power requirement but not necessarily the QX9650, could be the Q9450.

As for health talk (& obscenities) I wonder if this is catching the eye of US citizens because of that election they will be having soon (and which the rest of the world are all mightily interested in too btw). Obama/Clinton v McCain. I guess they have to decide a similar kind of ambivalence, the compromising conscientious mutualism of the democrats versus the competitive enlightened self interest of the republicans.

So I wonder if you can equate chips with different parties?

Maybe the Wolfdale E8400 / Q9450 (plus aid donation) is the Democratic choice and Yorkfield QX9650 (plus additional excellence) is the Republican choice. But I wonder if it is so straightforward.

I have to make an order and it could be a preorder for a Q9450 or an order for a QX9650 but thank goodness I dont have to vote in the USA elections , I would never get out of the front door!

 

[zsdersw]

Originally posted by: Soubriquet
While I appreciate the reality of that appraisal as things stand zsdersw, in theory shouldn't there be money in keeping people healthy for the insurance companies? If they reduce payouts then providing the cost is less than the savings then they are making money. In that sense its all to the good if treatment costs more than prevention as it makes prevention worth doing. That idea may take time to impact the insurance companies' business strategies though.

Insurance companies don't really care, I'm sure, because they will always make (and be able to continue making) money. If payouts go up, they raise rates to make up for it.

If anything, insurance companies don't want people to get too healthy.. because then people will be under less pressure to buy health insurance in the first place.

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: Soubriquet
US healthcare I only know from what I read, I live in the UK and citizens here pay for the NHS through the nose with high taxes. Here though the NHS has to refuse certain top dollar treatments because they are too expensive and would mean that it couldnt afford to provide the basics.

I understand the UK's method of patient stacking in ambulances waiting outside full ER's is the envy of the world!

If only we could all have such luxuries of dying in an ambulance 50 feet from the hospital after waiting for a few hours.

Health care is not ideal, government is not ideal, putting the government in charge of healthcare is doubly non-ideal. You have my pity.

 

[Soubriquet]

Very drole Idontcare, very drole, if only it wasnt so true! That is not to mention the hazards you face in a British hospital from various lethal micororganisms which apparently find it a very benign environment indeed. You might almost think the NHS were trying to reduce their patient load in a slightly unorthodox manner, kill or cure and all that! Scandalous allegation I know but all the same that is what is happening, especially to the elderly... I try to keep well clear of hospitals here if I have a choice in the matter.

zsdersw I can certainly empathise with your discomfort over private health insurance, especially at the prices quoted by docmilo. Maybe if people task the insurance companies and shop around for deals that would encourage them to innovate. Fit healthy people below a certain BMI should pay less for example. So it should pay people to get fit and reduce the cost of their own insurance. Likewise it should pay insurance companies to help customers get and stay fit, they could do deals with private health spa and gym facillities thrown in and a sliding scale of payments depending on your biometrics! Depends on whether customers like the idea, I guess some would and some wouldn't. But that as they say is human nature.

As for this chip, I am not sure yet, I am going to have to sleep on it. The majority view from the poll here is that its wiser to buy a better value chip and invest in other hardware, which makes sense from a computing point of view and could lead to considering DDR3 but it wouldnt ease my conscience much. I reckon the simplest answer is Docmilos, do both, make a suitable donation or two and see how much of my budget is left, then spend as much or as little of that as I see fit !

 

[aigomorla]

Ultimately this post means this... From my reading and understanding so far...

I am too poor to afford to buy a QX9650. So make me feel better.

Why do you guys seriously HATE on people who can afford a lot nicer stuff? Who cares about its price and value, if you saw two computers next to each other, the same overclock, but one had a QX9650, That machine would automatically get more OOOOOOOHS.

This thread isnt informative, its more like hating on people who can afford QX processors. Simple known FACT. Extreme Processors have a higher unlocked potential then locked processors in overclocking. EXPECIALLY since intel is being cheap and locking the multi's at 8x and 8.5x

Next thing im gonna see is people convincing other people to sell there BMW's and BENZ to buy a toyota ECHO and dropping a turbo charger on it so it keeps up with the BMW.

This is what you guys are trying to convince me from reading this POST.

OP, if your budget allows, go for it. Its the ONLY Extreme Edition processor thats ACTUALLY worth it because the highest Quad Multi after the QX on YORKIE is a craptastic 8.5x While the QX is 60x. Eat that Q9450.

Originally posted by: Idontcare

Originally posted by: taltamir
God I hate the fXXXXXX state of medical care in the us... horrible.

What you hate is that it costs money to access superb quality...but if you merely want the level of healthcare options available to the other 95% of the planet's population then you can get that here in the US for free too.

The perception of the existance of superb quality healthcare tends to decrease the perceived quality of inexpensive healthcare.

To put it mildly, the healthcare industry has done an equisite marketing job on US citizens. We all believe that unless you buy (or more likely, you insist your employer buys for you) the "QX" version of healthcare then you have been given a Via C7 chip.

Intel couldn't be so lucky to convince everyone that anything less than a QX is a total POS. But the healthcare system has succeeded in doing just that. With the discovery/invention of $1M life-saving operations it is no longer good enough to have the $10,000 version of the operation.

Nothing but the absolute best for each and every one of us, on someone else dime of course.

Can both of you guys remove that F word please. Or next week mark is going to regulate both of you. :X

 

[Soubriquet]

Ultimately this post means this... From my reading and understanding so far...

I am too poor to afford to buy a QX9650. So make me feel better.

lol

Fine, and your post means "I didnt read the thread but my knee jerk rant based on the title is as follows"!

Seriously, read the thread before ranting, you completely missed the point.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: Soubriquet

Ultimately this post means this... From my reading and understanding so far...

I am too poor to afford to buy a QX9650. So make me feel better.

lol

Fine, and your post means "I didnt read the thread but my knee jerk rant based on the title is as follows"!

Seriously, read the thread before ranting, you completely missed the point.

and i did...

what i picked up..

Your asking if the QX9650 holds value. And everyone who never owned a X chip says no. Of course there always going to say no because they never owned one to know what value it holds.

The owners of previous QX chips, IDC is trying to defend the possition, yet is getting shot down, and he's going around a much nicer person aproach. But this approach just ends up dead in the water. Trust me, ive tried this method countless times on quadcore vs dualcore posts. I just have to be straight up and forward....

If im missing something please fill in: But here's what i got off the first page.
Besides the whole medicare debate which is almost 1/3rd of the post and i have no idea on how it got into a QX9650 thread....

Your asking people who take this area as a hobby to validate the hobby on such an expensive chip when a cheaper one can easily match it. Well, for you to make a claim would mean you dont know what the QX9650 can do nor have you owned one.

The only way this kind of post can be truely answered in a non biased point of view would be off someone who has the QX9650 giving his plus and minus into this thread. So far JAG hasnt responded to it, and neither have the other QX9650 owners. So how is this an intelectual thread? Its basically trying to justify to someone NOT to get a QX9650. Can i even ask how many of you guys who posted even OWN a QX9650?

This is the same kind of mess that happened when people were comparing dualcores with quadcores. Im not trying to flame on you, you had some valid questions regarding the QX chip, however the other members who are bashing it without even OWNING one is the group im directing this comment at.

To make things short, you really need to enjoy the hobby of computers and also have OWNED a X chip or an ES chip to truely enjoy its worth, or even speak up about it. Otherwise people who dont own hardware being discussed should not participate because you'll only confuse the people who's wallet is large enough to buy such an item.


Now my proof....

1. Q9550 will NOT even be able to keep up with the QX9650 because of the 8.5x multi.
2. QX9650 is NOT a newbie chip where you recomend someone to go off bat and buy one unless they want the fastest non overclocked chip you can buy on the market.
3. QX9650 offers a 60x multi, so even 4.0ghz on the QX9650 will be less stressful on the overall hardware vs a 450x8 Q9450.
4. If you like overclocking, and a 1000 dollar chip is within your deep pocket range, then this QX9650 is the BEST VALUE X chip intel has released so far. There hasnt been an X chip in relationship to higher value to its current processor line thanks to intel being Cheap as hell with their quad multi.

However overall, i decided not to get a QX9650 chip. Instead im gona stay on kentsfields until neha rolls around next year on server platform and jump up to that instead. Im getting kinda tired in the gaming department, and i want to play with real hardware. ie. Promise SAS card, dual cpu configs. I even want a 16core monster rig setup next year.

Anyone else notice how intel is starting to roll out there higher end enthusiest side with different platforms? ie. skulltrail? and the 2 new chipset platforms for neha?

Finally i think a very clear line will be drawn for intel on the average overclocked system, to the high end gaming machine.

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

However overall, i decided not to get a QX9650 chip. Instead im gona stay on kentsfields until neha rolls around next year on server platform and jump up to that instead.

Thought you got an E8400?

 

[Diogenes2]

WTF do processor chips have to do with morality ?

Is Intel running child labor sweat shops now ?

Should we do anything about it?

You are doing something about it, when you choose to buy it or not ...

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: jaredpace

Originally posted by: aigomorla

However overall, i decided not to get a QX9650 chip. Instead im gona stay on kentsfields until neha rolls around next year on server platform and jump up to that instead.

Thought you got an E8400?

and all it does is WCG non stop. LOL....

i only bought it to see how long it would stress b4 it died along with the board on full intensive load. The board and chip is doing pretty well, but as i said it takes about 1.57Vcore to hold up 4.3ghz. Load temps are awesome because its on a external bench setup on water.

But its fun to see what it can do. 4.5ghz will require about 1.6vcore + to keep prime stable, and thats well... insane. IDC lemme borrow your vapo.

Its been going straight, with 1 reboot each week to keep the OS clean and ram wiped.


Oh and let me add this on the thread regarding how my concept is mixed up:
Your original post was this:

Originally posted by: Soubriquet

In other words a moral conundrum, isnt it obscene to spend that much on a CPU when these other things need doing? Wouldnt it be better to live with an overclocked CPU and give that money to a good cause? Or is it a reasonable investment for long term high performance computing? Why is the price like that? Should we do anything about it?

In all those questions you ask, your trying to justify if the cost is worth it. Thats why you asked the question regarding to morality. Since when was buying anything you wanted considered moral? Everyone would be okey on laptops and Via processors if we didnt game. And Gaming also has no morality involved. Your not giving to anything besides your time and money to the creators. Not really moral, infact it wastes a lot of time... ie. 1 game of supreme commander can take up to 3-5 hours depending on the settings.

Then the following posts were all negitive on why the QX is not worth it, or blah blah... in all they were mostly negative... then healthcare came out.. WTF! :shurg: Then more negative... then my post saying people who dont own QX chips cant talk about QX because they dont have one to compare how there morality is when they bought it.

Or am i mixing up your entire original post?

 

[Soubriquet]

I really do want to hear other peoples views on the issue so thanks for taking the time to express your point of view on it. I am gathering from your post that the unlocked multiplier makes this chip worth the extra over a Q9450 in your view. It would be great to hear from QX9650 owners for sure.

Its interesting aigomorla because I like overclocking and have not had the results I would like from previous chips and setups (So7, FCPGA, SoA, So939). I can usually get 10% to 20% extra but not a whole GHz like some are since Core2. That would be a plus definitely. But the reason I like to overclock is to get an extra speed bin out of the chip. For once I have enough budget I dont need to play that game (because I have saved money carefully for the last two years for this upgrade in fact) but I am still wondering about the QX9650. If I could change something about the way Intel does business to my liking it would be that Intel unlocked the multiplier on lower bin 45nm quads. In fact I am wondering if someone will figure a way to do that with a pin bridge mod or something, then I would know exactly what to do!

You are not the first to criticise my OP and I accept your criticisms but I also said

Or is it a reasonable investment for long term high performance computing?

In fact the poll is nicely balance IMHO and I submit that shows the intent of the thread which is intended to welcome allcomers. I tried to make the poll span the full range of reactions that I could conceive of to the issue. I am glad you find it a bit controversial because I think there is a minor controversy here so that is why it is worth discussing. I dont think it is exactly the same controversy as the dual v quad debate but that does come into it. And yes I do have way to much time on my hands right now ... lol

As for moral, IMHO morality is in every decision I ever make, not something I save up for Sundays or tea with Pastor Joe, since it is a question of choosing the best/wisest option in the context of anything and everything that I can perceive about the world I am living in, all the time. For instance learning kung fu for self defence is moral IMHO. I am not a worshipper of ideals just curious about outcomes for purposes of self preservation, and mutual preservation where applicable. IMHO morality is necessary knowing that what I do has a comeback and is about having the foresight to make sure the comeback I want is the comeback I get. Its not about judging Intel or overclockers, or trying to use a PR issue to strongarm Intel, its about facing the dilemma I am personally aware of in deciding how I should spend my money and finding the right answer.

So its a question of going cheap and cheerful this upgrade or laying down a big wad for the unlocked chip. If I lay down a wad thats a choice with repercussions because I cant spend it on other stuff and the question is what else would I spend it on? Then compare that with the unlocked chip and see if its worth it. The most controversial alternative option I could think of was supporting third world development and it is controversial isnt it?

EDIT

And speaking of Kung Fu, just in case someone decides I am talking hypothetical stuff and full of it. Here is an example of where I am putting my money where my mouth is, just to show its a real issue for me, not BS.

On behalf of Just a Drop - thank you very much for your kind donation. Just £1.00 can deliver fresh water to a child for nearly 10 years, when used appropiately.

On behalf of the children and communities around the world that Just a Drop supports in the field, a sincere thank you. Your support makes a real difference to the work undertaken.

If you would like further information on Just a Drop please visit our website www.justadrop.org or email: justadropteam@justadrop.org

Is it better for me to have that chip or provide fresh water for 400 children for 10 years? This is what I am asking myself. I am looking in the mirror here not pointing fingers, OK?

 

[Idontcare]

Originally posted by: aigomorla
But its fun to see what it can do. 4.5ghz will require about 1.6vcore + to keep prime stable, and thats well... insane. IDC lemme borrow your vapo.

LOL! If my vapoLS can make my B3 QX6700 stable at 4GHz and 1.55 Vcore then I would seriously expect a much higher clock at even lower Vcore for a 45nm wolfdale!

 

[JAG87]

Dear Soubriquet,

I think I am one of the only people who is qualified to answer your question, maybe cause I have one duh. No Extreme Edition or FX (way back in the day) is worth their money.

The cost to Intel is around the 300 dollar range for each chip, and thats because they are paying people to bin them, otherwise it would be even lower.

That said, the reason why people buy them is because it makes their life easier. Some people would rather run 333x12 and call it a day, than waste time trying to find a stable FSB overclock, and playing with 5 different voltages. All you do is up the vcore, set multiplier to 12, and voila' 4 GHz.

I run 400x10, because I believe in making the most out of my RAM (since that was fucking expensive too when I bought it in 2006), but otherwise I would be content with 333x12 out of the box.

No need to waste time trying 450 FSB, then 452, then 455, then 458, then 460, then 475, then I get prime stable, and then it bombs on me when I am playing online with my friends, or when I am encoding a movie and it's almost done.

Some people are willing to pay for peace of mind, and thats all there is to it. Other people don't have the budget and would rather waste 10 days trying to find the best FSB/RAM/voltages until they squeeze every drop of performance from their budget quad core.



Whatever way you choose to do it is great, just make sure you overclock it, or I'll ban you

 

[Tempered81]

Originally posted by: JAG87
Dear Soubriquet,

I think I am one of the only people who is qualified to answer your question, maybe cause I have one duh. No Extreme Edition or FX (way back in the day) is worth their money.

The cost to Intel is around the 300 dollar range for each chip, and thats because they are paying people to bin them, otherwise it would be even lower.

That said, the reason why people buy them is because it makes their life easier. Some people would rather run 333x12 and call it a day, than waste time trying to find a stable FSB overclock, and playing with 5 different voltages. All you do is up the vcore, set multiplier to 12, and voila' 4 GHz.

I run 400x10, because I believe in making the most out of my RAM (since that was fucking expensive too when I bought it in 2006), but otherwise I would be content with 333x12 out of the box.

No need to waste time trying 450 FSB, then 452, then 455, then 458, then 460, then 475, then I get prime stable, and then it bombs on me when I am playing online with my friends, or when I am encoding a movie and it's almost done.

Some people are willing to pay for peace of mind, and thats all there is to it. Other people don't have the budget and would rather waste 10 days trying to find the best FSB/RAM/voltages until they squeeze every drop of performance from their budget quad core.



Whatever way you choose to do it is great, just make sure you overclock it, or I'll ban you

Hah. Well said - that is me for sure. Not that I'd rather do it this way, just that I didn't have the $1,000 up front. I say, if you have the cash, go for it. I'd probably spend 10 days tinkering with it still.

 

[aigomorla]

Originally posted by: JAG87
No need to waste time trying 450 FSB, then 452, then 455, then 458, then 460, then 475, then I get prime stable, and then it bombs on me when I am playing online with my friends, or when I am encoding a movie and it's almost done.

omg is my eyes decieving me...

did jag just say 475fsb quad? lol...

 

[JAG87]

Originally posted by: aigomorla

Originally posted by: JAG87
No need to waste time trying 450 FSB, then 452, then 455, then 458, then 460, then 475, then I get prime stable, and then it bombs on me when I am playing online with my friends, or when I am encoding a movie and it's almost done.

omg is my eyes decieving me...

did jag just say 475fsb quad? lol...

its possible .. its possible .. for me its possible :laugh:

I used that number because that's what your going to need to get a Q9550 to 4 GHz, nevermind a Q9450...

 

[rudder]

Originally posted by: Soubriquet


In other words a moral conundrum, isnt it obscene to spend that much on a CPU when these other things need doing? Wouldnt it be better to live with an overclocked CPU and give that money to a good cause? Or is it a reasonable investment for long term high performance computing? Why is the price like that? Should we do anything about it?

LOL, are we in the off topic forum?

Anyway.. do you ever go out to eat? Do you buy new clothes or wear second hand stuff? What kind of car do you own? Do you live alone?

Whether it is a cpu or other aspects of your life it does not matter. Should you have forgone that $20 dinner with the girlfriend and instead spent $3 on some bread, baloney, and mustard? Did you go to the thrift store to buy a pair of paints for $7 or do you buy brand new pants for $27? Do you drive a $12,000 car or a $1000 car? Do you share you apartment or do you spend the extra money to enjoy piece and quiet?

Why are you sitting at home playing video games when you could be doing good works in the slums of Calcutta?

 

[Soubriquet]

all good questions rudder, lol

thanks for your posts JAG that makes a lot of sense, certainly like Jared said you describe my FSB clocking experiences to a tee!

I am planning on getting top gear for the heatsink and mobo (thermalright Ultra-120 Extreme and Asus ROG X38 or X48) RAM undecided DDR 2 or 3

In the end I suppose you pay for an X if it is worth it to you. As someone who has always been a bit miserly with upgrades I am very tempted I must say to get a beauty like that just for once.

But rest assured whatever chip gets into my mobo will be thoroughly overclocked and I will drop by to make a report, though I may go easy on the volts as I am wondering how the new hafnium process will react, (reading reports about chips degrading a little when pushed with higher volts.)