Intel speaks out against 12th Gen non-K CPU overclocking

Intel: "You should not overclock non-k Chips, we cannot guarantee their operation beyond their specifications"
Us: "Wait, so you *do* guarantee the operation of K chips that are overclocked?"
Intel: "...No, we do not guarantee the operation of K chips that are overclocked either"
Us: "So...what's the difference beyond you just putting a K letter, giving them a symbolic and on-paper only performance increase along with a *very* non-symbolic price increase?"
Intel: "...We have no further comments at this time"
Over half a decade ago Intel offered overclocking insurance as an extra-cost premium. They've stopped doing that now though, so comment is quite accurate.

Avro Arrow

Posts: 2,206   +2,610
TechSpot Elite
It's not a matter of being pro-consumer for the sake of it, if you're losing ground with consumers you need to offer them something in order to regain market share. For instance Intel appeared to be on the right track when they (kind of) stopped limiting RAM overclocking to the Z series motherboards with the previous generation (it remains locked for the H510/610). So, yeah, I kind of hoped that they would relax their attitude to CPU overclocking too over time.
I honestly never gave a rat's posterior about what Intel does because I have no intention of every buying another Intel CPU as long as I live if I can help it (like, as long as there's a viable alternative) and I'm the same way with nVidia. To me, buying their products is simply rewarding their behaviour, something that I cannot do without feeling slimy. So in that regard, I was blissfully unaware of what Intel was doing. I mean, why would you care what Intel is doing with regard to unlocked multipliers when pretty much all of AMD's CPUs are unlocked? Unless you're a blind fanboy (which I don't think you are), you should just go grab the AMD platform instead and stop caring.

Those actions that I take are the ones that would change the entire industry if people did the same thing. I honestly can't even begin to fathom how people could even look at Intel once Ryzen came out. Hell, I used an FX-8350 for five years and, despite what all the people who never owned one say, it was probably the best decision I ever made (tech-wise anyway) because the thing can still game respectably today, literally a decade after its introduction and it only cost me $170CAD.

I use it today as the core of my mining rig (because 990FX motherboards are great with multiple GPUs) and when I installed W10 on it, I was literally shocked at how fast it was. I hadn't used it in 5 years but in those 5 years, I've purchased two Ryzen CPUs, an R7-1700 and an R5-3600X. I expected it to feel like molasses but I guess that Microsoft finally got their scheduler properly set up for multi-threaded CPUs because the W10 installation felt no slower than with my R5-3600X. Now, being a 125W CPU, I have since disabled half of the cores (so it's now essentially an FX-4350) to run it at 65W and now it can lag if I try to open too many things at once but in its full octocore mode, there is no lag at all.