Discussion in 'Processors, Motherboards & Memory' started by PowerSlide, Apr 21, 2007.
Hmm.. That seems kind of odd. I don't think Intel would actually waste that much time and money testing to see if it was damaged due to overclocking.
Besides, Intel intentionally removed the multiplier lock for the Core 2 Extreme processors. They have also stated they are targeted at enthusiasts. If that's not an unofficial claim of support for overclocking, I don't know what is.
Yeah. I think they save more cost not checking it and just replacing the dead chip than hiring a bunch of guys and puttin in the processes to check for such cases.
Doesn't make much sense. But I've personally not seen a processor died due to overclocking, I mean nothing excessives like motherboard vcore mod etc.
By the time the processor dies, it's time for a replacement anyway.
Yeah, that's true. THe only processors that actually died were mostly also those chipped flipped chip packaging during the Celeron II and Pentium 3 days... even chipped some could still run!
IMHO, it sounds more like the retailers are bullshitting their way out of RMAing their customers' dead CPUs.
I had one CPU die because of overclocking, but I didn't place the cooler properly so it was my fault. Thing is, if I know it's my fault, I gut up and take the cost that comes with it, and I think just about everyone who overclocks does the same because they know there are some risks. Not many any more as the system usually won't even boot if the CPU is being asked too much, but still. I think Adrian is right here, retailers don't want to RMA so they come up with reasons not to do it. Plus, Chai is correct too, when a CPU dies, you might as well replace it anyway because it will be more then outdated 90% of the time.
I always thought the minute you overclock the minute your warrenty is gone, so this isn't such a bad thing as it should be because you've already voided warrenty.
That's kinda the point here. If you void the warranty, you shouldn't get a free replacement. Honestly, if you do it right, you won't have problems, just like installing the processor. If everything is done right, there shouldn't be a problem. I actually like the idea because this can help keep costs for processors down because they won't replace CPU's when the user is at fault.
1031982, It won't be the case. Cause they'll need more resources to check whether the CPU has been overclocked or not. Like what Adrian said here:
Quiet NoFormz! I like my fantasy world! Don't make it go away with FACTS! lol
Well people who don't know how to over clock properly (The guys that end up needing warrent and then find out they voided it) shouldn't do it at all unless they know what their doing.
I personally think if a user decides to break their CPU by over clocking it why should the company waste their time fixing the users errors?
i've never broken and processor despite OCing so many.
don't be greedy.
Separate names with a comma.