Enthusiasts criticize AMD for locked multipliers


— 3:08 PM on November 24, 2003

Has AMD castrated overclocking? This new editorial over at ipKonfig seems to think so, but since when was overclocking an inalienable right? The editorialist rails against AMD for locking the Socket 754 Athlon 64's locked multiplier and complains the processor isn't hitting speeds much above stock, as if the enthusiast community were somehow entitled to unlocked multipliers and overclocking headroom. Enthusiast expectations aren't limited to the Athlon 64, either. Recently, I've also seen a lot of whining in various forums about a new Barton multiplier lock.

The enthusiast community has always been an incredibly vocal minority, but this recent bout of selfish complaining is a little ridiculous. I love an unlocked multiplier as much as the next guy, but when did AMD ever have a responsibility to cater to overclockers? Why should they actively support or even condone an activity that voids a processor's warranty?

Heck, we should be happy the pencil trick ever worked at all.

AMD has no responsibility or real financial incentive to serve up unlocked multipliers or overclocking headroom on a silver platter. Anyone who really wants an unlocked multiplier is free to dish out for an Athlon 64 FX-51.

Instead of pouting like a spoiled child, I'd like to take this opportunity to thank AMD for the overclocking headroom many of its processors have provided, and for all the unlocked multipliers that slipped into production. Nothing would make me happier than to see AMD release an Athlon 64 2500+ with an unlocked multiplier, but I'm by no means entitled to one. If the enthusiast community is going to be so quick to chastise AMD for "castrating" overclocking, maybe we don't deserve one anyway.

 
   
Register
Tip: You can use the A/Z keys to walk threads.
View options

This discussion is now closed.