Overclock.net banner

1 - 20 of 71 Posts

·
Tator Tot Enthusiast
Joined
·
3,177 Posts
Nice club! Looking forward to see some interesting posts/results!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
588 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by jaclipse
View Post

Isnt it a tri-core cause the fourth core failed fabrication?

It is, so I don't see the point in unlocking the fourth DEAD core.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,011 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by jaclipse
View Post

Isnt it a tri-core cause the fourth core failed fabrication?

Yes. But if they don't produce enough 'bad' chips, they take a working X4 and market it as an X3, or so the theory goes. It's also possible that some of the chips that they deem 'bad' have a very rare fault.

I could have sworn that they physically disconnected the fourth core, though. I haven't really been following this whole thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,231 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by Liability
View Post

Yes. But if they don't produce enough 'bad' chips, they take a working X4 and market it as an X3, or so the theory goes. It's also possible that some of the chips that they deem 'bad' have a very rare fault.

I could have sworn that they physically disconnected the fourth core, though. I haven't really been following this whole thing.

LOL Worst theory ever.. What company would sell a better product by disabling part of it to sell it for less money. Trust me they make enough bad cpus that they have plenty of x3s in stock.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
12,992 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by jaclipse
View Post

Isnt it a tri-core cause the fourth core failed fabrication?

No, I think it failed quality control. Remember that with AMD's fabrication process they make one large batch of chips, and the highest binned ones go on to be the Phenom II X4 845s, the next lower binned ones become the X4 810s, and eventually when they get down to the bottom there is likely a small window between the defective cores and the ones that simply don't perform as well. These ones I think became the X3 720 BEs.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
943 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by jacksknight
View Post

LOL Worst theory ever.. What company would sell a better product by disabling part of it to sell it for less money. Trust me they make enough bad cpus that they have plenty of x3s in stock.

Not exactly. They do this because they want to offer a balanced range of products/prices for their consumers, and the demand for X3's is higher than the supply.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,354 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by jacksknight
View Post

LOL Worst theory ever.. What company would sell a better product by disabling part of it to sell it for less money. Trust me they make enough bad cpus that they have plenty of x3s in stock.

Well if they sell more of the cheaper cpu and get more profit from that rather than the more expensive cpu they sell less often, taking the more expensive one that they probably have plenty of surplus of and selling it as the cheaper one that costs the exact same to make is no loss to them, only a gain in sales = more money

but on this specific subject XD i dont know a single thing about tri to quad unlocking or anything of that sort lol my guess would be that they would lock it just like they lock the multiplyer, by physicaly cutting something on the processor and it would still be there just not recognized or used...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,389 Posts
more here:
http://www.techpowerup.com/86100/Phe...om_II_X4?.html

Maybe it's a viral marketing publicity stunt from AMD... release a few completely working 710/720s, allow the fourth core to be unlocked, then after people see this a billion people order them to realize that it either has been fixed or the fourth core is screwed up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
93 Posts
Quote:


Originally Posted by jacksknight
View Post

LOL Worst theory ever.. What company would sell a better product by disabling part of it to sell it for less money. Trust me they make enough bad cpus that they have plenty of x3s in stock.

You know nothing about economics.

Also they might have enough bad chips to make X3s now, what about when yield increases?
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,699 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by jacksknight View Post
LOL Worst theory ever.. What company would sell a better product by disabling part of it to sell it for less money. Trust me they make enough bad cpus that they have plenty of x3s in stock.
Sorry but all companies do this.
GTX 260 is a 1/8th of the GPU disabled from the GTX 280. (Then it is a joke since the 216SP GTX 260 adds another cluster... even worst stunt)

CPU's
e6600 - full fledged dual core
e4600 - cache disabled
e2200 - even more cache disabled

q9450 - full fledge quad
q9400 - crippled cache quad.

and not to mention all the CPU's are practically the same, a clean process like intel's would be binned for sure but basically the only difference with each cpu is the multiplier, which sets out a q9550 from a q9650 and what used to be a $300 price tag.

In the end though, i have to agree AMD has a lot more crippled CPU's to sell than the other members think since they are going to release 2 core phenoms with 6MB of cache, not crippling it. But if the demand for the cheap tricores keep up, then AMD will have to disable some quad cores and sell em for less.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
358 Posts
The cost for making a Tri-core and Quad-core are similar, so why not just cut production costs by manufacturing ONLY Quad-cores and just disabling one core? Seems like what AMD likes to do and doesn't hurt us in any way. Tri-Cores are usually a Quad-Core with a core disabled, regardless if it works or not.
 
1 - 20 of 71 Posts
Top