The new microcode is in reference to the fact that some motherboard manufacturers exploited non Z87 (H87 B85) chipsets to OC using multiplier. Intel strictly wants overclocking to be made on Z87 chipset motherboards iirc.Originally Posted by Zvejniex
Im writing with a phone and little bit mad.. because i have seem various articles about intels microcode blocking haswells oc.. ome said z87 is fine but some didnt... I aswell have a hard tolime believing than intel would rip us off like that with the k series chips.
Seems like somebody here has an aditude... mabey next time g t f o with the pointless posts.
This. Relax, nothing is going to happen to your Z87 board.
The only pointless posts here are yours. The others are in reply to your incomprehensible gibberish of half-finished thoughts and inexcusable spelling, phone or not.Originally Posted by Zvejniex
Im writing with a phone and little bit mad.. because i have seem various articles about intels microcode blocking haswells oc.. ome said z87 is fine but some didnt... I aswell have a hard tolime believing than intel would rip us off like that with the k series chips.
Seems like somebody here has an aditude... mabey next time g t f o with the pointless posts.
I agree. This thread is going to brew more hate towards the OP. Please keep this thread civilized,Originally Posted by Zvejniex
So your saying i cant be mad? And you couldnt understand what i was saying? And your saying i need to read all the information in the article, yet you probably arent referencing to the one i have read... Actually i have read a few, majority of the articles were saying what here people said.. And my posts are so understandable that they are useless? And the other posters posts were more related to the thread? please, piss off...IS IT SERIOUSLY THAT IMPORTANT SO THAT YOU HAVE TO JUMP ON ME?
Thread CAN be closed.
Lolwut?......Originally Posted by Zvejniex
So your saying i cant be mad?Are there any rules for spelling worlds here? Have you ever thought about the usefulness of your posts? And you couldnt understand what i was saying? If so, you may consider yourself ******ed. Sure, my posting wasnt THE BESTHave you considered that alot of people here arent native english speakers? Mabey, just mabey, i couldnt do better than that, yet i wanted answer to the question and you guys WASTE TIME for me and you. And your saying i need to read all the information in the article, yet you probably arent referencing to the one i have read... Actually i have read a few, majority of the articles were saying what here people said.. And my posts are so understandable that they are useless? And the other posters posts were more related to the thread? please, piss off...IS IT SERIOUSLY THAT IMPORTANT SO THAT YOU HAVE TO JUMP ON ME?![]()
Thread CAN be closed.
What hes saying has nothing to do with what's happening by this microcode change, it has nothing to do with limiting K-sku speeds. He couldn't fully read an article and jumped to rediculous conclusions of Intel limiting K-skus via a microcode change. This is not the case. Its to lock out K-skus from being multiplier-overclocked on NON-Z87 boards, not Z87. This is how Intel intended things and some manufacturers found a bypass. Intel plans to fix that. Simple concept that he didn't understand correctly. Intel does not plan to limit K-skus' ability to reach X frequency.Originally Posted by *ka24e*
I kinda understand what your saying, Zvejniex.
It's wouldn't surprise me at all if Intel implemented a 'restriction' on clock speeds, even tho the CPU is fully capable of going higher. After all, K series chips are multiplier unlocked. No overclock (even 100Mhz) on a K series chip is guaranteed at all.
That wasn't what you were saying at all. What you were saying and what's happening are two completely different things. I, along with everyone else who read said article, understood what Intel was doing because I fully read what was happening, unlike you.