| Desktop PC Platform: Killed By Overclocking |
| Articles - Opinion & Editorials | ||
| Written by Olin Coles | ||
| Tuesday, 10 August 2010 | ||
Desktop PC Platform: Killed By OverclockingIn part one of this editorial series, Desktop PC Platform: Fears and Predictions, you were introduced to the basic framework of threats surrounding the desktop market segment. That article wasn't meant to be a self-sufficient story, but instead provide an illustration of the chain of events that have precipitated to create the perfect storm. Desktop PCs are our life blood, after all, and you wouldn't be here unless you held a vested interest in the future of this platform. I've already got more content prepared in support of my initial post, but this article will focus on one of the lesser-known threats: overclocking. No, it's not the act of overclocking itself that threatens the survival of desktop computers as a platform; it's the overclocking market that's killing the industry. Manufacturer's have turned a hobby into a product, and then turned that product into their flagship model. Allow me to illustrate my point with a few passages from our recent Best CPU Cooler Performance series:
In this paragraph, I state how overclocking desktop computer hardware was born from need, not packaged as a product. I go on to demonstrate how the industry picked-up on this enthusiast hobby:
So overclocking began when enthusiasts simply needed hardware that could drive at the speed limit, and not necessarily to outperform a reasonable need for speed. That's when the component hardware industry stepped in to make a profit:
At its inception, overclocking computer hardware was a tool for making the incapable into something more capable. Professionals, students, enthusiasts, and countless personal users, have all discovered that using a computer was more enjoyable when it was able to keep up with the demands placed on it. For the longest time, the industry couldn't sell a piece of hardware that satisfied the fast-paced tasks a user could throw at it. When it slowly began to happen, which is subjective due to individual perceptions of speed, the computer component industry created an entire market segment dedicated to hardware enthusiasts and overclockers. The age of overclocking hardware was born. Effectively standardized overnight, computer hardware components were separated into various categories of quality. There was budget, mainstream, professional, and then enthusiast. We've witnessed this trend for years now, as graphics solutions, processors, system memory, motherboards, and even power supplies have all be segregated by class. That's when overclocking stopping being the solution, and became the problem. The examples are everywhere: Intel's $1000+ 'Extreme Edition' desktop processors, Gigabyte's $700 GA-X58A-UD9 motherboard, and $300 system memory kits made explicitly for overclockers. While there are people willing to buy these items, they often lose sight of the original purpose behind overclocking: making something slow become fast, and getting something more for no added cost. Tacking $2000 onto the price tag of your computer system is hardly keeping in the original spirit of overclocking, and is more closely identified with showing off how much money you can spend. The problem only gets worse, because now manufacturers have found ways to feed on this. Back when I was taking my first baby steps into overclocking by risking everything to push a lousy Cyrix M-II 233MHz processor an extra 33MHz, the reward was a 15% bump in speed and a noticeable increase in performance. That was before computer hardware could keep up with user demands. These days, most hardware components are faster than you'll ever need. Enthusiast-branded products simply mean you're paying a premium for the privilege to own hardware capable of yielding an overclock... but once you've paid their price there's no guarantee you'll experience any difference. At some point the computer industry went from asking consumers to pay more for the faster products, to paying more for products you might be able to make faster. This runs opposite of other industrial markets, which is why manufacturer's have spent so much of that added cost on convincing you that the purchase was necessary. Intel's Core i7-980X 6-Core CPU was advertised as the "Ultimate Gaming Weapon", but testing proved it did nothing at all for video game performance when paired with a suitable (and much less expensive) video card. The same message is parroted by memory manufacturers, who have notoriously labeled their products as gamer this-or-that. So how long can this business model last?
Related Articles: |
||
Comments
Bleeding edge drives innovation and progress. Some products marketed to enthusiasts are ridiculous but others drive the industry as a whole forward, it's up to the individual to decide what is valuable to them. So let people decide for themselves what they want, personally I prefer it that way, it leaves the industry open and standards constantly improving. Would you prefer we all have the same standardized and bland hardware? I think we have that already, they're called macs.
Fail to innovate and you merely stagnate. No thanks.
Today, it's a much different world. Marketing 101 has reached the part manufacturers. You can barely buy a part today that isn't "overclocking". Then there's the added cost. So what you ca buy 1066 OC memory that can run at 1333 speeds. Well, it will definitely turn out in the long run, you'd just been better off buying 1333 memory anyway, as it probably cost about the same thing. Then there's the performance gains, unless you spend 2+ times what a "normal" clocked PC would cost, the overclocking gains will be minimal as far as real world performance, and at that you're paying exorbitant fees for what is maybe a few FPS in performance gains. Totally not worth it.
Then 140 hours of labor is hemmed and hawwed over, and some 2-3 pages single spaced jabberwockey talk has to be puddled on, with some supposedly fair or unbiased or even accurate conclusion given the tiny 1 system test platform on psycho speed parts...
Yes, the author made a VERY GOOD point indeed.
NOW they have DESTROYED Overclocking for any chip that is inexpensive and force you to purchase 1000 dollar processors to be able to Overclock greatly.
They RUINED the very reason people OVERCLOCK because they are GREEDY!!!!
Since we have an automotive analogy posted here anyway, I'll add to it....
Enthusiast - Buy a Mercedes, throw in AMG kit.
Budget Overclock - Buy a Lada, drive downhill.
Nobody goes to a shop and drops 1.5K on a 6 core i7 Extreme and uses standard memory, graphics or mobo - that's retarded. That's like buying an olympic size pool and filling it by the cup.
People want the fastest they can afford. Some people can afford an overclocked i7 that would kill a standard i7 Extreme - they would normally prefer to have the Extreme but they just can't afford it. There are levels involved you can't just assume that most overclocks happen because people don't have funds.
My 2 cents.
Of course, those sort of people would probably be buying 6-core Xeon workstations, but they really are massively expensive/overpriced!
As I've grown older, I've felt less need to overclock my gear. Not least because performance of entry-level CPU's is nowadays quite good anyway. I aim more for system stability than bleeding-edge speed. I even considered a 'proper' workstation setup for my next PC, with ECC RAM and 5x SAS drives in a RAID5 array. I'll stick instead with a nice, little mini-ITX setup which I can use with my TV.
Overclocking is a great way to get performance from low-end or mid-range kit, but there is still a risk of wearing out some expensive component.
At ANY level now the purchaser can buy that single "OC , superpiped, DDR'ed, megawhomper !" part and slap it in for the goal.... and many do so...
Then there's the spread time upgrader, who does the above over and over.
ANY PART at ANY LEVEL, marketed with hyper sensationalized "super upgrade!" PR slogans, boxing..
140 hour " benchmark testing review"... minute detail on this or that setting and frame or io test Sandra tweak score, OC trick, all on THOUSANDS of dollars of provided hardware.... so that "nothing is held back".
Oh, the author is perfectly correct.
The mass brainwashing is utterly complete.
What was a personal private occurrence on a bus speed or jumper, is now a commercialized, e-extension, mass marketed, obsessive compulsive disorder, that is required... or go home.
#hardforum.com/showthread.php?t=1538922
As one said, it isnt about cost, it is about performance, some people can only afford a $500 computer, while others can afford a $1500 computer, just cause someone spends $2k on a computer doesnt mean they are showing off, they can simply afford better components to take further.
World-record-setters aside, I'm completely aware of the other people who gladly hand over their paycheck just for bragging rights. Good for them, they managed to buy their overclocking success instead of earning it with experience. The point is that manufactures? are starting to cut out the penny-wise enthusiasts who wanted to get something more for nothing at all.
1) The Budget Overclock : Some people have found fun in buying a cheaper then normal CPU, some spacious RAM (PC3-12800, instead of PC3-10600) and a good motherboard (think Gigabyte UD4/UD5) and then overclocking this to match a much more expensive system. Big bonuses to be had by saving $400+ on the MB/CPU/RAM and spending that on the Video Card (HD5570 -> HD 5870).
2) AMD : Yes, Intel have locked down their low-end chips. They've stopped people from getting the most out of their low end, and forced overclockers to spend a lot more in the pursuit of their "art". But AMD have done pretty much the exact opposite, almost by mistake. Just by browsing some PC forums, you'll find people who've turned their dual core Phenom II into a quad core. 2 extra cores, no extra money. That seems pretty win to me. Also, Black Edition chips like the Phenom II X2 555 -> AU$ 120 Fully unlocked.
in what way? I can still buy cheap hardware that overclocks well.
But with manufacturers it is a money game. That's the reality behind offering OC branded parts to those with the extra cash. We, as consumers can buy into it or not. To them, selling is everything and any way to do that is fair game to them. Harping on OC'ing parts sells product. You should understand this and realize that it's not gonna change any time soon.
I started overclocking with a Tyan board with two Celery 300's on it. It was a blast to get them screaming along and keeping them cool at the same time too. It was a lot of work too.
OC'ing isn't really what it used to be anymore, and I've quit doing it on most levels. My three systems run just fine at stock settings and utterly slay the games that I like to play. The most I do now to improve my computers is to tweak the cooling and manage the cable layouts within.
#2. Even back in the 80386 days it was pretty easy to build a custom system.
#3. Back in the "old" days, a normal everyday computer would cost at least $1500... the first 80386sx-25 system my family had cost over $2000. Compare that to a normal everyday computer now... You can get a pretty decent one for $500 or less if you get a good sale.
#4. As for overclocking. I have overclocked every system I have ever owned. I DO NOT buy super expensive parts, yet I usually have a system that will far outperform almost any pre-built system available. I think buying $700 to $800 worth of parts and building a system that out performs systems that sell for $3500 to $5000 is a pretty good return on overclocking.
#5. Yes, I do use the extra speed.
The only thing they are "painting into a corner" is the people who don't know any better and/or have the money to burn.
I certainly don't buy uber expensive parts that are trying to be marketed to overclockers. Sure, I am not able to buy the cheapest motherboard, but at the same time I have never bought a motherboard that is anywhere near what the most expensive motherboard available for my setup is.
I also don't buy the super expensive memory kits either. Paying twice as much or more for a miniscule speed difference just isn't worth it.
The difference in smoothness and resposiveness.. and overall speed, especially in memory intensive programs is very easily noticeable even when comparing DDR3-1600 to DDR3-2000. And running DDR3-2000 just wipes the floor with DDR3-1066.
The brainwashing that runs rampant everywhere now is apparent even in this thread, as posters discuss their ddr3 and i7 platforms...
Every card and part now has a most prominent gamer's, over#er's, superfassst, hyper version, power version, rainbow colored in your face box version, car clone version, plastic gun encased version, DDRx version, and on and on and on...
Then comes the average thread at any sight, and all the sigs advertise for some wacked out PR stunt name they juiced into the brains of the drooling wallet busting doofus, who is proud to offer the free advertising all over the net, so long as his post name is attached and he can spew his oc jollies on auto sig ever post...destroyed indeed.
Let us not forget what we have today as I note in this review: ##techreaction.net/2010/08/09/review-asus-p7p55d-e-pro-a-step-above/. The Uber priced allow for those on a budget to get equal performance to plat games of still get the faster render.
I must digress because the market is growing not shrinking and when it comes down to it nothing has changed and the vast majority of usere still buy OEM.
First of all, the fact that some people are willing to pay more for 'overclocked' GPUs or fast RAM allows the manufacturers to reach profitability despite low prices on non-enthusiast parts.
Secondly, there are noticeable gains to be made through overclocking. My Vaio P at 1333Mhz is sluggish; overclocking to 1600Mhz peps things up to the point that I'm no longer cranky about its performance. My i7-920's overclock to levels above the 975 saved me $800.
Thirdly, there's a snobbish elitism at the core of this criticism. Should only the most technically sophisticated be allowed to reap the benefits that can come from overclocking? Isn't it better, instead, for people to be able to buy off-the-shelf solutions which provide enhanced performance such as overclocked parts and systems?
We must have the high priced items to have low priced items. and really who cares if someone buys a CPU they dont need, I only need one computer but I have a farm..
Many of the points made in this article are either severely distorted half truths, or complete fabrications all together.
"These days, most hardware components are faster than you'll ever need. "
No- they are faster then YOU will ever need.
I'd love to hear you legitimize a $1100 processor for gaming, or $700 motherboard for overclocking.
For leisure- i play battlefield bad company, starcraft 2, stream blueray content to several TVs at the same time (the whole house uses content off my computer). And when the computer isnt in use, its crunching folding@home work units at around 41,000 ppd average. This computer is worth every single cent i paid for it.
Since I was apparently incorrect, what exactly do you use your computer for? and how exactly is my expensive computer "killing" yours?
Aside from testing hardware for this website, which I operate, there's also my computer service business. I create DVDs for my Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu competition team, and compile large database code for this server. Nothing too dramatic, but enough to require SSDs, 6GB of memory, and a good i7. I use a 5870 video card, even though I've got GTX 480's sitting in a box nearby, to play BF:BC2 as Das Capitolin.
I have a $900 FirePro 8700 in my computer that runs two 24" monitors. I spent the money on this card because its GPU is many times more precise then regular consumer hardware in its calculations. The system has an i7 930 clocked to 4.2ghz (thats a 150% increase, so your argument for current hardware lacking noticeable overclocking abilities is completely false), an Asus P6X58D Premium motherboard ($350), and 12GB corsair dominator RAM.
For example I went with a modest system including a i5 750, Gigabyte P55-UD3R, Ripjaws DDR3-1600, Coolermaster Silent Pro 1000W Modular, etc... The savings went on a HD 5970. My cousin went with a i7 920, most expensive Asus enthusiast motherboard and Ram and an ubber expensive power supply. He did not want to wait for the HD 5970 but got two 5850s in Crossfire. He overclocked his system as I did mine and in all types of benchmarking we are about even.
Moral here; he spend about $1000 then I had buying these enthusiast level labels and in the end wasting his money for nothing.
An HD5970 is a dual GPU card that runs two 5850 GPUs on a single card; no surprise there that you were equal in graphics since you have essentially the same exact video hardware. If the only benchmarks you did were graphics tests, that is why you may think your computers are equal.
There is a valid point here about branding like "platinum super overclock edition" is just a marketing gimmick. However people who are not brain dead will know to compare actual specifications of hardware, instead of which retail package looks the coolest.
One HD 5970 is actually two 5870 (undercut to 5850 level performance). But I overvolted and overclocked to exceed 5870 level performance.
I think the article was more concerned for everyday common people that don't know the difference and just get confused when facing all these gimmicks.
/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=522&Itemid=72
So then you're arguing that poorly competing products are killing the industry? I mean i can't really disagree with you there, but what does that have to do with overclocking in that case?
I've been reading through this article and i can't find a certain step in logic:
1) Manufactures have turned overclocking into a product.:"The examples are everywhere: Intel's $1000+ 'Extreme Edition' desktop processors, Gigabyte's $700 GA-X58A-UD9 motherboard, and $300 system memory kits made explicitly for overclockers. While there are people willing to buy these items, they often lose sight of the original purpose behind overclocking: making something slow become fast, and getting something more for no added cost."
2)???
3)this is destroying the pc industry / this business model wont last.
whats 2?
why does a demand for uber high end "overclocking" parts and an appropriate supply of them affect me in anyway when the same budget parts are still being made, and as far i'm concerned, overclocking far beyond what older parts before the pentium 3 age used to.
As I recall, Rodney Reynolds has also been caught stealing images from techPowerUp! and HardwareCanucks. Times must be tough for this guy.
You're correct about the images, but I don't know what ever happened with those two complaints.
I think each family of CPUs are aimed to different users. The AMD Phenom II X6 has 6 cores, but i doubt is gonna work faster than a 4 core Xeon for my 3D rendering jobs.
So maybe Overclocking is just for a specific user. Altough, like F1 cars, at that speed, is more posible to crash.
It seems most people here missed the point.
There are some true performance gains to be made on certian processors, but this is generally the cheaper model. EG buying a base model and overclocking it to similar performance of a more expensive, higher end part. However, some CPUs are like 5% faster, yet cost 50% more... But are "overclockable". Most of the time you can get the same performance from overclocking a cheaper model as you can from overclocking a fast version.
There is one exception though, businesses. SQL licenses are based on the number of CPUs, not performance. So buying a single ultra high speed CPU for $1100 might seem crazy, but if preforms at the same speed of 2 slower CPUs you can save up to $25k on SQL licenses. In that case, its not worth saving $500 on 2 cheaper CPUS when the license cost is 10 fold more. (You wouldnt overclock a CPU in a business environment, so overclocking a cheaper version isnt an option).
"Desktop PC Platform: Killed By Overclocking"
"No, it's not the act of overclocking itself that threatens the survival of desktop computers as a platform; it's the overclocking market that's killing the industry."
Desktop computers outsell all the Xbox 360, PS3, PS2 and Wii sales combined by a factor o 2! And is increasing.
Desktop computers DO NOT outsell all gaming consoles by a factor of two, but I'm pretty sure that your ratio of hype to fact does.
First of all, I am so, so sorry that English is not my native language. I really apologize if the way I write made your eyes hurt or something...
"statistics pulled from his..." My what? Is this the level you want to go on this discussion? Well, I will not go there.
Here are the source of my statistics. They were not pulled from my anything...
##pcgamingalliance.org/NEWSEVENTS/AlliancePressRelease s/tabid/383/Default.aspx
##game-newswire.com/index.php/the-news/232.html
On the first link you can download the PDF with the complete release.
Oh, and by the way, try to answer me in Portuguese. I'm sure I will love your grammar too!
Now consider this: there were 89.1 million gaming consoles shipped in 2009, which is more than the number of desktop/laptops they claimed shipped. See the follow-up article here: /index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=11429&Itemid=8
There are more examples than not where overclocking components are literally hyped by companies and aimed directly at the middle to upper tier market for enthusiasts. Take the MSI Big Bang for example. Or take the AMD Phenom II X6. Both of which only appeal to a general market. They don't appeal to a mass market because they're extremely over powered as is! Let alone the ability to overclock them.
I do understand the point of the article and while it is well written it is also way off base. The fact is overclocking has and will drive the market segment for the foreseeable future. We would not have what we do today if not for the demand for something faster.
Today prices are lower than ever, yes that 1000 dollar CPU is on par with the historical high priced CPU but when you adjust for the vale of the dollar and add in the amount og choices the market is great and the prices are great.
I'll say it again - I did NOT read all the comments. So before I get bashed, remember this.
....... and KUDOS OLIN! WELL DONE!