H97 Anniversary OC Settings Gone - RANT

Hi all

Edited by Juzzi - 19 Oct 2015 at 6:10pm

Aah I see what you're saying. I'm going to have a look at this work around and see if I can get it to work. I completely agree with you on Windows 10, privacy is a thing of the past. But for me, with this specifically, I don't want to hand over a PC to someone and then tell them "Here, BUT here's also some restrictions on what you can do because I didn't do enough research." If he wants to run Windows 10 and have an overclock, I want him to be able to do that. And it isn't like Z series boards are cheap, they're quite a bit more expensive which doesn't make it any less frustrating especially considering that H series boards can do what they can do, but just "aren't allowed to." 

Ok I've done a bit more research on the issue and I see it's almost completely Microsoft and Intel being ****s. Seems Gigabyte have issued a bios update removing the block so doesn't seem like all manufacturers are complying. I'm just going to give him a choice: either wait it out and see if Asrock ever unblocks it and live with Windows 8.1 for now or fork out extra cash for a Z series board. I'll recommend the former even though it isn't ideal. Anyways, thank you for your input 

Juzzi wrote: Ok I've done a bit more research on the issue and I see it's almost completely Microsoft and Intel being ****s. Seems Gigabyte have issued a bios update removing the block so doesn't seem like all manufacturers are complying. I'm just going to give him a choice: either wait it out and see if Asrock ever unblocks it and live with Windows 8.1 for now or fork out extra cash for a Z series board. I'll recommend the former even though it isn't ideal. Anyways, thank you for your input

I find it hard to believe that other mother board manufactures, or even just one, still allows over clocking on the newer, non-Z chipsets. If that is true, IMO it is only a matter of time before that changes.

The usual customer - supplier interaction (Intel the supplier of chipsets, board manufactures the customer) is the customer has the upper hand. They must be satisfied by the behavior of the supplier. The adage of "the customer is always right" is an example of that.

In business to business situations, the reality is not that simple. Sales of products include legal contracts that both the supplier and customer are bound to abide by. I don't have personal knowledge of these contracts, but it is generally known Intel only allows over clocking features to be available with their 'Z' chipsets. Is that rule (legality?) included in the sales contracts? It seems to be.

In another break of the customer - supplier model, ignoring the rules of a sales contract might result in the supplier withholding current and/or future products from the customer. Such as, no 100 series chipsets, or more subtle but significant things like no processor microcode updates during the product development cycle. Imagine the affect that would have on a mother board manufacture.

The unknown (to us) story of what happened between Intel and the mother board manufactures, with the non-Z OC feature would be very interesting to know. It almost seems as if the mother board manufactures were defiant against Intel about the non-Z OC feature. Intel had to be aware of this from day one, and it took a long time before the UEFI/BIOS updates that turned off non-Z OC were posted on the board's download pages. Is it a coincidence that those update appeared not long before the release of Skylake processors and the 100 series chipsets?

We also have the unprecedented (as far as I know) move of Intel's collaboration with Microsoft with the Windows update to lock out over clocking on some boards. That the board/OS combination became unusable after the update, which had to be known to occur by both parties before the update was released, is simply incredible IMO.

Was this update meant to only be the final removal of the non-Z OC capability? Or is it also a punishment for the board manufactures, whom immediately received the wrath of those affected by it? I know MSoft has been beat up by... victims of this update too, and I had to laugh at the responses of the moderators of those forums, that seemed to have no idea what happened or why. They quite likely had no idea.

I wonder if someday we will learn of the details of this saga. The PC press has been useless in telling this story as far as I know. That may be another story in itself.