How are Intels locked?
I've been wondering this...as i don't really understand why a lower multiplier is better, i guess i'm just curious lol. But, since intel sorts their cpus according to what they can or can't handle, and let's use the C line for example, they all have the same fsb. so that isn't what they change. what they change is the multiplier. now, there's no obvious way to do this externally, and they all start out with the same multiplier. they test it by running it, seeing where it stands, and dropping the multiplier. probably all done by computers, but still done. so the only way they can change the multiplier is internally...now what i'm wondering is, if intel can do it, why can't we? from what i'm seeing all they do is give the cpu some sort of command or shock (very carefully controlled perhaps) that tells it or forces it to drop the multi. ok, if they shock it i can see where perhaps they sever some connection to do it, but if it's code, couldn't we figure out some way to repeat the process, except reverse the change? now, anyone correct me if i'm wrong cuz i just thought of this using what i gathered off forums and such. anyone willing to explain why a lower multi is better, feel free as well. thanks!
0
Comments
Lower muiplier is better because that allows you to run a higher FSB and keep the same CPU speed.
100*20 or 200*10. The RAM is running twice the speed in the second instance. The whole system speeds up yet the CPU is still the same.
Some Engineering samples are sent to reviewers with an unlocked multi so it is possible.
//EDIT:
Before someone tries to call my bluff, I'll explain why this is not only plausible, but probable.
The circuits for both the Pentium 4 and the Athlon series are fabricated on the 130 nanometer process. Any metallic trace that must interface with the core of the CPU is a 130 nanometer, or finer, wire. That said, both the Athlon and the Pentium 4 have traces running through the CPU to control multiplier. In order for said wires to fit in the core, they must be fabricated on the aforementioned 130 nanometer process which is smaller than fractions of the width of a hair.
You have to keep in mind when the cores are produced, they (the producer) don't know what speed the core would be running at. For instance, in the case of the 1800+es and the 2400+ CPUs, AMD only wants to make one core so they could cut manufacturing costs. At the same time, they want to be able to use these same cores sold as different speeds, thus charging different prices and filling different consumer levels, all with one product. So, they take a core from the pile, stick it on the organic (or ceramic) package they want to use, and the package itself would "tell" the core what speed to run at.
Now sure, the conductors actually interfacing (touching) the core will be only 130nm (assuming the 130nm process isn't JUST used within the core, and not the packaging interface), but once the conductors are traveling within the packaging, they are most certainly larger, so they can do necessary things like make a large enough contact with the SM caps and resistors, and in some cases the pins to interface the package with the motherboard. All one would have to do to make contact with these conductors (using equipment which is available at the consumer level) would be to connect to them to either the pins, or the SM components.
Oh, and let's not forget that it'd be much, much cheaper to use larger conductors on the package, especially when they don’t really need to. We all know they want to keep the manufacturing process as cheap as possible.
So I'm not saying you're wrong, but don’t count on being right.
http://www.gsilumonics.com/process_online_ordering/pdfs/108.pdf
It'd would be trivial and cheap for intel to directly make new links on the chip after manufacturing to effectively make the multiplier truly locked. AMD tries to minimize costs they they have changes made on the external packaging which are hackable.