3 ms·
The author is complaining out of context on a couple of points here: 1) The B820 came out 1.25 years later than the B940. So, it's not hard to see that maybe I
by azurelogic 12y ago
The author is complaining out of context on a couple of points here:
1) The B820 came out 1.25 years later than the B940. So, it's not hard to see that maybe Intel decided in that timeframe to add VT-x support.
2) None of the K-series CPUs support VT-d. For some reason, VT-d and overclocking are not compatible. This would have been more noticeable if, for example, the author had compared the i7-4770K to the i7-4770, not the i5-4570. The same distinction is there between the i5-4670 and i5-4670K.
3) The table is organized in a misleading fashion. Why put the weakest CPUs in the center except to make proper trend be intentionally disrupted
After fixing or striking these issues, this isn't even an article worth writing because the features suddenly make sense.
- wtallis 12y ago> "None of the K-series CPUs support VT-d. For some reason, VT-d and overclocking are not compatible." No, compatible usually implies there's a technological or engineering justification. This is pure marketing. And the Devils Canyon update to Haswell introduced some -K parts that have VT-d. Edit: And support likewise implies that even if it's not a purely technical issue, that there's at least some tradeoff. Enabling virtualization has a price to the consumer, but doesn't cost Intel anything extra.
- binarycrusader 12y agoNot true. The 4790k supports vt-d. All indications are that it's a market segmentation choice Intel made.