AMD Sempron ships

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 00:58:20 -0400, JK wrote:
Tony Hill wrote:

On Fri, 03 Sep 2004 01:58:29 -0400, JK wrote:
Tony Hill wrote:
Perhaps for some companies this might mean more. Do a Google
search on Intel recalls.

AMD is not without their recalls as well

I can't remember the last AMD recall. Can you post some links to
articles about some of AMD's past recalls? I couldn't find any on the net.

While perhaps not an official recall, AMD did have a bug with a number
of their K6 chips that caused some fairly major problems any time you
tried to access more than 32MB of memory at any given time. When the
K6 was first released this wasn't a huge issue as most systems of that
day only came with 16 or 32MB of memory, but over the years it's
required AMD to replace quite a number of processors. Here's a
description of the issue:

http://membres.lycos.fr/poulot/k6bug.html

That is 7 years old! I am talking about relatively recent events. Look at
how many recalls Intel has had in just the past year or two.

Such as...?

The only recent recall I know of from Intel was their ICH6 chip from
(the I/O companion for the Grantsdale/Alderwood chipsets, among
others). That was actually a pretty funny one, caused by a
manufacturing glitch where a plastic film was not properly removed
from one of the chips before a heatsink was attached, eventually
causing the chip to overheat. This was caught very early on and
basically none of the affects products ever made it out into the great
blue yonder of consumers hands.

What Intel HAS done a lot of in the last little while is to delay
products at the last minute because of various problems, either on the
manufacturing or design side. That sort of thing certainly doesn't
fill one with confidence of a company, but at least it doesn't end up
causing big problems for customers.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca

On Tue, 07 Sep 2004 06:06:02 GMT, "MyndPhlyp"
wrote:

"JK" wrote in message
...

Tony Hill wrote:

While perhaps not an official recall, AMD did have a bug with a number
of their K6 chips that caused some fairly major problems any time you
tried to access more than 32MB of memory at any given time. When the
K6 was first released this wasn't a huge issue as most systems of that
day only came with 16 or 32MB of memory, but over the years it's
required AMD to replace quite a number of processors. Here's a
description of the issue:

http://membres.lycos.fr/poulot/k6bug.html

That is 7 years old! I am talking about relatively recent events.

http://www.3dchips.net/content/story.php?id=3927

And you are still a silly little troll.

That's not a recall in any way given that it's correctable with a
microcode update. Both AMD and Intel have fairly extensive errata,
and I never did figure out why this one managed to get plastered
around many tech websites and the others did not. These sorts of
issues are really quite small and, for the most part, can be ignored.

-------------
Tony Hill
hilla underscore 20 at yahoo dot ca

keith wrote:

On Thu, 02 Sep 2004 08:01:40 -0500, chrisv wrote:

keith wrote:

On Wed, 01 Sep 2004 20:39:34 +0000, Bill Davidsen wrote:

Most people don't buy them to run benchmarks, nor are most applications
limited by CPU, at least not between similar AMD vs. Intel models. Even
gamers will admit that the human eye is the limiting factor in how many
fps they need.

Will gamers admit this? Most lamers are of the same ilk as audiophools
and buy the wquivalent of Litz-cable, or oxygen depleted copper
monster-cable for their speakers.

BS. Not even close. The typical gamer is infinitely more analytical
and logical about hardware than the golden-ears you speak of.

Ah! That's why they buy illuminated fans and cases with windows (the
see-through kind) in them. ;-)

But they don't delude themselves into thinking that their illuminated
fan gives them more fps. The overclocker crowd can get a bit silly,
but even they usually keep at least one foot on the ground, with
regards to cooling, etc. Plus, they rely of quantitative measurements
to verify the results of experiments. Try getting a golden-ear to do
THAT. 8)