SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)
INTC 47.14-6.1%Feb 10 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: kas1 who wrote (9745)1/31/1997 3:46:00 PM
From: Tony Viola   of 186894
 
Andrew, someone asked:

>Is there a quality difference between CPU's (pentium vs. Cyrix vs. AMD ?)<.

You answered:
i'm not an engineer, but in my experience, the answer is no. if a chip isn't doa, it will most likely run forever, barring overheating.

First, this probably has nothing to do with Intel stock price. But, anyway, well, I am an engineer by trade and I disagree about there probably being no difference in reliability, vendor to vendor.
There are many failure modes that don't necessarily manifest themselves as DOA. Wafer contamination, the old pin hole defects, and many many more problems I know Paul can add to the list, can result in early life failure (or later life failure). Different vendors of the same type of chip can have markedly different quality in their processes. I've seen a little reliability data for Pentium Pro, none for AMD or Cyrix. However, I've seen a lot of data for DRAM and SRAM, which are made from the same silicon and have similar processing steps. MTBF for these varies significantly, vendor to vendor. In our experience, the best have consistently been the Japanese (Maybe now the Koreans also?). (Fortunately, for many reasons, including the trade deficit, by far the #1 CPU chip guy is about 1.5 miles from where I'm typing this. So, we can buy American).

I would guess that Intel is at least tied for the best with AMD. Cyrix would be last, IMO. There have been allegations of Cyrix chips made at the IBM foundry being marked at the higher of two possible clock speeds when there may not have been enough margin for reliable operation. Chips made on the same line, but intended for IBM "branding", would be more conservatively treated in the same situation and brand at the lower speed. If you overclock or are right on the hairy edge of crashing (no margin), this translates into probable lower MTBF at the best, early life failure at the worst. If the allegations about Cyrix are true, who knows if they are cutting corners elsewhere? Intel, with their complete dominance, can't afford to, doesn't need to!

Anyone have any data on MTBF of Intel vs. AMD vs. Cyrix chips?

Tony
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext