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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Ali Chen who wrote (25801)11/11/1997 12:41:00 AM
From: Elmer  Read Replies (3) of 1580448
 
Ali -
Clueless one, I responded to your post with references.
You must have missed it. Not suprising seeing as you have trouble
reading. The link you refered to has nothing whatsoever to do with
the original point, clueless one. This involves the Pentium Pro and
Pentium II processors and they are not affected by the bug you are
blowing your horn about. In addition you are once again proving
yourself wrong. You are the one who insisted that reprogrammable
microcode wasn't available and now you post "proof" by pointing
to an article that discusses reprogrammable microcode. Real
smart Ali. This is as good as your "proof" that the 440LX chipset
was the "slowest" when you showed us all that it was only a little
faster than the fastest. Now you prove that there is no reprogrammable
microcode by pointing us to an article about reprogrammable microcode.
Brilliant!

When are you going to condem AMD for existing bugs running perfectly
legal code? No need for viruses, no need for hackers. Just like the bug that cost Intel $500 million. The K6 is bug infested right now
and all you can do is condem Intel for undefined operation of illegal
hacker code.

Are you entitled to a refund for your bug infested K6?

amd.com

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