Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Petz who wrote (69918)	8/26/1999 1:16:00 AM
From: Scumbria	Respond to of 1572942

John, BTW, the reason Intel did not reduce their 600 MHz is because they are yielding so few of them that they will sell them all anyway. Tomshardware reported that NONE of his 600 MHz PIII chips would run more than half a day at 650 MHz and only one of them could pass Winbench even once. This means that under spec level conditions (voltage 0.05 below spec and maximum temperature), they are barely making the 600 MHz grade). This is a familiar sounding story. One x86 company is pushing their manufacturing to the limit, and is experiencing yield and reliability problems- in an effort to keep up with their competitor. However, there is a slightly different twist this time around.... Scumbria

To: Petz who wrote (69918)	8/26/1999 1:55:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572942

<Tomshardware reported that NONE of his 600 MHz PIII chips would run more than half a day at 650 MHz and only one of them could pass Winbench even once.> I don't know what Tom is going through, but the Pentium III 600 MHz system that I'm building is doing just fine. It's an OEM version with just an el-cheapo heatsink on it (although the cooling unit does have two fans on it). I've haven't tried running the system for more than half a day yet, but I have been able to run Winstone and Winbench on it without any crashes. I sent an e-mail to Tom asking him about his defective Pentium III 600 MHz chips. He hasn't sent me a reply yet. Maybe he's busy with Athlon stuff. But it kind of bothers me when he is talking about unstable Intel CPUs when the one I have is working just fine. If he wants to recommend against that chip in favor of Athlon, fine. But if he's talking about stability problems without following up on those findings, then he just proved to me that he's swung so far to the side of radical AMD supporters that he won't mind giving Intel an unfair shake. By the way, all Intel CPU's have a warranty (three years for retail, maybe one year for OEM). So if Tom's having problems, he really ought to take advantage of the warranty, unless of course he tried to overclock his CPUs. Tenchusatsu P.S. - I'm leaving nothing to chance, however. The system I'm building will have several fans in it (it doesn't yet), and the CPU temperature alarm has already been activated in the BIOS. Then again, the computer has a 300W power supply, a 10K RPM SCSI hard drive, a 7.2K RPM second SCSI drive, a TNT2 Ultra card, and possibly a second Pentium III 600, so it's going to be a space-heater. At least the computer is going to Boston, where my friend could use a space-heater. ;-)

To: Petz who wrote (69918)	8/26/1999 2:08:00 AM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 1572942

Petz - Re: "even non-technical talk radio hosts know that AMD has the fastest available chips. " That may be true - but Intel's CUSTOMERS have the next fastest chips. As long as AMD has the fastest - and keeps them at AMD - they will be losing money and market share. Paul