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 (86760)	1/12/2000 5:58:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Respond to of 1576638

Petz, More woe for Intel. Unfixable bugz again Intel of bug, Sweat & Tears, part of II In December the announced floating decimal point error in Intels Pentium III processor (Erratum 56) concerned only the older Katmai versions, the newer copilot by mine processors does not indicate it. The latter was only one error in Intels Specification update from the December 99, which is corrected meanwhile. This error in Katmai systems can be recovered easily by a Microcode Patch. Whether your Pentium III Katmai system further of the error E56 threatened or a Microcode Patch is installed by the BIOS already, can check you with the new version 1.10 of ctpnfo(Download 222KByte); it outputs additionally Microcode ID and Platform ID and identifies also the copilot by mine. Stupidly only that Intel in the newest Pentium III Specification Upgrade from 11 January 2000 must indicate a further calculation error E59 " MOVD or to CVTSI2SS following zeroing INSTRUCTION CAN cause incorrect result ", which can occur with a certain program sequence and according to documentation all Pentium III processors concerns. Hiergegen does not even seem to have grown a Microcode herb, so that the only possible Workaround exists in the avoidance of the which is applicable sequence. Thus the error weight of the E59-Bugs moves all Pentium processors close already substantially more near to those of the famous FDIV bug, which arranged Intel 1995, to exchange (as/ c't) translator.go.com Bill

To: Petz who wrote (86760)	1/13/2000 12:17:00 AM
From: Charles R	Respond to of 1576638

John, <Chuck, received the following PM about low price Athlon 650's: John you wrote: "Goutama, re:<Athlon price drops> HUGE! Based on this, I think AMD must be planning on selling 3M Athlons in Q1, rather than 2M. I don't understand the huge gap between 650 and 700 MHz ($299 to $499), but then again, these single vendor prices are like futures prices and are subject to change. Thanks for putting this table together every week. Petz" Maybe the 650's are the old 250nM chips and AMD's trying to move them out of the Channels to make room for the 180nM 600Mhz, and 650Mhz as rumors are 500 and 550Mhz are gone. > I would put this under the "much ado about nothing" category. The speed grade/price curves have been highly non-linear for a while now. I see this pricing as perpetuation of that trend. Chuck