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: Jim McMannis who wrote (118992)	7/3/2000 5:09:16 PM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1577893

Jim(s), Re: If the problem can be fixed by swaping the 1000 Mhz Thunderbird with the 1000 Mhz Classic then it has to be a processor problem right? I believe this is Jim K's overly simple view of things, which neglects to take into account the more stringent timing requirements of the Tbirds. Gateway is using a Slot A mobo with classics and 'slocketed' Tbirds. The mobo is probably just out of spec on timing when running at 1 GHz. The fact that he would not consider the same tbirds running fine on different mobos (assuming such a test were conducted) to be sufficient evidence of exoneration of the tbird itself is what I find bizarre. I suppose he could claim that the other mobos were 'above spec' and that the tbird is actually slightly more demanding than spec'd, but other than that, I can't imagine what he could be thinking. And of course, there's an even simpler possibility. Power supply. A 1GHz tbird together with a GeForce-based video card is going to suck down a lot of juice. If the power supply is borderline, going from 900 to 1000 MHz might just cross the line. Doug

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (118992)	7/3/2000 5:28:04 PM
From: RDM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577893

If the problem can be fixed by swaping the 1000 Mhz Thunderbird with the 1000 Mhz Classic then it has to be a processor problem right? This means nothing as to the fault. My guess is that it is a board layout issue. The number of board layers, chip grounding, length of traces, size of traces etc. These board are very tricky and small changes make enormouse differences. The Thunderbird chip could a better chip for speed, such as having more bus drive current, and creat a problem with a bad layout that was able to squeak through with a lower bus (worse overall) chip.