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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Gopher Broke who wrote (19990)11/21/2000 9:17:20 AM
From: combjellyRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
"Do we know what Intel were trying to fix and whether it fixed it? "

According to the discussion on JC's BBS, there are some of the processor errata that can be worked around in the BIOS. Now it seems that at least one of those patches could have a performance hit...



To: Gopher Broke who wrote (19990)11/21/2000 9:26:55 AM
From: dhellmanRespond to of 275872
 
Why didn't they just admit that they needed to patch the BIOS to fix a last-minute bug?

Feeling rather naive here, thinking only that the chip was being blamed for a BIOS screw-up and just glad to see INTC being treated like an "AMD". Had not actually considered this was a pure cock-up!

d



To: Gopher Broke who wrote (19990)11/21/2000 12:37:54 PM
From: PetzRead Replies (1) | Respond to of 275872
 
Gopher, one of the errata on the Pentium 4 said "it is possible to fix this bug via a BIOS patch," or something to that effect. I couldn't find the errata on Intel's website but someone posted a direct URL to it.

Petz