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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (163616)	4/6/2002 5:36:07 PM
From: Charles Gryba	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

wbmw, that's not what I said. Of course, the more exhaustive a bug search you do the more bugs you'll find. What I think is that the verification procedures for both manufacturers is probably similar plus you have the OEMS doing their own verification before they ship their product. Don't you think the OEMS test all the popular software out there and then report their findings to the cpu manufacturer? All I am saying that given the same verification procedures, the Athlon may be the better design when it comes to bugs ( and other things ). C

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (163616)	4/6/2002 9:32:10 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: If you think that all the bugs in the Athlon can be found in the 4 listings in the errata list, then you are naive. LOL!!! Since P4 has 17 known bugs, but Athlon XP only has 4, you are convinced that it means AMD missed finding some bugs. Intel is the company that shipped, then recalled, 1.13GHZ PIII, MTH, 3 Rimm motherboards, 4-8 way server chipsets (I forget which model, but the ones where Dell shipped some units before Compaq found the problem). For some reason, Intel stuff has a lot of bugs, and Intel misses finding key bugs quite often. I don't know why this is, and, given their resources, it's surprising to me, too, but those are the facts.