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

To: Petz who wrote (244066)	12/6/2007 8:04:58 PM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Petz: I OTOH have demonstrated an undocumented C2D crash likely caused by AI124 that did corrupt data, programs and caused an unrecoverable system crash. When you have to restore a server from scratch, that is very bad. Could it be that a confluence of system events caused a one in a million failure? Sure. Like I said, if it crashes like that again, I will no longer recommend any C2Ds for server use again. Of course then, it would be a common occurrence. Once a year is quite unacceptable. At some VARs, they may have thousands of such servers in the field. If a few failed like this one so spectacularly did, they would swear off them due to the bad rep alone, not to mention the large lawsuits that would result. Just think what a large mission critical server failure for 8-20 hours would cost outside of the rebuild itself. And it isn't the fact that it went bad, its that it corrupted data and that is what makes even having a hot spare (ultimate in most recovery plans)wouldn't help shorten the recovery time. Most here should give AMD, Kudos, for taking an aggressive stance to fix a very improbable error. Yet so many vilify them, yet do nothing to Intel which has worse errata, yet continues to ship. Although if Intel issued a C2D stop ship right now, many tier one and tier two OEMs would have their quarter go into the crapper. The service calls alone would bankrupt most of them. Thus they have a vested interest in papering over any C2D errata. The same happened with FDIV, if you remember. New CPUs though don't have that luxury. So Intel slips them quietly. Pete