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: Paul Engel who wrote (25706)	11/8/1997 10:16:00 PM
From: Andrew Subda	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1579371

Paul. Why did you lie about Albert beeing your friend. You are not on Albert mailing list. Albert ask me, and probably all on his list to uncover one more of your dirty and petty sides. I understand, that you are hired hand for the Big Company. Dirty hired hand as a matter of fact. What they are using to walk you up any time somebody on the world is taking something positive about AMD and Cyrix? Pii 300 with electric shock? Or kick in the proper place? Or is it the mental state to serve, to serve, to serve. I can understand your followers, working days and nights for one pat on the head from you, but you cannot expect anything else from "idiotus pospolitus", like MakeIt, Fake It (so), StockFrock etc. No need to answer, your posts are filtered as well as the above bunch, but the thread may ask you for explanation about Albert. Andrew

To: Paul Engel who wrote (25706)	11/9/1997 1:08:00 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1579371

Paul Yousef, <to corroborate Yousef's continued position that Intel's process technology has a lot more capability than AMD's.> You both are clueless about process technology and it's capability. Yousef's "position" is correct the wrong way around. You both are totally incapable to take the design complexity into account, and your "conclusions/envisions" are therefore wrong as well. I believe this lack of analytical abilities is the main reason why you both are unemployed ("independent consultant" and "retired hobbist"), and socially useless.

To: Paul Engel who wrote (25706)	11/9/1997 10:32:00 AM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1579371

Paul; Can you not overclock safely for heat reasons by using active or extra coolling to keep the actual die temperature within spec, or within an allowable excess?. This was commonly used years ago. I suspect that if the faster speed makes some timing spec get exceeded that this would be the actual limit. In effect both overheat and running out of timing specs are two ways the chip can fail to operate at a higher speed, and only the heat can be palliated to some degree. Can the timing be helped by slight over voltage to make transitions harder?, this would worsen the heating, but by judging the two you could run both at the limit. What would that limit be? What are other things that go wrong if you try to run faster?(apart from external failures) Bill