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: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (33933)	7/4/1998 7:49:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573221

It may or may not come to anything. You speak of overclocked chips and that is not what is spoke of. The idea that a mark anyone puts on the case makes the chip become that is in error. intel may well sell the same chip marked for 300 and 266. You are not overclocking the 266 when you run it at 300, it is a 300 Mhz processor. There may be some that are geniune 266 as well. It will take some self incrimination by Intel to reveal that there was one bin used for two speeds. Analogising to other products like milk is also erroneous as these are commodities that sell on their naked specs.(% fat etc) like oil. I am not sure what stage this suit is at, or whether or not it will prosper. The buyers hurt is only revealed after it comes out that one company got 10,000 300 Mhz CPUs, marked as 266 to allow a lower price on them. Whether or not that buyer ran at 266 or 300 ??? He is free to do it as he knows what he has. A buyer who does not know will run at 266 or risk what he feels is overclocking(and we know it is not) Interesting to see how it affects Intel marketing, ie if they stop the practice. In any case how would we know?. Is there a data base of cpu specs versus speed, heat, current etc? It would take careful testing to see if this has happened. Bill