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: Elmer who wrote (43126)	12/10/1998 10:48:00 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572268

Have you notice the words "THESE ERRORS" in the original message, in the context of the 350-bug discussion? What makes you feel to conclude that "it fails" to function otherwise properly, except the intermittent boot problem due to acknowledged Win95osr2 timing bug? "Gee... Whee..." What argument other than this do you have?

To: Elmer who wrote (43126)	12/10/1998 1:40:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1572268

Elmer. The End of overclocking coming soon. Can an Intel employee let me know if this Karl Andrews really works for Intel? Use e-mail.. The Latest Stuff @ the OCP Got some news you freak? Well don't be hoggin' it! Mail it HERE. Remember, to win cool prizes, check out the BenchMark Rodeo!! December 9, 1998 12:15pm More on the demise of OverClocking.... This time from an Intel employee. Date: Tue, 08 Dec 1998 09:41:16 -0800 From: Karl Andrews <kandrews@ichips.intel.com> To: DV-L@dvcentral.org Subject: Why not to overclock Message-ID: <366D64BC.65F948A@ichips.intel.com> Let me say up front that I work for Intel, and that this is not an official Intel statement, only my opinions. That out of the way, I help design microprocessors, so maybe I can shed a little light on this subject. Yes, with the currently available crop of chips, you can usually get away with moderate overclocking. What you are trading off is reliability and chip life. There are certain semiconductor failure modes that are speed sensitive. We design chips with these in mind for a certain (rather long) lifetime. Overclocking reduces this, but many people don't care as they will have traded in their machines long ago. We care, because we honor the warranty on that chip, no matter who has it now, so overclocked chips cost us extra money in support. Also, faster chips can be sold for higher prices, right? When we test manufacturing batches, we sort them by maximum reliable speed. If a 333 MHz chip was capable of running reliably at 350 or 400, don't you think we would be selling it at that speed, with it's correspondingly higher price? Whatever you may think of Intel, we aren't stupid. The speed-sensitive error causing that lower speed rating may or may not be significant to your application, but how do you know? We don't label the chip with the type of error, only the maximum reliable speed. Anyway, the newer chips coming out soon have more effective speed control methods built into them, so overclocking will soon become a dead subject. Why do we go to such great lengths to prevent hobbyists from experimenting with their personal property? Ah, if that were all it was... There are people who make their living by grinding off the speed labels on our chips, and reselling them at higher prices. The unsuspecting buyer of a system with one of these chips doesn't know this, they were only interested in maximum speed at minimum price. Then when problems pop up, who has to pay for replacing that chip? Not the overclocker, they are offshore somewhere; and not the screwdriver shop that assembled the system with grey-market components, they too are long gone. Who is still around to catch the blame? Intel. That's why we care. It comes out of my paycheck in the form of a slightly smaller year-end bonus, so I care, personally. - Karl ------------------------- Well, if that don't sound like a nail in a coffin, I don't know what to tell you......bummer eh? I wish Intel could come up with a way to simply tell if the CPU was ever OC'ed, that would take care of the warranty issue. Makes you wonder if their official, "We don't care what you do with the CPU in the privacy of your own home", is for real or not........... ---- If anyone wants a URL I'll post it.