SI
SI
discoversearch

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: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (55165)4/11/1999 8:06:00 PM
From: Process Boy  Respond to of 1572778
 
Tad - Re: Original Pentium

< I seem to recall that the problem with the original Pentium was about half a dozen incorrect values in the FPU lookup table. Does that really qualify as a typical design/process problem?>

I beleive this was classified as a typical example of "erratum", not a yield killing speed path error or design flaw. As my alias may indicate, I am not as familiar with problems that don't concern the fab world, and specifically, development. Speed path errors and critical design flaws affect the fab when material and equipment is sitting idle waiting for the mask fix associated with these type incidents. I do recall the mask change associated with the FPU bug, but it was made relatively quickly, as the fix was already scheduled to be incorporated as part of the device's next stepping, or optimization. Cirruslvr, I believe, was making a joke when he brought this up relative to my original post to Scumbria.

<I always viewed that as $475 million of bad carpentry (you know: measure twice, cut once) and horrendous PR sense. - Tad LaFountain>

I believe Intel and it's exec's have been very up front and contrite in the aftermath of the FPU bug fiasco. Intel, obviously, initially mishandled this incident in a very big way. However, I believe the culture of the company allowed it to do an about-face relatively quickly. I believe the incident is now looked upon as a valuable lesson learned.

PB



To: A. A. LaFountain III who wrote (55165)4/11/1999 8:15:00 PM
From: Process Boy  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572778
 
Tad - do you cover CPQ? Forgive my ignorance. PB.