Inte recalls 1.13 GHz P3s

[Maggi]

Hi Guys,

I found two articles on C-Net and ZD-Net ...

Intel has recalled its fastest chip--the 1.13-GHz Pentium III--saying the chip could cause system errors when running certain programs and at a particular temperature

Intel (Nasdaq: INTC) officials said the company is recalling the chip due to a problem that could cause certain applications to freeze.

The guys from HardOCP wrote an interesting article about the 1.13 GHz P3, before Intel pulled them back ...

Cheers,
Maggi

[The PIT]

Quack Quack Ooops. Amd will be pissing themselfs laugthing. Has the coppermine reached it's limits?

[Joel]

LOL. That's what they get for trying to beat AMD out the door with an unfinished product. They are slowly but surely losing the CPU race and they know it. So much for their strategy, years ago, of trying to kill the competition by abandoning the socket7 market and going to a slot1 design.

Joel

[This message has been edited by Joel (edited 29 August 2000).]

[High_Jumbllama]

Intel Advantages:
Industry Standard at least for now.

AMD Advantages:
Price!
Performance
Taking over the industry standard slowly and surely.
Supply
Persistent
Careful (For the most part)
Did I mention Price?!
Don't Restrict High End processors to OEMs
Upcoming 64bit processor ensures compatability with old software even while running new software.

I could probably go on. If only I had money to put into AMD stocks.

[cjolley]

I liked this part of Toms PIII review best....

"The fact that all three 1.13 GHz Pentium III samples (Kyle's, Anand's and mine) acted in the Linux compilation test as if they were overclocked processors combined with Intel's comment that these CPUs need massive cooling solutions leads to the simple conclusion that this processor is indeed nothing else than an overclocked CPU, only certified by Intel. Let's be honest, when it comes to overclocking of Intel processors, who would be more experienced than Intel? Intel did all the well-known things: Raising the core voltage (1.7 V to 1.8 V), hefty cooling, lowering of the temperature spec, slow BIOS settings. Doesn't that sound familiar? Maybe we should ask Intel to publish their very own Overclocker's Guide. I bet it will be a huge success!"

chuck

[The PIT]

Yep it looks like Intel are panicing and producing blunder after blunder. Crippled chipsets, crippled processors, processors that can't run at the speed they marked up at and sticking to duff memory technology thats to expsensive and doesn't offer much of a real world performance increase.

[Maggi]

You guys know what I'm really waiting for ?

That someone finds out how to reactivate the 2nd 128KB of each Celeron-II's L2 cache ...

[alessandro]

It seems that my choise of buying a T-bird 1000Mhz and a ASUS A7V next month is a good one.....

[This message has been edited by alessandro (edited 29 August 2000).]

[The PIT]

Just need Via to sharpen up there drivers and Intel would really be in deap shit. They can smell it and it's ballsing up their senses and they can see the pit below them. Are they going to carry on digging?
Now come on AMD release the new chipset.

[paulcs]

It certainly seems like AMD has repeatedly forced Intel's hand, and, as a result, Intel has made quite a few missteps.

Mistakes from the motherboard and chipset divisions are one thing. A blunder originating from the mighty CPU division is another matter entirely. And the fact that the recall of Intel's highend flagship product appears to have been facilitated by the actions of three hobbiest websites must be particularly galling.

It is a credit to Intel that they took this matter so seriously and sent an engineer to Kyle's house to look into the matter. I suspect a lot of other companies would have handled this differently.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[Nuno]

AMD could have the upper hand a long time ago. They needed the K6 relative fiasco to realize brute fpu power was all it was about. If they K6/K6-2 had a dual fpu, it would have been much better than the expensive Pentium MMX/PII at the time.

AMD just got it righ with the K7. A very slick design with lots of room for improvement. Well, if they strecth the K7 arquithecture as Intel did with the PPro core, they should be able to hit about 5Ghz, right?

But I´m still a bit disapointed with AMD for not selling slotA T-birds, offering an upgrading path for people with older boards. Not even Intel had the guts to do it.

[paulcs]

I suspect the problem isn't so much the lack of Slot A TBirds so much as the compatibility issues associated with the TBird and the KX133 chipset. If the two were more compatible, I suspect AMD would have had to of ramped up production on the Slot A TBird even further as demand would probably be higher.

I fried my Slot A TBird, by the way, but I liked the system so much, I ordered another.

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[Admiral]

You say AMD doesn't sell slot A T-birds, Nuno ?
Well, the only T-birds I can find here are 650(240$) and 700(250$) OEM slot A ones. I'm pissed that I couldn't find some socket A T-birds and that a month ago I had to go from a 450 Katmai to a 650 Coppermine instead of a 700 T-bird.

[This message has been edited by Admiral (edited 29 August 2000).]

[paulcs]

Where are you, Admiral?

Paul
paulcs@flashcom.net

[Nuno]

My mistake, I was´t being clear enough.
I´m aware that there are slot A T-birds, but they top at 700 Mhz. I already have a classic athlon 700Mhz, the performance increase T-bird offers, clock by clock, isn´t that much.

VIA sucks, there is no other way to put it. The only mistake AMD made was trusting VIA would be able to deliver it. They are soon fixing it with the 760. The KX fiasco is no excuse, AMD could have made slotA T-birds in all speeds. They could warn everyone and even staple a label "for use with AMD chipset only". And I bet they could have given a hand to all the OEMs with older 750 boards in stock (the best chipset still available for K7, IMHO).