lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1997]   [Nov]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe:Stops Pentiums dead (and how does Cyrix perform?)
    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----

    It does kill this P133, but we all know that.

    I wonder what the changes are of Intel releasing a fix? It probably isn't
    bloody likely, but suffice to say that if they don't I for one will never,
    ever buy another Intel product. First they broke the FPU, but "only
    technical people" were supposed to care, though they did offer
    replacements after getting roasted on the Internet and in the media
    (though I don't know what somebody had to do to get one. Anyone?). Now
    they've screwed up and got a "shut down internal clock" option in their
    chip.

    I wonder what the chances are of Intel issuing a sane recall? It probably
    isn't bloody likely, but suffice to say that if they don't I won't be
    buying or recommending Intel products anymore. First they broke the FPU,
    but "only technical people" were supposed to care. They did finally offer
    a replacement after getting roasted on the Internet and in the media. Now
    they've accidentally included a "shut down internal clock" option in their
    chips.

    Anyone know what people had to go through to get the FPU fix?

    The last thing I want is my machines crashing continuously because
    somebody telnets in and nukes my boxes. If Intel is going to let me haul
    my CPU into a local electronics store some weekend and get it fixed free
    of charge that's one thing. If they expect me to upgrade to a PPro or PII
    because they screwed up then that's quite another.

    Sure, shit happens, and I don't much mind so long as it doesn't happen to
    often and the defecators (in this case Intel) manage to clean up after
    themselves without putting me through too much trouble.

    Suffice to say that if I have to buy another set of processors they're
    probably going to be Cyrix (assuming Cyrix doesn't have a hosation like
    this) or K5s (ditto) and the next slew of computers I buy won't be touched
    by Intel. Of course if all three designers are just as bad, oh well.

    In any case I think I probably echo the sentiments of a lot of people.

    Does anyone know if the Cyrix chips have fallen into holes like this,
    whether Cyrix has replaced them in a sane and customer-friendly fashion,
    and if Cyrix has gotten their FPUs up to snuff? One of the main reasons I
    didn't get a Cyrix in my home machine to begin with was the (alleged?)
    FPU slowness.

    processor : 0
    cpu : 586
    model : Pentium 75+
    vendor_id : GenuineIntel
    stepping : 12
    fdiv_bug : no
    hlt_bug : no
    sep_bug : no
    fpu : yes
    fpu_exception : yes
    cpuid : yes
    wp : yes
    flags : fpu vme de pse tsc msr mce cx8
    bogomips : 52.84



    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: PGP 5.0i
    Charset: noconv

    iQEVAwUBNGS0b4GWQdtxhoVNAQG3RggA26QJ30Lr+n8oWDExPkWqjLa36rl3ZwaL
    vVY4Z9IOvPL1JCN+2R6vTrKHGKY2gDM+37Yqvpb9jiI/Xi+0oSddyXoZMKktsw0I
    8+ro1LpNdMldd0f7KKlaAZxTtmhFHHkVVHPbPBjuE8HzGZfn8stZOC+w1IdmsKtG
    DlNNM+e8TYyoOVACXkUqUb1DNdxomBqCBNlQm9aVXP+tftMcHQvK+ookgkzGKr/E
    wxu1gHdBZ+BfFJov9lXqhPnIgLkOS6GEnjJXZLWfY0jEZtgrdQi/HZ8K/fEkNUgA
    al2Mv74ongNhR1ND/+5u52OskUs4IQ/n1pCyrDct5FFO9h1/wTvYvw==
    =Kzsh
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:40    [W:0.024 / U:94.376 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site