Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

AMD CONFIRMS CPU FLAW!

Last response: in CPUs
Share
July 24, 2001 4:21:41 AM

oh yeah, It's getting stale in here so I decided to cheer you ppl up a bit.

<A HREF="http://216.194.77.198/news/2001/july/010723_AMD_JPEG/01..." target="_new">AMD cpu's make your jpeg's and mpeg's look like [-peep-].</A> nice link Van! oh btw stfu about the P4 throttling already! you made it seem like it was rampant and now you're back peddling and accusing Inquest? please.

Update! 7/24 changed title. was AMD REVEALS FLAW!
Update! 7/27 added "n" to cofirm LOL!
"AMD/VIA...you <i>still</i> are the weakest link, good bye!"

More about : amd confirms cpu flaw

July 24, 2001 4:50:53 AM

Yes, it's nice that AMD stands behind their product and helps the consumer resolve the issue.
Wasn't there an Intel cpu a while ago that had problems and Intel wasn't going to recall it????
July 24, 2001 12:38:55 PM

By the way, just to correct your english, it should be .... AMD/VIA you are STILL the weakest link, good bye!

<b>"These are my thoughts, your mileage may vary."
Related resources
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 24, 2001 12:50:32 PM

Itsy bitsy lil flaw! Miniscule compared to some other chipmaker...

<font color=blue>Is there a forum </font color=blue><font color=purple>for forum addiction?</font color=purple>
July 24, 2001 1:32:14 PM

Oh "it must be on the internet so it's true". You are a complete idiot! Number one there is nothing about it on AMD's site. If it isn't on AMD's site why would you believe it? You're the type of person that would read at a site you believe to be credible and read "Aliens Invaded" and believe it cos you're a moron!

If you knew anything about computers, which by this post proves you know jack [-peep-] about computers, you would know that cpu's don't look at a jpeg or mpeg file and say, "hey it's a jpeg lets slow down and make the jpeg look bad". If that article was true it would affect everything not just jpeg and mpeg rendering! The chip would run slower then a normal chip. Now because it says it effects how mpegs and jpegs are rendered and AMD has nothing about it on there website i conclude the site is a hoax or a very stupid journalist who has no clue what a computer is wrote that.

What crap! God you people are naive and believe anything thats on the web without taking logic into consideration. Entirely stupid!

void renderJPG(){
int yourIQ = 345;

if(IsJPG(renderBadly)){
int newIQ;

asm{
mov ax, yourIQ
xor ax, ax
mov newIQ, ax
}

cout << "your IQ = " << newIQ << endl;
}

LOL!

edited cos there was a syntax error lol!
<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by xxsk8er101xx on 07/24/01 09:36 AM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 24, 2001 2:27:04 PM

I'd have to agree. The nice man with the family named Gordon can't possibly be wrong, right? After all, he has a PhD in Computer Science and was one of the people who helped INVENT the microprocessor, for crying out loud!

Wait, no he didn't. Maybe it's actually some punk kid in Israel who decided to grab the www.gordonfamily.com domain and make up a few rumors. Hmm...possibly, but unlikely.

If someone knew as much about processors as this guy claims to, why would he be using a K6-2? Especially since he JUST NOW noticed the problem, he can't have had it for very long. And he claims Durons and Athlons have the same problem? You mean to say that he has a flawed chip of all three types (or knows people who do), but the problem hasn't even surfaced until now? I doubt it. The chances are just not in this guy's favor.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
July 24, 2001 5:10:34 PM

funkdog, thanks! that sound much better now, sounds Just like the bitch on tv! :-)

"AMD/VIA...you <i>still</i> are the weakest link, good bye!"
July 24, 2001 5:54:23 PM

yo dorky, all jpegs and mpegs rely on algorithms to display properly, if your beloved cpu has a flaw then these types of images will display much like the "L" sign on your forehead.

AMD has denied this for over 2yrs and now they admit it? wtf?

the fact that AMD has finally confirmed this and has relayed their finding via the <A HREF="http://216.194.77.198/news/2001/july/010723_AMD_JPEG/01..." target="_new">Van Smith website</A> is all I need to formulate my opinions and give you the bad news, too bad, boo hoo!

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
July 24, 2001 6:08:52 PM

Why do you insist on creating threads to start up flame wars...you know that there are hardcore Intel and AMD lovers out there and you are just pressing buttons!

And btw..both Intel and AMD as well as every other manufacturer of computer equipment has made a low quality product or recalled a product. It does not matter, because both Intel and AMD have released great products recently, especially AMD has improved greatly from where it used to be.

Instead of trying to cause trouble, why not have an intelligent discussion about the pros and cons of different products, because really the decision to buy one product or the other is user preference.

My System: <A HREF="http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=9417" target="_new">http://www.anandtech.com/mysystemrig.html?rigid=9417&lt;/A>
July 24, 2001 6:20:29 PM

Here is an email I received from Van of Van's Hardware, in reply to my request for proof of AMD's confirmation:

Quote:
The issue is so small, that I don’t think AMD is going to put up an official press release. Other than Damon’s remarks, this will probably be the extent of AMD’s statements on it. The company views this problem like it views any defective parts landing in the hands of consumers – it falls under their warranty and they support their warranties.

Regards,

Van



The way I read it? AMD HAS NOT CONFIRMED THIS IN THE LEAST, THIS IS PROBABLY A HOAX.
I could very easily be wrong about that, but come on, Meltdown, you have to do better than that.


-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
July 24, 2001 6:51:38 PM

If you read <b><A HREF="http://216.194.77.198/news/2001/july/010723_AMD_JPEG/01..." target="_new">his article</A></b> carefully, there is <b>only</b>
<font color=red>'that a <b>tiny fraction</b> of AMD K6-2, Athlon and Duron processors contain a flaw that leads to incorrect JPEG and MPEG rendering under certain narrowly described circumstances. '</font color=red>
and AMD will exchange defective ones.
<font color=red>…the testing methods in past production cycles of the AMD-K6®, AMD Athlon™ and AMD Duron™ processor families did not detect a small number of processors that exhibited a minor manufacturing issue that could potentially cause the distortion of JPEG images or MPEG audio/video. The issue is not design related and has been addressed through additional manufacturing tests AMD has implemented.

Since the problem was first discovered, we've received a very limited number of customer inquiries regarding this issue, and AMD has in each case made every attempt to resolve the issue. A very small number of AMD processors may exhibit this issue. AMD has updated its test measures, and we stand behind the quality and reliability of our products. We encourage any customer who believes they may be encountering this issue to contact their AMD field sales representative or AMD technical support. AMD technical support may be reached at (408) 749-3060.</font color=red>
If you're working in production industry, it is a situation that happens sometimes.
Are you so ignorant to realize that?


:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
July 24, 2001 7:07:03 PM

I love the downplay, "Only a handfull of processors".

Yet this problem spans all the current product lines.
July 24, 2001 7:14:18 PM

hey moron!!! do you even know what an algorithm is!?
guess what interprets your algorithm!? your CPU you dumb ass ignorant computer illiterate fool! Thats all the cpu does is take the machine language (do you even know what machine language is!?) and does whatever the machine language tells the CPU to do! There is no algorithm that controls JPG's in your processor you dumb f'uck it's all programmed by progammers who make the program to read JPG's!

What is your highest level of education in computer science!? I'm assuming thats your major since you believe you know what your talking about but don't have a frickin clue!

My sig is better then your's!
July 24, 2001 7:23:02 PM

lol i know it is a hoax! because i know how cpu's work.. it's a mindless tool that does whatever the code tells it too! There is NO and i mean NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! algorithm in the processor that controls JPGS this is stupid and anyone who believes it is a fool! The CPU just does whatever the code says 800mhz or whatever the speed is along with its fetch, decode, process, and store = 1 cycle. so it's doing 4 things in 1 cycle unlike a MIPS processor which does 1 thing per cycle.

off on a tangent but how else can i prove my credibility over this fool running his mouth with a pair of scissors in his hands and running a muck like a fool he is!

My sig is better then your's!
July 24, 2001 7:25:58 PM

Well lets see, I owned a K6-2 400, K6-3 400, currently own a Athlon 700@800 and a T-Bird 1200c @ 1.46. I've havn't any of those problems ever. Why don't we do a quick survey to see if this really is a present day problem. Oh, also built a Duron 650 system 7 months ago still going strong and no such problem. I've havn't seen it in my tour of AMD products. Maybe it is one in 100,000 chips that may exhibit this problem. Of course a nice looking famility with a Computer Genius with a Phd in computing using his K6-2? (speaks loudly his wisdom in choosing AMD over Intel) finds this problem a few years after the first K6-2 first produced. Well anyone else ever heard this or saw this??? In any forums? any news annoicements? considering that the K6-2s have been out for a long time?

<b><font color=blue>1.5</b></font color=blue> T-Bird
<b><font color=red>2.1</b></font color=red> P4 Speed<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by noko on 07/24/01 05:29 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
July 24, 2001 8:08:44 PM

>guess what interprets your algorithm!? your CPU

lol, guess what's <i>not</i> interpreting the algorithm correctly? your AMD CPU you dumb ass ignorant computer illiterate fool!

note, I never said that a cpu has a built in jpg algorithm, dorky.

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 24, 2001 8:09:33 PM

AMD Meltdown is just trying to discourage people from buying amd... you should just ignore his lame ass posts..
July 24, 2001 8:11:38 PM

so then you admit it's a hoax?

My sig is better then your's!
July 24, 2001 8:20:23 PM

Since thermal throttling is a fact plus proved by Intels own WhitePaper to prevent the CPU from destroying itself, also noted by a number of tests done on some P4's/mobo's with a 1.8ghz P4, this is a real problem. In addition the power requirement of a P4 1.8ghz cpu is 82-84w while the T-Bird 1.4ghz is 72w. Without thermal throtling the hot spots in the P4 would get excessively hot making the cpu worthless or defective. Maybe that is why so many benchmarks are so low with the P4. Also why you don't see to many overclocked 1.8 P4s, maybe because when overclocked they get thermaled throttled to Celeron speeds. So when you buy a P4 at 1.8ghz depending on mobo, temp, particular cpu you get, you may have a much lower performing cpu then expected. Amazing that Intel design gates in the cpu to shutdown sections to prevent overheating, sounds like junk to me and poor engineering. Looks like the P4 .18micron technology was rigged to get the P4 out to compete against the T-Bird. Except A T-Bird with slower clock speeds outperforms a much higher clocked P4 in virtually every benchmark.

I hope the Northwood gets rid of this junk engineering and offers a truely good cpu. Otherwise expect AMD to take a substantial market share away from Intel.

<b><font color=blue>1.5</b></font color=blue> T-Bird
<b><font color=red>2.1</b></font color=red> P4 Speed<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by noko on 07/24/01 04:24 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 24, 2001 8:29:03 PM

noko,

Clock speed isn't the only thing that affects processing speed. I know it's an older site but you should check out: <A HREF="http://www.emulators.com/pentium4.htm" target="_new">http://www.emulators.com/pentium4.htm&lt;/A>

*****

That's what you get for buying your computer based on <font color=orange>color</font color=orange>. :redface:
July 24, 2001 8:34:54 PM

Yes I've found that to be a very interesting article myself. Real world benchmarks also prove out the content of the article in more ways then one.

<b><font color=blue>1.5</b></font color=blue> T-Bird
<b><font color=red>2.1</b></font color=red> P4 Speed
July 24, 2001 9:16:29 PM

Quote:
I love the downplay, "Only a handfull of processors".

Yet this problem spans all the current product lines.


Nice try FUGGER, but no dice. Obivously it can be a very small fraction of all types of AMD processors, can't it? Think a little before replying.
Not that it matters. It's all a hoax anyway.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
July 24, 2001 9:56:17 PM

I don't know about that.
I have problems watching MPEGs or Divx on my Athlon system, however, it did it with BOTH my Athlon and Duron processors, and two different soundcards, under different OS's, etc. I assumed it to be a Compaq mobo issue, it may be AMD's fault.
I will look into this further.

----------------------
Independant thought is good.
It won't hurt for long.
July 24, 2001 10:12:00 PM

how can it be the processor? the processor just calculates 1's and 0's thats all it does! CPU does not make your mpegs or divx's or anything else go bad. Unless the chip is bad, in that case everything would not work not just mpegs and divx movies! It couldn't be the speed of your processor or the amount of RAM you have now could it? How about the software! What do you think the CPU does? think? hell no! programmers like me tell the cpu what to do! CPU has no freakin clue that your doing mpegs or looking at jpegs with porn on it!

It's a HOAX people!



My sig is better then your's!
July 24, 2001 10:16:53 PM

true true

My sig is better then your's!
July 24, 2001 10:41:26 PM

alright you arrogant little punk, you know NOTHING about me, nor my skills in computer diagnosis or repair.
take your little crusade and shove it up your ass.
I said I will find out, I didn't say it WAS DEFINATELY AMD, I said I have TWO processors that BOTH do it. I had personally decided it was a shitty motherboard, as I have removed and swapped EVERY DAMNED PIECE OF HARDWARE IN THE SYSTEM except for the motherboard, but it does make a funny coincedence, doesn't it?
in plain English, you know nothing of me nor my system so BACK THE HELL OFF and quit showing your brand loyalty and ignorance.

----------------------
Independant thought is good.
It won't hurt for long.
July 24, 2001 10:50:38 PM

u got some serious issues! Seek some counciling!


My sig is better then your's!
July 24, 2001 11:06:40 PM

you basiclly come back on me saying it CAN'T possibly be my CPU, calling me a liar or an idiot.
you may know more about CPU's than I do, you may know more programming, but you DO NOT know everything about CPUs.
do not attack my statements or person and we'll get along fine. do not assume ANYTHING.
and mostly, don't mess with me on a bad day.

----------------------
Independant thought is good.
It won't hurt for long.
July 24, 2001 11:20:53 PM

"It's a HOAX people!" - thats what i said at the end. by saying that i believe it is meant towards the general audiance who believes this mumbo jumbo hoax.

When you hear the word people do you think of people or yourself?

doesn't matter but i have not called you a liar or an idiot show me where i personaly said, "74merc is a liar or an idiot" .. if anything this amdmeltdown is an idiot! right? lol ... future note ignore amdmeltdown's post!

My sig is better then your's!
July 24, 2001 11:39:48 PM

I agree with xxsk8er101. AmdMeltdown Here to start flaming. And all of you others. Need to know what a cpu dose. What the Mother board dose and Ram. One cheap ram or cheap mother board will make the Amd thunderbird 1.4 and p4 1.8 run really slow.

Compaq and compusa oh dont forget Gateway crap. You get what you payed for. The Techs who dont know crap. So they build CRAP. And they use Cheap Parts to get that Great price LOL.

So 74Merc Its more Like you have cheap parts for your computer.

That why I build my own computers.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 25, 2001 12:27:10 AM

Dude, why is it you are the only one who resorts to using foul language? All you ever post is nonsense anyway. If it wasnt for AMD you would STILL be paying twice as much for an Intel chip and Intel would STILL be milking all of us for every last nickel (we would all be running PII's).

There is no try. Only do, or do not...
July 25, 2001 12:52:41 AM

Actually I've experienced something like this but it was with a celeron 600. It would not show any graphics properly at all and would lockup when i tried to play a game. When i called Intel they would not beleave me they kept telling me it was my motherboard even though I had tried a 566, a 600,and a 700 and they all played fine. They finally replaced it 3 and 1/2 months after i sent it in for replacement. I now use AMD.

I've done so much,for so long,with so little,I'm now qualified to do anything,with nothing,forever!
July 25, 2001 1:01:33 AM

Boring!
July 25, 2001 1:17:56 AM

yea, we all know Crucial, Creative and Asus sell crap, thats my other parts.
Compaq motherboard was my first choice of the cause of the problems, and I mentioned that.
Just think of the odds people, AMDMeltdown is a troll, yes, but what are the odds he would guess a problem I have only with my AMD system? meltdown is a pain most of the time, that doesn't mean that he is NEVER right, also, I respect Van.
and the only reason I bought this rather than build was because of the satellite that was packaged with it. Every part got replaced except for the sat. specific cards and the motherboard.

----------------------
Independant thought is good.
It won't hurt for long.
July 25, 2001 2:10:25 AM

Did you get the Dish Network/Starband Sattelite with the Compaq?How does it work and is it fast?I only have
dial up where I live and have been considering the sattelite
system,just looking for some real world results.Thanks

Rock out with your AMD out
July 25, 2001 2:51:16 AM

I have some experience with DirecPc satellite systems. I have been fairly impressed, as long as you know the limitations of the system. The downloads I have seen are generally in the 20-30 k/sec range, though I have seen them as low as 8 and as high as 90. I *believe* my boss just got in an order of the bidirectional units, but I'm not sure, and cannot tell you anything about the upload speeds they have. Right now, the upload is limited to how fast your phone line can handle it.

Another thing to be aware of is the latency issue. If you like playing games, go somewhere else for your connection. The satellite signal takes too long to travel to be effective in games, according to what I've heard.

Overall, I would say that satellites are the last option. The only reason I use them is because I am in central NE, and cable, DSL, and wireless internet are not viable options in the rural area I am at:(  I know it sucks, but there is nothing I can do about it.

<b>P</b>eople for the
<b>E</b>ating of
<b>T</b>asty
<b>A</b>nimals
July 25, 2001 3:04:28 AM

Thanks I believe it is about a 3 second delay,
so I would get fragged real bad online.The only
option I have out in the sticks is modem or
sattelite.The Dish Network/Starband says that
it is 400 k/sec download and 100 k/sec upload
no phone line needed, but all the systems I looked at
were beta and I was not impressed with the speed
that I saw.I was told that the final release would
be faster.So I dont know what to think at this time.

Rock out with your AMD out
July 25, 2001 3:17:28 AM

I'll pretty much ditto what he said, its ok if you know the limitations.
Starband, however, doesn't allow for the latency right, I think the bandwidth would be MUCH better if they did.
it'll go fast, stop, fast, stop, fast, stop...
30KBps, nothing, 30KBps, nothing...

----------------------
Independant thought is good.
It won't hurt for long.
July 25, 2001 3:36:50 AM

Hey guys....DON'T FEED THE TROLLS!

Fact of the matter it is a problem albiet a very small and nearly insignificant one. If one where to get such a chip and sent it back for replacement then whala problem solved. Simple as that. We have all gotten DOA hardware before be it Intel or AMD as long as it is replaced under warranty then whats the problem? We are talking about such an insignificant number here it really mystifies me, I mean to this date how many threads has anyone seen with this problem??

And 74merc....although I guess it is a remote possibility that this could be the source of your problem, I think the chances are much better of you winning the lottery then to recieve two such chips.

In any chip producing plant any number of chips produced off of a given wafer produces good and bad chips, this is referred to as yeild. The better the ratio of good versus bad the better the yeild. It appears that AMD may have not tested for this very rare defect that allowed some bad chips to be labled good, and this is what they have admitted. The exact number of how many of these made it through Q&A is unknown but certainly very very small as hardly anybody has heard of this problem until recently. Now we can slam AMD for this or we can applaud them for admitting to it rather than outright denying it ( which they easily could have done given the very small rate of incidence ) like so many others in the past have done ( did somebody say VIA? :)  ).

A little bit of knowledge is a dangerous thing!
July 25, 2001 5:11:18 AM

Why are u guys slamming meltdown? I know his posts can be annoying but I find this one totally reasonable. He found an article and posted it. I think the article is a hoax but it’s not like meltdown made it up. Give him a break.

As for the article think about it, how could a bug only affect jpegs? Is their some programming command that is only used when viewing a jpeg? I highly doubt it.


Thx & Cya


<font color=green> 1. e4 e5 2. Nf3 f6?? </font color=green>
July 25, 2001 5:53:53 AM

Quote:
And 74merc....although I guess it is a remote possibility that this could be the source of your problem, I think the chances are much better of you winning the lottery then to recieve two such chips.

yea, I know, I was thinking the same thing. the only component that has not changed is the motherboard, which I said in the first post, I said I would look into it and some jerk responds that its all a hoax and blah blah blah...
I guess some people would argue over anything if it was originally stated by AMDmeltdown.
btw, further reading into it, it doesn't address my problems, I had almost concluded it was related to my timer, but I don't give a crap right now...
although, if I put one of these processor's in my bro'in'law's box and his does it, I'm buyin tickets dammit!!

----------------------
Independant thought is good.
It won't hurt for long.
July 25, 2001 5:54:02 AM

Well, this isn't a flaw with the chip, and even if the article is true (which I doubt), it states that these affected chips are faulty parts.

What's your point in such a post, to try and confirm your constant *assertions* that AMD chips suck? Do we really need to count out the problems Intel chips and products have had, which were actual problems with the chips and not just faulty parts?

"Trying is the first step towards failure."
July 25, 2001 7:34:50 AM

Most people wouldn't slam Meltdown if he would just be civilized about the debate. If he would stop cursing and provide useful information with the intent of helping his fellow forum dwellers instead of just trying to pizz in everyone's cheerios, people wouldn't slam him- I GUARANTEE IT.
EX: Let us suppose AMD's processor DOES in fact have this flaw.

Meltdown says, "yo dorky, all jpegs and mpegs rely on algorithms to display properly, if your beloved cpu has a flaw then these types of images will display much like the "L" sign on your forehead."

I would say, "JPEG's and MPEG's rely on algorithms to display properly. If the CPU has a flaw then these types of images will not be displayed properly."
(NOTE: assuming I believed this statement)

See the difference? He doesn't post to learn. He doesn't post to help us. He only posts to antagonize AMD owners. I personally will never waste my time by replying to his posts. The only reason I read his threads at all is because I'm looking for people's responses that actually contain useful information like 74Merc's problem.

Fact is he (74Merc) has the problem. He said he's looking into it. I'm an AMD owner and I'm interested in his results. He's not trying to tick me off- he's just trying to solve the problem AND help us out.



Catheter and Caffeine IV are in place. Let's PLAY.
July 25, 2001 7:40:06 AM

Very Well Said!

:smile: Good or Bad have no meaning at all, depends on what your point of view is.
July 25, 2001 11:26:32 AM

-----------------------------------------------------------
Dude, why is it you are the only one who resorts to using foul language? All you ever post is nonsense anyway. If it wasnt for AMD you would STILL be paying twice as much for an Intel chip and Intel would STILL be milking all of us for every last nickel (we would all be running PII's).
-----------------------------------------------------------
Amen, Gargoyle. Agree with you 100%. A new system today is less than in the days of 486,Pentium, etc for one reason only. AMD.
July 25, 2001 2:41:19 PM

AMDMeltdown,
This is what Van Smith has to say:
Quote:
<font color=blue>FUD Snuffing AMD JPEG Issue

Posted By Van Smith

Date: July 25, 2001

With sad predictability an Internet sub-community of message board posters has attempted to magnify a news report made here Monday regarding a minor manufacturing defect in a small number of AMD's processors.

===================================

Misinformation War For Profit and Position

It is an ugly Internet secret that members of the investment community visit high traffic message boards posting responses made to drive down a company's stock value so that the poster can profit by shorting the affected stock.

Also known is that corporate insiders do much the same thing in efforts to aid their company's fortunes while undermining rival companies. Additionally, it is a possibility if not likelihood that some of these posters are paid to undertake such covert guerilla tactics judging by the sheer quantity of corporate FUD (Fear-Uncertainty-Doubt) dumped on some of the more influential message boards.

The true extent of these practices is not known since the Internet can afford a level of anonymity, but it appears to be widespread according to remarks I have gathered from a few webmasters. If you have any evidence supporting such conjecture, please contact me.

===================================

The AMD JPEG Issue

AMD became the target of such actions yesterday regarding the minor flaw in a few processors that would lead to distorted image rendering and sound problems in narrowly specific conditions.

According to AMD, the so called "JPEG issue" was a manufacturing test problem and empirical evidence supports this assertion. Even though the gap in AMD's testing procedures allowed a small number of faulty processors to trickle out over time, the fact that the vast majority of processors were fine despite this oversight, suggests that the problem is easily correctable. By implementing more specific testing procedures, effectively all chips exhibiting the JPEG problem can be caught without impacting yields with any numerical significance.

AMD asserts that it has implemented such measures to their manufacturing test process. Anecdotal evidence seems to support this, as no claims for newer Athlons having this flaw have been publicly made.

The gentleman who made the JPEG problem widely known via a report on his family's site, Ron Gordon, states up front:

This defect has been observed in only a small proportion of AMD microprocessors. The majority of AMD microprocessors operate correctly.

Later on in this webpage he states:

This problem does not appear to be caused by a fundamental design flaw with the AMD-K6-2 microprocessor, and the vast majority of these microprocessors operate properly. Evidently, certain sequences of instructions on some AMD-K6-2 microprocessors do not yield the correct results at the rated speed.

===================================

Propaganda of Misleading Comparisons

A few FUD posters, after testing the waters, have even tried to compare the apparently isolated AMD JPEG problem with the Pentium floating point division bug of several years ago. The Pentium defect was a design flaw in its division lookup tables that impacted *all* chips manufactured over a certain period of time and, unlike claims to the contrary by revisionist historians, the problem was an issue for *everyone* using the chips -- it was a matter of Russian Roulette if and when the problem would bite you. Furthermore, the problem could occur in programs as innocuous and commonplace as Windows Calculator or spreadsheets.

For instance any Pentium with the defective stepping would incorrectly execute the following division in Windows Calculator:

4195835 / 3145727 = 1.333 820 449 136 241 000 (Correct value)
4195835 / 3145727 = 1.333 739 068 902 037 589 (Flawed Pentium)

Intel was not forthcoming on this issue. Even though the company became aware of the problem when the design was undergoing validation, the chipmaker chose not to publish the errata or even disclose it to its closest OEMs. After the company finally admitted to the design flaw, it then initially required each customer to give Intel a good reason why the customer needed a new chip before the Santa Clara, California, company would send a replacement part.

Intel's actions were far from magnanimous. Only under intensifying customer outrage combined with IBM's threat to stop shipping Intel's chips did the company back down and offer replacements for all defective Pentiums.

===================================

P4 Throttling a More Apt Analogy

A much better comparison can be made between AMD's JPEG issue and the Pentium 4 chip that I witnessed throttling. I believe that the individual 1.7 GHz Pentium 4 that throttled (measurably slowed down under load) while running Quake III was a defective chip that eluded the chip giant's quality control measures for the still young design. I do not believe that this is a widespread problem and it almost certainly doesn't warrant a recall.

I do believe strongly, however, that other Pentium 4 chips exhibiting the same problem under the same circumstances probably do exist in small numbers. I trust that Intel, like AMD, will honor its warranties and replace these defective chips at the owner's request once these problems are spotted.

AMD, for its part, advises any users who have CPUs impacted by the JPEG flaw to utilize its technical support site or call them at (408) 749-3060. Mr. Gordon has a procedure for testing any chip you think might have this bug. If you are running Internet Explorer 4 or 5, simply go to his main AMD page and view the test images on his site.

===================================

<b><font color=black>Just Say "No" To Corporate Trolls</b> <i><font color=red>AMDMetldown take note</i></font color=red>

People who post on Internet message boards with the deliberate intention to incite responses usually for insincere or calculated reasons are known in Web parlance as "trolls."

Please keep perspective on the AMD JPEG issue and beware the corporate trolls.</font color=black>

</font color=blue>



<b><font color=blue>1.5</b></font color=blue> T-Bird
<b><font color=red>2.1</b></font color=red> P4 Speed
July 25, 2001 2:56:48 PM

Well spoken, even though you didn't originally speak it :) 

Quote:
also, I respect Van.


I'm not here to put Van down, but my point has been that his headline ("AMD Confirms JPEG Issue"), is misleading. I personally emailed him and got the reply quoted above.
HE HAS NO CONFIRMATION FROM AMD. Come on, people. When someone says AMD confirmed a flaw, and then refuses to offer proof when confronted, I think that's a bit suspicious.

-----------------
Whoever thinks up a good sig for me gets a prize :wink:
July 25, 2001 3:09:50 PM

I think Noko deserves tremendous props for pulling that one out. Thanks :) 

Don't feed the trolls guys... just hit 'em in their weak spot (the real facts), and maybe we can live in a FUD free world.

"Laziness is a talent to be cultivated like any other" - Walter Slovotsky
July 25, 2001 3:12:15 PM

You musn't be able to read. God damn, boy, I thought you were smarter than this.

The article even says it wasn't a design problem. I guess AMD CPU's aren't flawed after all. Ooh, woopie do 4 or 5 of them!!! Read the friggin' article before you post your crap about it, dumbass.

(Don't bother posting a reply because I'll just skip over it.)

---------
Grass is a beautiful weed.
Anonymous
a b à CPUs
July 25, 2001 3:34:38 PM

Hmmm, well said. Well I say we boycott all AMDmeltdowns posts from now on. Anyone who see's any of his/her crud posts give the only response possible.

<font color=red>"WARNING>>>Dont listen to this information, it is not the truth"</font color=red>

(Imagine a whole page of that response after his/her post)...lol

This is to warn any newcomers, as the rest of us are wise to AMDmeltdown. He/she only comes in to troll anyway, and Iam tired of the absolute extremes he/she goes to to find any rubbish information then distorts it. After many peoples request to substantiate the claims that are made , no reply is given with any intelligence.

<font color=blue>Is there a forum </font color=blue><font color=purple>for forum addiction?</font color=purple><P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by scotty3303 on 07/25/01 09:44 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
!