TRYING TO DEBUNK THG!!!

Well now its www.vanshardware.com not www.vanshardware/

Nice Nvidia and ATi users get a Cookie.... Yummy

shhhh. dont say that!
lets use the same inferior ill equiped motherboard again and again!

OEMs selling "High End"PCs with integrated video will be forced into Q3tournaments using a TNT2M64!

Actually crash, that point is still debated. It is unclear if the fujitsu board was using AMD's complete specification, they claim they were. But many sites have raised many doubts on this. The fact remains however, that the board does NOT support the thermal diode properly, and the new(or origional, I will agree with you it is a point of contention) thermal monitoring specification works properly EVEN when the heatsink is removed. As the numerous leaked videos clearly show.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

Thats a great take ncognito, if the video was pre thg test that proves they did not respecify the thermal logic and that fujitsu was at fault, not amd.


I agree that the p4's thermal solution is better, and that if you cant install a heatsink you should not be building a computer.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

I am not making this statement It is still possible that at time of production Siemens was using the current guidelines, then again maybe not. My argument is that AMD never intended those video's to be used to debunk the THG video's they were leaked out. Tom Claiming that his video caused AMD to all of a sudden design this chip and have it functional in less than a week is ridiculous. in fact on some of the video's you can actually see the onboard logic chip.


Another Cookie? Who is going to pay my dentist bill?

I didn't say that AMD catually ever released the video to the public. I think AMD at first offered motherboard manufacturers the cheapest solution, and when that failed, offered them a better solution. I don't think the modifications AMD performed to that test system were even in their published specifications, as AMD probably thought they would be too expensive to implement (aka, requiring a board redesign).

Back to you Tom...

I tend to agree, but that is pure speculation.

I don't think it is expensive at all to implement, after all they are able to add it to existing motherboards. The fact remains it was already developed and it was probably offerd as an option that motherboard makers choose not to use. but again this too is speculation.

What is not speculation is were MR. Meltdown is trying to accuse AMD of trying to debunk THG, that is just more of his FUD.

Even worse is all the AMD fanatics trying to tell everyone that current motherbaords would indeed protect the CPU's in case of a heatsink fall-off. Isn't denial a wonderfull thing LMAO!

Just like everything else, somewhere in the middle lies the truth. but what really erks me is the self righteous attitude expressed by THG.


Another Cookie? Who is going to pay my dentist bill?

I you want me advise bolth are in the faulth

1 Siem... Are suppost to test mobo before.
2 AMD are suppost the test/help/look at there protocol if there are as they want.When GM buy tire for there car they test them or it look like ford explorer.( in fact it was drive train prob).NISSAN new SENTRA SE-R spec V a fail some test and it in the market anyway.

Wisdom dont come with time
Meilleur chance la prochaine fois

I have no issue with this, although I doubt his intent...but that is irelevant he was right!

I definatly agree the results should have been published, but remember, that is not what I took issue with. the statement he made about the thermal diode in the xp was incorrect and the external logic chip proves this. It is capable of much faster detection then he gives credit for. So, then the integrity you speak off should force him to correct this error no? And that whole part about him patting himself on the back like he was responsible for a new piece of hardware being developed ( that already was in existance) if laughable. These are the things I take issue with.

Another Cookie? Who is going to pay my dentist bill?

I agree on both points. However, he should have checked first, before publising what a third party has to say as being the truth. Isnt that the foundation of any form of journalism ? Check your sources, and doublecheck them ? How hard would it have been to contact AMD or ASus or whatever other company to shed a light on this ? Surely Tom is smart enough to understant Fujitsu would prefer blaming the cpu than their board ?

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =

>Well now its www.vanshardware.com not www.vanshardware/

thanks dude, I changed it, been in a rush lately!

"<b>AMD/VIA!</b>...you are <i>still</i> the weakest link, good bye!"

how about another turn on this?
a purely money one, if AMD would use the thermal diode on chip, it would make it more expansive(plus the R&D for it), but thry put that responsability on the mobo maker thus making the mobo makers spend more on it.

<font color=green>
*******
*K.I.S.S*
*(k)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid*
*******
</font color=green>

try reading the link:

"A microcontroller DEVELOPED BY FUJITSU SIEMENS reliably protects your PC from overheating, thus preventing loss of data and damage to the processor."

This is not based on AMD's thermal protection.

They have a thermal diod on the chip now. The problem is that MoBo makers need to include a solution to speed down the chip or cut power to it in order to prevent burnout. Ultimately, it's the MB that controls the speed of the CPU, so AMD can't do much about it other than spec a solution and hope they put it to use.

486/SX 25 @ 256. Anyone have any dry ice to cool down the system?

The whole argument is that it DID NOT FOLLOW THE COMPLETE SPECIFICATION. Fujitsu CLAIMS they have thermal monitoring, but it is being debated whether or not it followed amd's specifications.
AMD has shown that the proper setup works, and the thermal diode can protect even in total hsf failure, the question, which you so conviently ignored, is whether or not AMD redesigned its spec or not. No one on this board knows what the answer to that one is yet, if you have links showing AMDs origional spec did not work, and fujitsu followed it(not some marketing page saying it has thermal management) then put up. If not join the debate and debate the RIGHT topic.

~Matisaro~
"The Cash Left In My Pocket,The BEST Benchmark"
~Tbird1.3@1.5~

First of I own an AMD processor, I think AMD makes better products than intel as of right now.

but umm.. Why is it Tom can talk much trash about a p4 or intel and there be little or no response from the forum accept by the intellamas, but all hell breaks lose if an AMD processor has a bad aspect.

Tom has seemed to be an avid supporter of AMD based on the fact they out perform intel counterparts. This is all fact. Also a fact that AMD has weak thermal protection. Even if AMD has the protection working now, its still inferior to the p4 (no data loss with p4).

<sarcasm>Yes its true! AMD can make mistakes and over look flaws! Intel is not the only micro-processor company capable of this! Wow!</sarcasm>

I don't see why people are trying to prove him wrong. The scenario in his lab did happen. People using new specifications by AMD for thermal protection are proving nothing to discredit this video. I don't think tom would blatently lie about the fact the board he used was in support of AMD's thermal specification either.

I am not personally worried about it though. I have never had a heat sink come off at all. I own 8 computers and have owned other computers for years, This has never happened. If it ever does, I'll fix it, but I see a several Hard drives going out way before that happens.

Computer: $2000 Internet Access: $40 Registering for forums: Free A good signature: Priceless

>I believe that fujitsu implemented a half ass thermal
>solution, and their mobo should be the one faulted, NOT AMD.

Hardly.. well.. look at it this way: the previous Athlons did not have this diode. If you build a board, you'd want it to work with Durons, Athlons and XP's, right ? You want a thermal protection that works for all of them for the most likely situations (fan failure). Thats what Fujitsu implemented.

If they would base their solution on the XP diode, they would have to implement yet another solution for the non-XP chips or give those no protection what so ever in the (much more likely) case of a fan failure. I think they did the sensible thing, however bad that looks on video.

Its not until ALL amd chips have this diode, that I'd expect MB manufacturers to make proper use of it, and throw out the external temp sensor & circuitry.

Just a thought though

= The views stated herein are my personal views, and not necessarily the views of my wife. =