Intel to stop 2.8Ghz release

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
N

nja469

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2002
632
0
18,980
Well well, it seems processors are getting too fast, according an article on The Register. It appears that Windows 2000/XP don't care much for Intel's 2.8GHz chip. Windows 2000 crashes, and XP performs badly. There's even a suggestion that Intel may quietly take the 2.8GHz prod out of the limelight. It seems unlikely to me, I suppose, as Intel had plans to blow past 3GHz by years end.

I wonder how Microsoft will address this issue? I mean we can't just stop where we are now! Noone will buy a chip that doesn't work. Can buggy Microsoft fix this somehow? ANY THOUGHTS?

Read about it at The Inquirer http://www.theinquirer.net/?article=4423<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by nja469 on 07/15/02 03:59 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
 
A

AMD_Man

Splendid
Jul 3, 2001
7,376
2
25,780
Wait, wait, wait! This can't be! Is this a hardware issue or a software one? It might be that the Northwood can't run at 2.8GHz at 1.5V.

:wink: <b><i>"A penny saved is a penny earned!"</i></b> :wink:
 
N

nja469

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2002
632
0
18,980
According to the article, it's the Windows 2000 and XP software, not the hardware. I have no idea about windows 98, but ick.. who wants to use that bag of old code.

Also, I don't think it has anything with the chips voltage, as the article also stated this problem affects Athlons to some degree at high clock speeds. This is really crappy, I mean something needs to be worked out here! We have faster and faster Pentium 4's coming - AMD's Barton, which according to an Article on the register yesterday AMD engineers said it won't have a FSB increase, the hammer will, but the barton will use hammer optimizations and, get this, 128K L1 cache and 512K L2 cache! Intel's Prescott chip, which is supposed to be a speed demon. Also we have the clawhammers, but maybe XP 64-bit isn't affected? I don't know, I do know this is crappy if operating systems become a limiting factor in processor speed scaling. What's next? Memory or hard drive transfer rates get too fast for windows?! Blah.... thoughts ppl.
 
C

chuck232

Distinguished
Mar 25, 2002
3,430
0
20,780
I think that <A HREF="http://www.sharkyforums.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=144407" target="_new">this</A> is a good decription of the article. BS.

:smile: Falling down stairs saves time :smile:
 
I

imgod2u

Distinguished
Jul 1, 2002
890
0
18,980
This is a problem with Windows and occurs with processors faster than 2.4 GHz in clockspeed. Microsoft does have a hotfix for this. Just search the knowledge database.
 
N

nja469

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2002
632
0
18,980
Well these chips currently running at 3GHz, etc are overclocked. The FSB isn't at stock speeds, etc. This doesn't seem to be BS, as Microsoft seems to have noted some problem somewhere. No one has an actual 2.8GHz or better chip to actually confirm/deny it. We'll have to wait and see! In the mean time I'll ask them over at the inquirer if they're pulling legs or not.
 
N

nja469

Distinguished
Jun 23, 2002
632
0
18,980
We are still waiting for Mr Intel to respond. Called them around 9.00 am this morning.

Mike Magee


-----Original Message-----
From: Nick Arvanitis [mailto:nja@buckeye-express.com]
Sent: 15 July 2002 22:47
To: mike.magee@theinquirer.net
Subject: Processors getting too fast for Windows Article


Simple BS or truth? If truth, can bug monster microsoft fix the issue. What would be next, RAM and hard drive transfer speeds get too fast for windows? A response on the validility of the article would be appreciated. Thank you.
 
lhgpoobaa

lhgpoobaa

Illustrious
Dec 31, 2007
14,462
1
40,780
LOL
he is probably on holiday

wouldnt be the first time that Microshaft winblows couldnt handle some piece of hardware.

but personally i think this story looks like [-peep-], smells like [-peep-] and well... i aint gonna taste it!


Proud owner of the <b>Beige Beast</b> :lol:
 
K

kamo

Distinguished
May 3, 2002
67
0
18,630
I saw a very cool signature (sorry I didn't remember the user) which is just in place
"Why use Windows, when you can use doors"
or something like that :cool:

:wink: <font color=green> The second time is always better than the first :wink: </font color=green>
 
H

Hoolio

Distinguished
Jun 26, 2002
291
0
18,780
Just a couple of things.......

1. The k6/2 300 problem in 95, it was caused by some sort of loop that the patch removed. Can someone remember?

2. Didn't someone overclock a processor to over 3Ghz? Hmm so what is this problem?
 
B

buddry

Distinguished
Mar 20, 2002
1,642
0
19,780
All kinds of people do, and I don't think they are having any problems.

<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=white>bless</font color=white> <font color=blue>the</font color=blue> <font color=red>U</font color=red><font color=white>S</font color=white><font color=blue>A</font color=blue>
 
H

Hoolio

Distinguished
Jun 26, 2002
291
0
18,780
Maybe intel have hit a rut, like the Pentium III 1.13Ghz.

Maybe the intel pentium 4 northwood architecture has not scaled as far as they wanted. oh this could be interesting, or it could be something really trivial, or lies many lies.
 
S

SammyBoy

Distinguished
Mar 16, 2001
689
0
18,980
'Cept that the P4 NW has been able to scale well beyond 2.8GHz, abliet with exotic cooling. But even with air, many people can reach 2.8GHz. Either this is BS, or it is a software problem. Maybe its like the old Win98SE patch that slowed the shutdown of the computer to give the harddrive time to move all the data in its cache back onto the harddrive. If I remember correctly, this was caused by the 1GHz+ processors, which were shutting Windows down too quickly for the HDD to react. Maybe the same kind of problem... something in Windows is moving too quickly for some piece of hardware to react, and Window's doesn't have any coding to tell it to wait for that hardware. Or, maybe it has issues with the multiplier. Who knows. Independent testing is required to figure out fact from fiction here.

-SammyBoy
 
A

aarona

Distinguished
Mar 11, 2001
99
0
18,630
3Ghz on aircooling has been done a long time ago on P4.
<A HREF="http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/repoe/sl67r-3059.html" target="_new">http://www.kumagaya.or.jp/~touma/repoe/sl67r-3059.html</A>
 
eden

eden

Champion
Oct 3, 2001
26,549
0
50,780
I wonder if they actually HAVE to slow down their P4 production due to a problem which actually exists!
That would mean the CH could come out with a fairly nice performance boost above it, yet its clockspeed would be far from 2.8GHZ!

Again that would be a very weird situation.

--
:smile: Intel and AMD sitting under a tree, P-R-O-C-E-S-S-I-N-G! :smile:
 
L

LED

Distinguished
Apr 28, 2002
511
0
18,980
I wonder if they actually HAVE to slow down their P4 production due to a problem which actually exists!
Click to expand...
I posted a link to anandtechs site that had an article dated the same date as the inquirers.......Anand reports nothing about delays, problems, or incompatability w/ MS OS's. Although they did move stuff around on-die recently. Its a bit smaller now. That couldve posed a problem, but I doubt it.

This sig runs too hot.
 
H

Hoolio

Distinguished
Jun 26, 2002
291
0
18,780
Well the only thing it could be is that they have shifted something around, because people have overclocked to beyond 3Ghz using P4A's and B's. And windows worked fine at that speed. So if it ain't MS (unlikely) then it is intel's fault.

It could be production problems or that they have moved stuff around and overlooked something. I am with LED on this one.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts

Moderators online

Share this page

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom