Go Back   Hardware Canucks > HARDWARE > CPU's and Motherboards

    
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 05:59 AM
Exmortis's Avatar
Top Prospect
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 172
Default welcoem to hell Intel

But of course no one will care, hey this has all happened to them before and did nothing to hurt them. Intel is the teflon company of the IT world.

Fudzilla

Done beleive? see here:
http://download.intel.com/design/pro...pdt/320836.pdf

AMD suffered greatly, wonder if the media will over state and totally drive this out of control like they did with Phenoms? Probably not. Hell all those years Intel P3s and 4s sucked, reviews kept saying they were great processors to buy, why stop the trend now?
__________________
Exmortis's System

Corsair 600T White
Asus RoG Maximus V Gene
Intel i7-2600K w/Corsair H100
16GB Gskill DDR3 2400MHz
AMD R9 290X
OCZ Revo 3 240GB
OCZ Vertex 3 240GB
WD Velocirapter 600GB
LG DVD burner
LG Bluray Burner
Windows 7x64 Prem
Asus VE24/VE27/VE24
Logitech Z-5450 5.1 speakers
Corsair AX850 Gold PSU
Corsair K90 Keyboard
Reply With Quote
  #2 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 06:13 AM
SKYMTL's Avatar
HardwareCanuck Review Editor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Montreal
Posts: 11,663
Default

Fuad saw TLB and jumped the gun. Even Core 2 Duos had TLB issues but the main problem with AMD (and why it became so widely-discussed) is because they had to DISABLE the TLB in order to fix their problem. This resulted in significant performance loss in some cases.

This is much ado about nothing.
Reply With Quote
  #3 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 06:14 AM
Mark's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bolton, Ontario
Posts: 859
Default

Intel says no:

Do Core i7s have a Phenom-like TLB issue? No, says Intel - The Tech Report

Quote:
TECH REPORT:

"While browsing news sites today, we came upon several reports saying Core i7 processors suffer from a translation lookaside buffer-related erratum. Those reports drew parallels between the TLB bug that plagued AMD's first quad-core CPUs and a note in Intel's Core i7 specification update, which states in part:

In rare instances, improper TLB invalidation may result in unpredictable system behavior, such as system hangs or incorrect data. Developers of operating systems should take this documentation into account when designing TLB invalidation algorithms. For the processors affected, Intel has provided a recommended update to system and BIOS vendors to incorporate into their BIOS to resolve this issue.

We asked Intel PR manager Dan Snyder for the chipmaker's official take on the issue, and he replied with the following:

This is simply a pointer to a previous document written in April 2007. This document is an application note (advises on programming techniques) that programmers have had since April of 2007. This item in the Nehalem spec sheet is a web pointer, under the heading "spec clarification". The reporter who wrote this did not contact us and we will try to clarify this with him.

In other words, Intel shareholders probably shouldn't be losing any sleep over this.

For reference, the AMD TLB erratum caused data corruption and system hangs in periods of high CPU utilization, and AMD halted shipments of quad-core Opterons for months because of it. On the desktop, the company released a BIOS fix that crippled the performance of early quad-core Phenoms in many apps. All Phenoms with model numbers ending in "50" and all shipping quad-core Opterons lack the erratum, though.

Update: Snyder has sent us a new statement that makes the situation even clearer:

The "AAJ1 Clarification of TRANSLATION LOOKASIDE BUFFERS" document is a SPEC CLARIFICATION, and is simply a pointer to a previous document written in April 2007.

SPEC CLARIFICATION AAJ1 was initially added due to an issue on the Intel® Core 2 Duo processor which was previously corrected with a BIOS update; this issue does not impact the Nehalem Family of CPUs. There are errata on the Intel® Core i7 processor that relate to the TLB. These all relate to improper translations or error reporting, and all of those that impact functionality have been fixed via BIOS updates prior to Core i7 launch.
__________________



CHEERS
Reply With Quote
  #4 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 06:23 AM
Madeinedmundston's Avatar
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Edmundston,NB
Posts: 27

My System Specs

Default

I hate intel...i'm the reel AMD fanboy on earth but....i wish shangai and + will be good but...Q9650 rules!!!!

70% of chance that my next Platform will be I7 core :S
__________________


Reply With Quote
  #5 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 06:46 AM
Mark's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bolton, Ontario
Posts: 859
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Madeinedmundston View Post
I hate intel...i'm the reel AMD fanboy on earth but....i wish shangai and + will be good but...Q9650 rules!!!!

70% of chance that my next Platform will be I7 core :S
I'm looking at the end of next year before I make any significant changes and truly hope AMD does something as well.
__________________



CHEERS
Reply With Quote
  #6 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 10:32 AM
Oversized Rooster's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 609

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mark View Post
I'm looking at the end of next year before I make any significant changes and truly hope AMD does something as well.
I think they really will. In my opinion Intel's Core i7 is a complete flop. Why did they orient it as a server product? Most of the fanboys won't take advantage of this. Not to mention the ridiculous $350-400 X58 motherboard necessary to run an i7...

My own Core 2 Quad Q9450 at 3.8GHz kicks ALL of the Core i7 CPU's arses. Core i7 is quite the rip off right now. Sure it does a little more work per clock cycle, but we're still just in the 2.5-3.5GHz range which is nothing earth-shattering.

I have 7 PCs in my household. To support AMD, I've upgraded two of them to Phenom X4 9750 CPUs and one is an Athlon64 X2 5000.
__________________
Main: Intel 2600K @ 4.8GHz | Gigabyte P67A-UD7-B3 | 16GB Corsair DDR3-2000 | 2 x 240GB Corsair Force 3 in RAID1 | 2 x 4TB Hitachi 7K4000 | 3 x 2TB WD Caviar Black | Antec 1200 | Seasonic XP-860 Platinum | 2GB GTX 670 | 2 x 27" Asus VE278Q | Asus Essence ST | Win7 Pro 64-bit
Reply With Quote
  #7 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 10:52 AM
sswilson's Avatar
Moderator
F@H
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Moncton NB
Posts: 14,529

My System Specs

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oversized Rooster View Post
I think they really will. In my opinion Intel's Core i7 is a complete flop. Why did they orient it as a server product? Most of the fanboys won't take advantage of this. Not to mention the ridiculous $350-400 X58 motherboard necessary to run an i7...

My own Core 2 Quad Q9450 at 3.8GHz kicks ALL of the Core i7 CPU's arses. Core i7 is quite the rip off right now. Sure it does a little more work per clock cycle, but we're still just in the 2.5-3.5GHz range which is nothing earth-shattering.

I have 7 PCs in my household. To support AMD, I've upgraded two of them to Phenom X4 9750 CPUs and one is an Athlon64 X2 5000.
Keep in mind that this current release is very much bleeding edge and as such is targeted towards early adopters who are more interested in raw performance than in budget.

We're also seeing them easily hit 4.2G on air (3.0charlie has some screenies around here somewhere... :) ) so the clock-for-clock performance boost we see on stock clocked i7 chips is even more prevelent when compared to the majority of C2D Quads that would hit 4G at best.

I wouldn't call that a flop. :)
__________________
MSI Z87I Gaming AC / i5 4670K / 2X 4G Gskill 1866 DDR3 / XFX XTR 750 / EVGA GTX 680 SC+ 2GB / Intel DC S3700 200G / random 160G Sata HDD
Inwin 904 / Swiftech MCP655-b / Alphacool NexXxos XT45 120 Rad / 2X Scythe GT AP-15 / EK Supreme HF / Dell UltraSharp U2412M

Asrock AM1H-ITX / AM1 Athlon 5350 / 2X4G Gskill PC3-14900 / Intel 6235 Wi-Fi / 90W Targus Power Brick / 320G Seagate Momentus / Mini-Box M350 / 1X 22" Dell IPS / 1X 22" HP
Reply With Quote
  #8 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 11:24 AM
zlojack's Avatar
Hall Of Fame
F@H
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,057

My System Specs

Default

What's that they say about opinions?
__________________
[SIZE=3]
Reply With Quote
  #9 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 11:34 AM
Mark's Avatar
Allstar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bolton, Ontario
Posts: 859
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oversized Rooster View Post

I have 7 PCs in my household.
So you're the one responsible for our energy crisis. Do you mind shutting off your systems to I can watch an uninterrupted show of Battlestar Galactica without a power failure? Only Sunday nights...'ta hell with the rest of the week
__________________



CHEERS
Reply With Quote
  #10 (permalink)  
Old December 2, 2008, 12:24 PM
Hall Of Fame
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,221

My System Specs

Default

I don't care how big is the impact of this TLB and the minimizing done by Intel - what bothers me is how the HELL can you make the same mistakes more than once ? Who are the monkeys at Intel testing those CPUs, and one would think that something like that would be seeded out before release - makes you wonder about Intel's Quality Control. Of course AMD has had issues as well - Every company now is plagued with QC issues, I would expect this kind of shit from NVIDIA, AMD, etc, but a little surprised about Intel.

As to the thread title LOL - doubt it - if anybody is going to hell is AMD with VIA gone, and soon NVIDIA - and the general move to Intel - unless they step up to the plate and make better chipsets which I doubt.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes