Just thought I would mention, having read the thing now, that it did not actually catch fire. I guess I got that impression from the picture of a fire extinguished that accompanied the story. But here is what it *does* say
...a 3.6 GHz processor that needs to throttle for thermal reasons. The only viable solution is to get a thermal compound that is based on silver oxide, resulting in much better thermal conductivity. But let's be honest: How many users apart from those who are into tuning and overclocking really care about their thermal compound? So, should a vendor release a product that is only able to run at its maximum performance under special circumstances? The fastest processors certainly are very exclusive devices, but that should not cause more troubles than necessary. The customer wants products that simply work! Think about that before releasing faster products, Intel. Thats' still pretty scathing. Dana On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 19:27:35 -0700, dana tierney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > that about fits with what I am seeing in my research; that AMD till > now has been a follower and all of a sudden... they are the innovators > and Intel is doing the following. Just seeing what other people think. > I saw something on Tom's Hardware that I haven't had a chance to read > yet that seemed to be saying that the latest P4 actually caught fire > when they were trying to benchmark it... that's kind of a major flaw > <g> > > > > > On Fri, 19 Nov 2004 07:13:30 -0400, Angel Stewart > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >From what I've read, there isn't going to be a 4.0 P4 chip. It's not even > > >on the cards anymore. > > Just as all the reviews about the P4 said, it was a flawed design that > > Intel lazily brought out because they felt they owned the > > market. > > But faced with competition from AMD they are crumbling. They don't have a > > solid foundation in the P4 chips on which to build. They > > were getting by through brute force, simply throwing more MHz out, while > > the chips flaws lingered. And now they have finally hit the > > point where the poor design can no longer be hidden, heat and power > > consumption doomed the P4. I figure Intel must be doing some > > sort of drastic architecture re-design in the interim, and hence decided to > > skip this battle and cede to AMD for the time being, > > perhaps knowing that with its advertising machine it isn't going to loose > > totally. > > > > The only place that Intel still has AMD thoroughly beat, is in marketing. > > That is what has kept them going ahead of AMD for the last > > six years. > > Intel's marketing juggurnaut is something that so far AMD has not been able > > to match. > > > > I expect to see AMD's Dual Core solution out before Intel's and running > > better than Intel's as well :). > > > > -Gel > > > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Robert Munn [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > Multicore would seem to be the way to go, but maybe there is some other > > issue with that. Maybe they are hoping the next stepping in > > die shrink will help them. Where are they now, .13 micron? AMD really has > > Intel's nuts in a sling in a bad way. Unless they have > > some killer product waiting in the wings that they have kept totally in the > > dark, they could be trailing AMD at the high end for the > > foreseable future. > > > > They might be on a totally different tack though. What about the Pentium M > > architecture? If I was Intel, I would get every ounce I > > could out of that chip because the power profile is so awesome and AMD has > > nothing really comparable to compete head to head. > > Corproate PCs don't need 3.0 GHz chips much less 4.0 GHz, so why not push > > all low-power systems for now? > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Special thanks to the CF Community Suite Gold Sponsor - CFHosting.net http://www.cfhosting.net Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:137268 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
