i doubt it, thats nvidia's problemQuote:
Originally Posted by nemrod
Printable View
i doubt it, thats nvidia's problemQuote:
Originally Posted by nemrod
Try find me a shop in Belgium or even Germany that has one.Quote:
Originally Posted by kl0012
I will tell you the secret, no one has.
Few places in the Uk have both the AMD and Intel instock.
My QX9650 ES has been fine from day one, inc the others ive had a go with.
I guess Intel wants it to have more FSB OC as they aint too good for that
Errr... I think Intel realized that if they start selling those quad-cores now, they will completely demolish AMD and face those monopoly charges.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brother Esau
So they made a smart move, they attributed the instability to the new CPU FSB signaling putting the blame off the X38 chipset so it can continue to sell with existing CPUs and at the same time giving themselves enough headroom to push out X48.
Side effect of all this is backing off the AMDs chest so that they can catch some breath before the next round.
mmm perhaps a C1 stepping is on the way? hopefully it not only fixes the bug, but it also runs cooler and clocks a bit higher
Without competition theres no need to migrate to 45nm yet - they could clear out as much 65nm stock now on the mainstream products,then migrate fully to 45nm when the inventory is cleared - rather than selling the 65 and 45nm products side by side.
That sounds familiar... I'm sure i've read something about a B3 stepping from another company that does exactly the same thing. How is this different again?:shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by JAG87
then how come the ES samples worked on the 680?Quote:
Originally Posted by dduckquack
Microcode hadn't been changed yet. It was for the QX non-ES.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
I love mine, haven't had to swat a single bug to date.
4.2g 24/7... All's good.
Thats still a little shady,people are blaming nvidia and then there blaming intel.Now if people got them to clock with there ES fine then why shouldnt the retail ones work?Quote:
Originally Posted by nuclearjock
really pissed at my striker extreme right now.I have no choice as Im running 2 8800gt's in sli.
I honestly wish I could find an ES, because I don't feel like waiting for 790i, and I don't feel like wasting money on a new board either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
Like I said, from what I've read, the microcode was changed on the retail chips.
hopefully wolfdale isn't delayed :woot:
for QX9650Quote:
Originally Posted by BeardyMan
Find from matbe:
http://www.clicknmouse.fr/intelcore2...096.html?ref=1
said as in stock
But most said they will arrive mid-december...
But if you prefer you could buy a dell
http://configure2.euro.dell.com/dell...bc=precn_t7400
Try now to find a phenom 9600 ;)
where you want even in a system
honestly i can't believe this at all. this is the first we have heard ANYTHING of a bug in yorkfield and yet intel is still selling all of the server chips and the 9650. and we have seen absolutely no reports of any problems form ANYONE that yorkfields have a bug or crash randomly. and the fact that intel has many chips on the market and are still selling them (unlike AMD which recalled most of K10) shows that there is nothing really wrong. i am going to have to call BS on this one until intel says it themselves.
The second source said:
Yesterday Intel tell to all his partner that a bug was discovered in yorkfield...Quote:
Hier, Intel a annoncé à l'ensemble de ses partenaires avoir découvert un bug au sein de ses processeurs Yorkfield
David, if you cross this topic could you confirm?
Why not 680i is supposed to support wolfdale and not yorkfield and now Intel says there is a bug in yorkfield and not wolfdale. Not sure it's not related...Quote:
Originally Posted by dduckquack
I can confirm from a good source that this IS true. There will be a press release about it shortly.
:(
wow talk about AMD geting a little breather haha
Im sure it wont take 6month+ to fix it.
If it doesn't affect Xeons and Wolfdales and Penryn (mobile DC), it won't amount to a 'breather' for AMD, given that Kentsfield already trashes Phenom, even without the Phenom patch installed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Skratch
I'm looking for that in a new stepping too. I mean, with DDR3 already spec'd at 1866mhz and being overclocked to 2000, the yorkfields need to be handling high fsb (500+) more easily than I'm seeing from early reports on the qx9650. Not to mention, the multis on the non-EE chips are going to make it tough to achieve the 4+ghz clock speed everyone has come to expect from these chips.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
well this sucks.. i was lookin forward to the new quads next month
So is this actually a serious bug? Or more like the "critical" C2D bug :rofl:
Currently there is a highly stortage of documentation or even news. And I dont think Intel errata people are sick or on vacation like AMDs...
And considering QX9650 aswell as all 45nm Quad Xeons are sold and still selling. I dont see an issue.
Also all my 45nm quad Xeons havent seen an issue yet either.
Well, Xeons wouldn't necessarily see it, being a different package/socket. If true, it has something to do with FSB stability, and Harpertown and Yorkfield could conceivably have differences in the way their dual-dies are interfaced to the FSB.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shintai
hallo :)Quote:
Originally Posted by nemrod