Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 02:09:48 03/02/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 28, 2003 at 18:11:36, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>This goes back to marketing. I say marketing forces them to release chips only >>as fast as they need to. > >If you read Steve's comments, he disagreed with this just as I did. > >Yes, they might "underclock" some faster chips. If (1) the fab line is >producing >faster chips and producing them at a rate that satisfies the demand for that >clock >speed; and (2) there is a demand for slower chips and siphoning off faster >chips >and marking them slower won't impact the ability to meet the demand for the >faster chips. > >No, I don't believe they underclock for any other reason. Ther eis much money >to >be made by clocking them as fast as possible. Just look at the difference in >the price >for a 2.4ghz xeon and a 2.8ghz xeon and ask yourself "given the demand, which >would >I produce?" > >the faster they go, compared to the competition, the more they will sell. > I'm pretty convinced they ship "underclocked" chips now and then. If you remember the thunderbird AXIA, it came as 1000 MHz chip, but most of those babies would run at 1300, some even managed +1400 MHz. That is pretty good for a 1000 MHz chip, a little too good. http://www.amdworld.co.uk/moreoc.htm of course later even better steppings came out, and it was clear (at least to me) that those were not genuine 1 GHz chips. -S.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.