AMD CPU's bugged, patch degrades performance.

[MajikMyst]

Erratum degrades Phenom 9500, 9600 performance
by Scott Wasson — 9:25 PM on December 3, 2007

We reported earlier today that a problem with AMD's quad-core processors has limited supply of "Barcelona" Opterons, but that is only part of the picture. Because the hardware bug—known as an erratum—affects all revisions and clock speeds of AMD's quad-core processors, it affects the newly introduced Phenom 9500 and 9600 processors, as well. And although AMD is no longer shipping quad-core Opterons to major server vendors and general customers, it is shipping Phenoms to large PC builders and distributors. In fact, AMD knew about the erratum before the Phenom product launch, although its original statements about the issue gave the impression it only affected virtualization, a server-class usage model uncommon for desktop processors.


To recap, the erratum is a chip-level issue involving the TLB logic for the L3 cache that can cause system hangs in specific circumstances. AMD has a fix for the problem in the works, but it degrades performance. AMD has stated publicly that the workaround can lower performance by as much as 10%, although one source characterized the performance hit to TR as 10-20%.

In order to better understand this problem, TR spoke with Michael Saucier, Desktop Product Marketing Manager at AMD. Saucier confirmed that the TLB erratum can cause the system to hang when the chip is experiencing high utilization. AMD has stated previously that virtualization workloads can lead to this problem, but Saucier clarified that other workloads can trigger system hangs, as well. He characterized the issue as a race condition in the TLB logic "where the other guy wins who isn't supposed to win," and said the likelihood of the erratum causing a system hang is extremely rare.

http://techreport.com/discussions.x/13724

Well? Remember that old saying. You get what you pay for. You pay **** and you get ****!

I knew there was a reason I bought Intel.

[HereComesDeath]

Soo...It only effects the AMD quad cores right? not the dual cores?

[MajikMyst]

Soo...It only effects the AMD quad cores right? not the dual cores?

I didn't see anything in the article about the dual cores, so you might be safe. I know that AMD wasn't to happy that this little issue leaked. So who knows what other issues AMD has. I know since the release of the original Athlon CPU, AMD chips have had to be babied to run properly. Special power supplies, bigger fans, you name it. Price is the only thing good about AMD CPU's. I would rather pay more and get quality.

[HereComesDeath]

I didn't see anything in the article about the dual cores, so you might be safe. I know that AMD wasn't to happy that this little issue leaked. So who knows what other issues AMD has. I know since the release of the original Athlon CPU, AMD chips have had to be babied to run properly. Special power supplies, bigger fans, you name it. Price is the only thing good about AMD CPU's. I would rather pay more and get quality.

Yeah, I like AMD, but the other day, I was playing UT3 on my friend's quad core rig(2 GB ram, and an 8800GTS), and MAN what a difference in speed and fluidity it has compared to my little dual core....When I build my gaming rig, in the next few months, im gonna get a Quad core, 4Gb ram, 2x 8800gt's....you know...the works...I CANT WAIT!!

[risk]

do you know intel had erratum problems as well? theres a saying "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." this AMD erratum problem has been greatly exaggerated, in real world testing the chances of you actually encountering this bug are slim to none.

[MajikMyst]

do you know intel had erratum problems as well? theres a saying "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." this AMD erratum problem has been greatly exaggerated, in real world testing the chances of you actually encountering this bug are slim to none.

And since you posted nothing to support your claims, I would gather that your post means the same thing. Nothing.

[spyte]

And since you posted nothing to support your claims, I would gather that your post means the same thing. Nothing.

Hmm, you on a smear campaign Majik? Did an AMD processor rape you in your sleep or something??

http://www.intel.com/support/processors/pentium/ppiie/

http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/w...ly/010398.html

I just googled 'intel erratum' and there are countless articles of them having problems over the years.

[Mr Evil]

Intel errata? Intel processors never have errata because at Intel, quality is job 0.99989960954!

[oldkawman1]

Please no more fanboy analysis. Here are legit reviews. The good, the not so good, and the really not so good.

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/..._athlon_64_x2/

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/..._motherboards/

http://www.tomshardware.com/2007/12/...dies_for_jobs/

All must hope AMD turns things around and returns to competition. Competition is very good for the consumer, monopolies are not.

[MajikMyst]

Hmm, you on a smear campaign Majik? Did an AMD processor rape you in your sleep or something??

http://www.intel.com/support/processors/pentium/ppiie/

http://www.mirrorservice.org/sites/w...ly/010398.html

I just googled 'intel erratum' and there are countless articles of them having problems over the years.

Don't get pissy because someone asks you to back your claims up. But hey! Thanks for going back a decade to prove your point? Ummm? I mean lack there of. I never claimed Intel was perfect, just better. And they always have been better. It is just nice to smear it in the faces of the AMD crowed for a change because you morons crow about price difference and the illusion of better performance. I went to an AMD seminar not that long ago, I saw an ATI display? Showing of their top end card while comparing it to an Nvidia card that came out 3 years ago? Guess ATI has learned something from AMD. When your stuff sucks, compare to your competitions stuff that was out years ago.

I also have some personal experience on the issue. Can anyone name an Intel certified power supply? Oooops! Sorry everyone, any power supply will work with Intel, that is AMD that forces you to spend more money on a power supply that will work? Wait? What was that about price difference?

There isn't a CPU in the AMD lineup that hasn't had issues of some kind or another. Special power supplies, special ram, special mainboards, heat issues, ect. ect. I remember the old days when Intel and AMD could use the same main board and having to put an Intel chip in a computer to install windows. Once windows was installed you could swap it out for an AMD chip. Otherwise windows would crash during the hardware detection portion of setup.

I honestly do hope that AMD does come around and ends being a serious competition to Intel. It would be awsome. I might even buy an AMD based computer. But until they come up with a CPU that has the over all performance and stability of an Intel, my money stays with Intel.

[cel4145]

Don't get pissy because someone asks you to back your claims up. But hey! Thanks for going back a decade to prove your point? Ummm? I mean lack there of. I never claimed Intel was perfect, just better. And they always have been better.

Hmmm....this would be the same Intel that did not plan to provide x86 emulation until AMD's success in the market with 64bit cpu's forced them to as they were playing catch up in providing 64bit cpu's in the first place? And the same Intel that used wonderful RDRAM with their CPU's? And the same Intel whose price/performance ratio was worse than AMD's for a number of years. And the same Intel who is currently being investigated by the EU and the State of New York for monopolistic business practices. Yeah. They definitely sound like they are always a better choice of a company. Get a grip. These are hardware companies in competition with each other. Each has made gains back and forth over the years to exceed the technological advances of the other. And for good innovation, I hope it continues that way. But enjoy your fantasy.

But then again, why should anyone listen to someone who is interested not in inquiry and discussion, but who has the juvenile goal of "smear[ing] it in the faces of the AMD crowed?"

[Brad.G]

lmfao.. well said cel

[Mr Evil]

There's that whole business of Intel trying to derail the OLPC project too, which is despicable beyond words.

[champdee]

Yeah, I like AMD, but the other day, I was playing UT3 on my friend's quad core rig(2 GB ram, and an 8800GTS), and MAN what a difference in speed and fluidity it has compared to my little dual core....When I build my gaming rig, in the next few months, im gonna get a Quad core, 4Gb ram, 2x 8800gt's....you know...the works...I CANT WAIT!!

I've read benchmark articles stating that having 2 8800gt's over one isn't that much of a difference.. Just thought i'd let you know.. I don't have the article but I think it's pretty easy to find.. i'm at work.

[champdee]

Hmmm....this would be the same Intel that did not plan to provide x86 emulation until AMD's success in the market with 64bit cpu's forced them to as they were playing catch up in providing 64bit cpu's in the first place? And the same Intel that used wonderful RDRAM with their CPU's? And the same Intel whose price/performance ratio was worse than AMD's for a number of years. And the same Intel who is currently being investigated by the EU and the State of New York for monopolistic business practices. Yeah. They definitely sound like they are always a better choice of a company. Get a grip. These are hardware companies in competition with each other. Each has made gains back and forth over the years to exceed the technological advances of the other. And for good innovation, I hope it continues that way. But enjoy your fantasy.

But then again, why should anyone listen to someone who is interested not in inquiry and discussion, but who has the juvenile goal of "smear[ing] it in the faces of the AMD crowed?"

Amd has been exellent over the years but the main reason intel is better right now is this.. In short they fired the head usa intel guy that was in charge of making processors, testing.. whatever.. not exactly sure.. and replaced him with some indian guy who apparently tried a pentium m (laptop processor) in a desktop.. it ran cooler/more efficient etc.. and they have been the better processor to get ever since.. does amd suk now? no.. but they just havn't had something happen like intel has to make them put out a kickass processor.. they are still good price/performance ratio.. but intel is too.. especially when you can get a cheap core2duo and overclock the hell out of it for basically the same price anyway.. Intel is just the better architecture right now.. Everyone thought the phenom was going to be incredible because amd has a good track record.. the first one is about 30percent slower than the q6600.. If they expect to be successfull the phenom has to be better or a lot closer to the q6600.

The newer ones will be closer/better but then you got the penryn coming out etc.. I've had both types of system about half and half.. got the athlon 64 when it first came out etc I just get whats good.. not a fanboy.