Replies to post #4351 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[chipguy]

All non-trivial chips have bugs, it is a matter of how many and how severe. It is curious
that it escaped escaped detection for so long, the silicon has been around for more
than two years. BTW, it seems like a test coverage issue more than anything since
it is reportedly only occurs in a fraction of chips under specific code sequences with
specific data. Just like the P4/3.0 bug. Perhaps the test coverage gating process for
release to manufacturing at Intel needs to be revisited.

[Tenchu]

WBMW, As if Intel needed another black eye with Itanium 2. Ouch, that hurts.

Only if you're short INTC. Broke 20 intraday and in AH.

Market may have already discounted Itanium's impact to the big picture, both positively and negatively.

Tenchu

[Andy Grave]

As if Intel needed another black eye with Itanium 2. Ouch, that hurts. At least Madison doesn't seem affected.

Two short sentences and a qualifier. This.... after literally hundreds of posts extolling the virtues of Itanium. After hundreds of posts taking AMD to task on QS. But for this. which is tantamount (I believe all current users will be notified and offered a replacement) to a complete recall, just two short sentences and a qualifier. You Intel fanboys are just so unbelievably predictable.

http://news.com.com/2100-1006_3-1001010.html

Andy Grave