cdawalland the workaround is easily turned off in most bios's but if not i believe crystalcpu had an off for it

Then you'll experience some nice old hardlocks. Im sure thats a even trade. Performance for locks ups.

So are there any bios updates released? my motherboard manufacturers server is down.

kwchang007Yeah, but they could butcher 45 nm like they did with 65 nm and the x2s. Unless Amd kept 90 nm chip around for a good reason which isn't really that likely.

would call it butchered, it alwase takes every company 1 steping/revision to get the kinks out of their new prosess size, intel isnt imune to this, remmber the first intel 65nm chips, people called them the "presHOT" for a reasion, damn things make a space heater more then a computer.

i can go back farther even since im an amd user by default.

remmber the tbredA, first gen of its prosess size, hot and didnt clock worth a damn, tbred-b the 2nd run of that proc size overclocked like mad and ran cool.

first 90nm chips the winchester cores SUCKED BALLZ for overclocking, but the venice and other 2nd/3rd run chips overclocked VERY VERY well.

the diffrance is it takes amd longer to move from revision to revision less fab space after all.

now this issue with the current k10's is a bad bad fuckup, but they arent being hurt in the linux market where there is an easy kernal fix for it, they are still selling to linux server makers in good numbers and demand is quite brisk.

b3 chips as stated fix the problems for windows users(most of us), i was in no huge rush to get a k10 anyway, wana see prices on tri and dual core units, quadcores really pointless for 99% of the home users out there.

btarunrFixed at last though we've to see how much the bug-fix actually impacts performance. DaMulta put a Phenom 9500 to an acid test, he reports never to have observed anything weird.

I think its so many out of a batch that have the problems, course his board probably has the TLB patch in the bios for it.

a111087there are to dates, B3 is Q2, 45nm is H2.
thats how i read it :)

same here :toast:

pentastar111l...again $ vs performance ratio is tilted toward humble little AMD....

Unless you overclock. Then Intel pulls ahead again.

I have to admit a E2140 at 3.2ghz beat out X2 cpus pretty amazingly. (Same thing with the E2160, E2180, E2200.

Which is all found for $95 and below depending on which chip you purchase.
But then you could argue that not everyone overclocks. But then you could argue that this is completely off topic.

InfDamarvelI have to admit a E2140 at 3.2ghz beat out X2 cpus pretty amazingly. (Same thing with the E2160, E2180, E2200.

Which is all found for $95 and below depending on which chip you purchase.
But then you could argue that not everyone overclocks. But then you could argue that this is completely off topic.

Lol:laugh: