Intel launches Atom C2000 revision C0 - fixing AVR54

Discussion in 'Processors and Motherboards' started by Petr, Apr 22, 2017.

  1. Petr

    Petr New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 22, 2017
    Messages:
    9
    Likes Received:
    5
    #1
    Patrick likes this.
  2. Evan

    Evan Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jan 6, 2016
    Messages:
    2,864
    Likes Received:
    429
    Revision history "April 2018"
    Time machine :)
     
    #2
  3. Terry Kennedy

    Terry Kennedy Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2015
    Messages:
    1,021
    Likes Received:
    474
    And they changed the specification to unsupport reconfiguring the LPC pins as GPIO:

    "All of the LPC interface signals (Table 10) are defined as muxed with GPIO signals. This implies that if the LPC interface is not used in your design these signals can be GPIO signals. This specification change removes the muxed support of GPIO signals for all LPC signals except LPC_CLKOUT1. These signals must be left in their default (LPC) state and not de-selected via software to be GPIO pins. Bits [26:21] and bits [29:28] in register SC_USE_SEL should not be set to 1."

    <rant>Why does Intel disable text copy when just about any PDF utility allows that to be enabled?</rant>
     
    #3
  4. xnaas

    xnaas New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2017
    Messages:
    7
    Likes Received:
    0
    Good on Intel for fixing that problem. Sucks it took so long and so much damage has been caused to companies and businesses...but hey, stuff happens. Hopefully this inspires them to do some additional testing before releasing the C3000 CPUs... :)
     
    #4
  5. TJ Ferdon

    TJ Ferdon New Member

    Joined:
    May 5, 2017
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    0
    However they have "found" this error after years of production and "exactly" before before announcing the new c3000's...

    And the end users? They have suffered the greatest damage, because they can not claim any damage from Intel directly (as can the big companies that have implemented this faulty processor familiy) and for the majority of cases, until now, the companies itself that have implemented these processors during the last years on their products, don't want to replace the units affected....so for end users the damage remains, they have to "pay" for something that it's not their fault.

    What a sad situation for the entire industry...stuff happens, sure, but in this situation there are the usual wrong behaviors.

    Just my 2cents
     
    #5
    Last edited: May 5, 2017
Similar Threads: Intel launches
Forum Title Date
Processors and Motherboards Intel XEON QS vs ES Nov 29, 2019
Processors and Motherboards Intel 10gbe x540-T2 on Asus motherboard PCie lane limitation Nov 20, 2019
Processors and Motherboards Supermicro x11spi-tf-o with Intel QL1K - Which BIOS Nov 18, 2019
Processors and Motherboards Intel Drivers for many older motherboards, RAID cards ect were recerntly deleted! Nov 13, 2019
Processors and Motherboards Considering upgrade from Intel/E5-2670v1 to SM/E5-2620v4 Sep 30, 2019

Share This Page