If there were truly competition in the market this is where companies would be substituting atom for whatever AMD's equivalent but they can't because AMD doesn't have one (I guess lowend jaguar or Brazos cores...)
Who is to say how "small" it is when intel is playing so heavy handed with this NDA horseshit. I'm sure the guys that make your car would rather not do all those little recalls because only a "small" number actually have a problem, thankfully that industry has to play by some basic rules.I think he's saying that everyone's trying to figure out how to deal with it, without actually replacing every CPU since that seems like overkill for an issue that (while real) is still affecting a small enough number of machines that years after the 18 month accelerated failure still hasn't made enough of an impact for anyone to notice except for the press about the errata.
This is in the main site post but we have 22x C2000 deployed and the newest has been going for 20 months. Oldest over 40 and zero failures.I have a Supermicro | Products | Motherboards | Atom Boards | A1SRM-2758F based system. Does it mean it will DEFINITELY die after 18 months' usage?
Anyone who has a bunch of C2xxx deployed for more than 18 or 36 months that aren't dead yet. It's obvious that the problem does not result in certain death after N months, it just makes the failure rate higher than expected. Did you buy the hardware with the guarantee that the failure rate would be 0%? If not, then it's unreasonable to expect total replacement because the failure rate is some non-zero value that's more than the original non-zero value. What is reasonable is probably some somewhat increased warranty time for devices that fail due to the bug, but what constitutes a reasonable time will be a big fight. And that increased warranty time is to make everyone involved lookWho is to say how "small" it is when intel is playing so heavy handed with this NDA horseshit.
I'm not aware of any basic rules for how long a computer chip is supposed to last. The manufacturers probably have contract terms on the failure rates, but the customers don't. In cars there are laws/regulations concerning things like emissions requirements (if a model doesn't meet certain requirements it has to be fixed, period) and other issues are life-safety critical. If someone has a life-safety critical system that depends on the total reliability of a single c2xxx processor, they probably have a much bigger problem than this. Think about the bad capacitor problem a few years back: if you had enterprise gear under warranty it got fixed; if you had consumer gear not under warranty, you got new consumer gear when the caps finally died. The key here is whether you're paying someone to ensure that you get new gear when it breaks, and it's that person who can recover damages if the failure rate on the equipment is higher than specified by the manufacture.I'm sure the guys that make your car would rather not do all those little recalls because only a "small" number actually have a problem, thankfully that industry has to play by some basic rules
Do we know if there's going to be a full C3000 lineup? there was only one chip I saw so farWe've got a bunch and they've been running non-stop for years. There's some old C2758 FreeBSD ZFS backup server pair that a coworker setup 2 years ago. They're at 649 days uptime.
I'm reading this right, after 18 or 36 months higher than normal failure rate. For most of our gear we start looking at replacements around 36 months anyway.
I'm reading many of these comments elsewhere and people clearly don't get how this works. I'm also reading many comments elsewhere by kids with gaming rigs who clearly don't own this gear and don't deal with DC gear. Stuff fails all the time. We're just going to start to look for C3000 options a few months earlier and rotate them in, using retired C2000 to fill the void as short term spares.