AMD just wants overclockers' money

THE REASON AMD doesn't go out of its way to protect overclockers is because overclocking voids the warranty. They are a business, and in the end they'll try to go far out of their way to suck every bit of money from you that they can when they can ;)

Michael

Subject: AMD grease affair may break US warranty rules

Why the outcry on warranties being voided with using thermal paste? If you want the three year warranty you have to use the supplied heatsink, thermal interface and all. If you use anything else it removes the assurance that your thermal solution will work. It really isn't that much worse since the interface melts into the processor and makes good contact too. BUT, it only works once, which sucks. I also out of 20+ installs/moves of AMD processors I never once broke a core, even with Thermaltake orbs.

Some also bitch at high wattage output of the Opteron. First of all, the heat dissipation is not even published. Ace's Hardware estimates it at around 52.5w. Not too good you might say, but keep in mind it also has a built in memory controller as well. Intel and nVidia don't have copper (Leadtek) or large surface aluminum heatsink/fan combos on the northbridges for decoration; they put out a lot of heat too. Part of that heat went to the processor.

Then about the piracy issue. It is wrong to share stuff which normally does cost money, but the music companies make it hard to go their route with making you pay $12-16 for a cd which only has 1 or two songs you want. You could pay for the music in mp3 form, and that's a good idea, except the site (which I forgot that does it) has it in 128kbps form, which is not cd quality. I don't mind paying for a DVD cause no downloaded movie has 5.1 sound. Watching the upcoming matrix movie in SDDS sound on a large screen is much better than downloading it then having crappy audio/video and people in the way. Course it costs money, but damn, worth it to me.

Email address supplied

This whole situation is being blown out of proportion.

Rather than any sort of "anti-3rd party thermal grease conspiracy", I suspect it is merely a case of AMD not wanting to go to the time and expense of testing and certifying the hundreds of different thermal compounds currently on the market.

I don't know of anyone who has had a CPU RMA refused on the grounds that they used the "wrong" thermal compound.

Furthermore, I'd bet good money that most of the people using Arctic Silver are technically voiding their warranty in other ways anyhow... I know *I* am! ;-)

Mike

The last time I checked, AMD did not automatically void one's AthlonXP warranty due to the use of thermal grease. In their System Builders' Guide, they state that thermal grease is suitable for test purposes, just not as a long-term solution. You can check up on that here:

http://www.amd.com/us-en/assets/content_type/white_papers_and_tech_docs/26003.pdf (page 9)

They also list several different manufacturers' thermal pads there, which rather undercuts the "Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act" story line.

My thoughts on the matter of why AMD uses/recommends phase-change pads instead of grease, for the long term:

1) Phase-change thermal pads are soft and thick upon initial installation, before they've "melted to fit," making it less likely that hamfisted heatsink-installation technique will crack the CPU core.
2) Thermal grease ranges from good-quality to pathetic, so AMD can't assume everyone will use a high-quality, pump out-resistant grease. With the small contact area of an AthlonXP (50-60W being passed through an area the size of one's fingernail) they need to know that the material will have staying power against pump-out.
3) Phase-change pads are very firmly stuck on to the retail AMD heatsink, so the user does not have the option of forgetting to use it
4) Due to the "melt-to-fit" nature of the phase-change pads, they'll fill uneven gaps.

The true nuisance is that the pads are, in fact, good for only one use, and as scarce as hens' teeth for the consumer who wants to purchase one. The large contact area of a CPU that has a heat spreader (Opteron, A64) should see AMD swing around to embrace thermal grease, as Intel now does in their tech documentation for the P4.

Thanks for continuing to put up a very interesting and informative site! :)

Tom

"Why is it that only now that piracy tools might become available there are suddenly people complaining about the copy protection? Why is it that only now that piracy tools might become available that "fair use" is suddenly so important?"

I don't want to take any sides here, but I've noticed that Arron assumes the guilt of the people before it is proven. Are you sure nobody complained about not being able to copy DVDs? (I certainly didn't, but someone out there probably complained back then.) But if someone complained to me few years back, I probably tell him to leave me alone. It is only now that this issue is getting the public attention. You cannot assume that people who support this is supporting because they want to make illegal copies of DVDs. (Saying that everybody who disagrees with you is a criminal is a poor way to get your point across.) I own no such 'Piracy Tools' and certainly not going to get any for the foreseeable future, but I still believe we should not dismiss such tools without examination. (Aren't you branding all such software as "Piracy Tools"?)

Edmund

Arron asks why until recently, there was little outcry about inability to copy DVDs. The answer is very simple: until recently, the limitations were technological, not arbitrary. When DVD recorders cost thousands of dollars, the only copying-related rights customers were denied were rights that no more than a handful could have afforded to exercise anyhow. For the vast majority, cost made the question of whether customers would be "allowed" to exercise their traditional fair use rights completely irrelevant.

Recently, however, the situation has changed dramatically. DVD recorders are cheap enough to be used in home video (especially with digital camcorders), and to be used as computer backup storage devices. And once a family has a DVD recorder for one of those purposes, backing up DVDs so the kids can have a copy to use without risking the original can be both a convenience and a nice insurance policy. Families with a creative bent might also want to exercise fair use rights in other ways, for example, making personal "favorite scenes" DVDs or even mixing content from DVDs into home videos.

And with those kinds of uses very much within the bounds of available technology, the entire nature of the question, "Why can't I do that?" changes. The answer is no longer, "Because the technology would be too expensive," but rather is, "Because the entertainment industry won't let me." And limitations that were perfectly acceptable when they were nobody's fault become completely unacceptable when they are arbitrarily placed in our way for the profit of others.

Keep in mind that home video technologies represent a marvelous new source of income for Hollywood, one that did not exist thirty years ago. Hollywood might scream bloody murder about every penny of lost potential income, but the truth is that Hollywood can lose a considerable percentage of its potential video income to piracy and still be better off with home video than they would be without it. Thus, I believe that rights should be balanced between legitimate users and Hollywood rather than tilted to maximize Hollywood's profits at the expense of legitimate users. And piracy would have to be far more rampant than it is now for me to view the damage it causes as sufficient to justify curtailing the traditional fair use rights of paying customers.

Nathan Barclay

Ray Replies to the reply:

Or is it in fact because it's only now that we have recordable DVDs available for a consumer friendly price? Surely the issue of copy protection was a moot point if you didn't have the means to actually make a copy, protection or not? Perhaps it's because the issue is now being brought into the public eye - they are now aware that they are being prevented from exercising their right to make personal backups? I don't know about you, but I make backups of all my software CDs - considering that the suppliers don't give you free replacements for broken/lost media, is that so hard to understand? Surely with escalating DVD prices - now easily reaching into the £20 region, people are wanting to do the same with DVDs too - I would if I ever purchased any (I much prefer waiting a few more months for them to appear on Sky - no film is worth that much money to me).

As for your slandering the products as "piracy tools"... bullshit. The consumer has every right to make a copy or two of the product for personal or backup purposes. If the RIAA and associates actively work to deny the consumers their right, what choice do consumers have but to use these "evil tools"?

Aaron's continuing defense of an indefensible position makes me wonder just how much of the kool-aid he has been drinking.

He says, "Why is it that only now that piracy tools might become available there are suddenly people complaining about the copy protection? Why is it that only now that piracy tools might become available that "fair use" is suddenly so important?"

And I ask, why is it that even now, Aaron makes such silly statements? Why, it took me less than two minutes to dig up discussion of fair-use rights with respect to DVDs from all the way back in May of 1996, back before any could even buy a consumer DVD player:

worldnet.att.net

If I could find that so quickly, then clearly there has been plenty of discussion since then. If Aaron can't get his facts straight on such a basic, easily verified statement, then its pretty clear that he is just another of the great and uncritical masses that have been so easily swayed by the copyright cartel's self-interested and short-sightedly culturally-damaging PR campaigns. And thus has no business acting as if he has an informed opinion on the topic.

Do some research, get some perspective on the historical reasons for the social contract of copyright in the USA and take a look at who the real authors are of copyright legislation in the last 30+ years (I'll give you a hint, they are not our duly elected representatives) and then you will be in a position to make an informed commentary.

J-Dub-Ya

Arron replies

The argument stands. There was very little discussion of fair use around the time of the introduction of DVD in comparison with now. Pointing to one discussion that is not directly on the topic and has only had a single response since 1996 is hardly a big discovery. Especially when that post ends, "I seem to be the only site collecting resources on the copyright issue, and I'd appreciate all the help I can get," which rather neatly proves my point.

To write of the historical reasons of the social contract of copyright without mentioning that the fair use provisions were intended to allow the use of extracts of a copyright work "for purposes such as criticism, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research" is rather interesting. Nowhere is copying the whole thing mentioned.

Under the DMCA Section 1201(a), circumventing a technological protection measure which guards access to a copyrighted work is a crime. That makes programs designed to copy DVDs "piracy tools" in the USA. They are considered piracy tools under the copyright laws of many other countries, including the UK. This is not a commentary on whether the laws are wrong or right, this is merely pointing out what they are.

Several letter writers have complained that copy protection and laws preventing circumvention swings too much control in the direction of the copyright holder. Recent history, the last fifteen or so years, has shown that when tools designed to circumvent copy protection become available on a general basis, the copyright holder tends to suffer considerable harm to their sales. In the late eighties to early nineties it was conservatively estimated that there were three to four illegal copies circulating for every legitimate copy sold of copy protected software in the UK. That makes it hard to protest any alleged swing towards the copyright holders.

It seems to me that the position of demanding that piracy tools, which not only copy DVDs but also remove the copy protection from them, be made legal is indefensible. It is easy enough appreciate that a few people might want to make a back up of a DVD to protect their investment. Why is it so difficult for those few people to appreciate that they cannot do that because the copyright holder needs to protect their far larger investment?

Arron

your fact-filled article "4-bit Futures Part III - IBM and Sun POWERing up towards the Sun-set" was highly informative...thanks...i especially like the use of the term "umpteen"...you don't see it used that often anymore...

David Killian

Subject: HP inkjet cartridges have built-in expiry dates

Or else signals "Low Ink" way too early. I'm a cheapskate when it comes to consumables. When my PhotoDumb P1100 announced the color ink cartridge needed replacing, I ignored the warning. A month later, I ignored a second warning, following which I printed a 200-page document. After that, the cartridge finally did need replacing.

Last December, I replaced an old color cartridge with a new one (they cost $90 here in Canada), but the cyan color did not work. I contacted HP for a replacement, which they agreed to do. Three-and-and-half months and many bi-weekly email reminders later, the replacement finally arrived at my door. This is the New HP.

Regards,
Ralph Grabowski

Subject: Amazon take over HMV

Amazon have taken over HMV.com in Canada. First of many ? What to expect;

Double the international shipping rates (dreamed up by some stupid USA centric marketer). HMV.com had a shipping rates which actually matched with those offered by the post office.

No SACD section
No DVD-A section
No LP section
No MiniDisk section

Amazon is a typical site designed by some USA programmer who doesn't realise people exist outside the USA. No offers for anybody outside the USA, oops Canada (they used search and replace on that offer). No support for other than the very mainstream formats. No japanese or import titles like HMV had.

Same boring, insular, 100% mainstream shit we had at Amazon.com

Shame
Shame
Shame

I hate you Amazon.

Daniel

Subject: Craig Barrett flip-flopped a little...

On the expensing of options in the last year. What a difference a year makes.

May 22 of last year he said the following:

"I think what we could do as a way to prevent abuse of options and excessive option grants to the top members of a company is just basically to force companies to expense the options granted to the top five officers,'' Barrett said in response to a question at the company's annual shareholder meeting in Santa Clara, California, where Intel is based."

That would be Barret, Otellini, Bryant, Grove and ?

Email address supplied

Subject: opteron's bus -what bus?

I don't know if the writer of the letter already had a response but if not, I humbly provide mine:

The athlon uses the 64bit wide EV6 bus, not the EV7 one. It is scalable from 100->200mhz ddr (200->400mhz, 1.6GB/s->3.2GB/s). The opteron on the other hand uses a hypertransport link, not a 400mhz bus. Also, the link does not have to provide nearly as much bandwidth as the FSB's of the athlon and the p4 coz memory data does not pass through this link. However, with technologies like AGP8x, Gigabit ethernet, PCI-X, Serial ATA 1 or 2, ... the link cannot be small either. Currently, I think the link provides 3.2GB/s in each direction (6.4GB/s total) which is much much more than what other x86 cpu's provide for IO purposes only. The latest P4 has a FSB that provides 6.4GB/s in ONE direction, so it is about on par with the HT link of the opteron, BUT it has to use this bandwith for memory access too (which coincidentally is 6.4GB/s for PC3200 dualddr)! Needless to say, you can sleep on both your ears, the opteron will not have a bandwidth problem anytime soon. It actually has an advantage...

Spoelie

Subject: Windows XP right click gobbles up CPU time

If you go into tools - folder options - and select "Use Windows classic folders" instead of the default "Show common tasks in folders" radio button, this issue goes away.

Tim

The right click issue is nothing compared to the fact that any serious file transfer between two PCs amounts to an MS-DoS (Microsoft Denial of Service) attack on the serving machine. Try to work on an MS-DoS box while someone else transfers files to and from this machine.

Unix is no better. NFS is a resource hog. That is why most people prefer double CPU machines for NFS servers and they still would not like to share the file systems of their `work stations'.

OpenVMS provides a pleasant alternative. Even a good old VAX 3100 can do the job while interactive users experience no serious impact. Of course a modern Alpha running OpenVMS blows the competition out of the sky, but who cares. There are too many idiots in the world who call this golden egg `legacy'.

Cheers!
Henry

Subject: Windows XP right click gobbles up CPU time

Thanks for this revelation. This is absolutely amazing. How slack can code in MS become? I dare you to work with a Dell Inspiron laptop, actually on your lap, right click and leave the menu up! Phewweee Seriously - they have to get this fixed.

Mike

Subject: Comment on file sharing court ruling and the Apple music store

Randy Hubbard wrote that the judge and the media didn't quite know what they were talking about with this ruling in favor of file sharing. It seems to me that they both know exactly what they are talking about. The judge's ruling seems to me to be pretty prudent, and the media are only trying to grab people's eye balls.

Randy mentioned that a software company has the legal obligation to design their software so that it can't be used to duplicate copyrighted materials. This sounds really easy, but theoretically there are infinite ways of hacking around protections, and can you imagine the host of lawsuits that would descend upon the software industry as a result of a ruling of that sort? It makes me shudder. Also, it is true that a software company can not be held responsible for the use to which it's software is put. Some people would love to put gun-makers in prison for murder, but guns also mean protection. And I would love to split hairs on this issue with you people, but this letter has other fish to fry...

The first of the other fish... I must say that Steve Jobs has once again hit the nail on the head with his Music Store. I couldn't have asked for a better price, because it is one penny short of what I would have charged per song if I were the CEO of Apple. When you consider they have tended to overprice new products in the past, this must be something about which the entire company feels very passionate. It is evident they are trying to bring music distribution to a higher plain. And yet, he is still missing some features, which would ensure instant uptake.

I definitely have issues with his payment method. He will only take payment by credit card. This effectively pushes out all the pre-teens, and teens whose parents do not allow them the use of a credit card. The pre-teens and teens are a huge market who would love this kind of thing, and here he has left them out in the cold!

I would like to know just how he is paying the credit card companies for each transaction. Unless he managed to weasel a sweetheart deal out of the credit card companies, he will have to pay 20 - 40 cents per credit card transaction. (transaction fee source - Google) Maybe more. And usually credit companies charge a monthly fee of several hundred dollars simply for the privilege of accepting their cards, which he probably already has to pay for selling software on their website. If people only buy one song at a time, and he is paying 65% of music sales to the big five, then he would probably lose money on it. Obviously he is banking on this service being a big enough deal that people buy more than that at once.

All in all, his is the most liberal and fair of the legally impeccable services available. I don't know whether I'm more overjoyed that someone is on the right track or more annoyed that someone is getting closer to my own brilliant idea for an internet music distribution service.

A final fish... There is delicious irony when one considers the big picture. Speaking in round figures, Apple, the diminuitive computer company with the 5% operating system market share, has managed to position itself as the digital media hub and server of content that Microsoft, with its 90+% monopoly, has always aspired to become! It is to laugh.

Michaela Stephens

Subject: riaa media reports

one winders whether the estemable Mr. Randy Hubbard works for the RIAA or the MPAA. His comparisons are ridiculus and his statement to the effect that time shifting (a VCR's primary use!) is ileagal ("Yes I am aware VCR's are often attached to TV's and illegally used to record copyright protected material") is close to insane

I also see no reason for his statement " a software mfg. has a legal obligation (which the judge failed to acknowledge) to design their software so that it can't be used to duplicate copyright protected materials." No such obligation, that i know of, exists such technologies invariably deny usage of material that ISNT copyrighted, as well as that which is, and a product that cant do what the consumers want it for simply wont sell. there is litle incentive to develop such technology for retail,] and significant deterence.

I really do worry that such legal stupidity and verbal brainlesness wil spread to other parts of the world.

Nick Sherwin

µ