CPU manufacturing - shocking!

[wip3out]

I found this posted on another hardware forum and would like to know if this is true or not. I personally was very shocked at this as I beleived that processors were specifically designed with great detail and care to exact specifictions in order to determine the clock speeds.

Originally posted at Bit Tech :-

All chips on the same core design are the same. That is to say, any Thunderbird core chip, of any speed or packaging (slot or socket) is the same design. Some will run faster than others, as the production process improves, and some are flukes.

As the production process improves (purer, less dust in the cleanrooms, etc), the chips run faster. Chips are "binned", based on the speeds they will run stably, and the ones that are stable at higher speeds are sold as such.

However, only one chip from each wafer (which could be a hundred or more) is tested, and so some will be faster, some will be slower. AMD's binning is very consistent and conservative, so most AMDs will run 200MHz over clock, and some much beyond that. Intel's binning is not so good, so some chips won't overclock at all (and some are even unstable at stock speeds), while others will achieve amazing overclocks.

The same process applies to graphics card chips. For example, GeForce 4 Ti chips. The best become Ti4600s, the less good ones Ti4400s and the worst ones Ti4200s.


Is this true or just someones imagination in overdrive. ??

[downhill]

I suppose that's pretty much it.

Let me add that memory is sold the same way, although I think most of it is tested a little better for quality.

[wip3out]

That really does suck! what if your that unlucky guy that has a duff chip.

[the_mp3_refuge]

That's the way it is. However I have a hunch the person wrote this is a little pro AMD. Just a little tho. Take the phrase

AMD's binning is very consistent and conservative, so most AMDs will run 200MHz over clock, and some much beyond that. Intel's binning is not so good, so some chips won't overclock at all (and some are even unstable at stock speeds), while others will achieve amazing overclocks.

As many of you will acknowlege overclocking is more of an art. The only reason I'm bringing this up is because I hate it when people say AMD has better QA then Intel or vice-versa. The're both good companies. Just one of my pet peevs ya know. I mean has this guy toured any manufatoring plant of either intel or AMD? Or is the binning data he gets simply from overclocking?

Back to topic yea that's how most chips are made. However the first ones (from either AMD or Intel) Go through billions of tests to see if they work. And once the chip is well above excellent. Clonning time

Bob

[Hamid]

about 4 months ago i read this one in a french magazin as " science et informatique" it is true and with a lot of suffering we should accept it ( unfortunately ) . since AMD took the advice of its own vp marketting ,they did it in purpose by losing a bit of money just to get stronger in the race .
and regarding if AMD is doing better than intel : for the moment what has been mention is still true but by the end of this year there is many surprises comming from intel.....

[YeOldeStonecat]

Yeah, hopping in the "way back machine", I remember when Pentium 166mmx and 200mmx (P55C I think was the official name)...were all cut from the same sheet. Production of CPU's from the same sheet often overlapped for a while...with faster ones becoming more common as the manufacturing process was groomed and fine tuned. Chips from the center of the sheet are usually "retail", higher quality, and faster. Ones from the outer edges often "OEM", duds, or slower ones.