Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > alt.comp.freeware > #252702 > unrolled thread

Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads

Started byFritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>
First post2016-01-19 01:50 +0100
Last post2016-01-30 10:03 +0100
Articles 16 on this page of 96 — 22 participants

Back to article view | Back to alt.comp.freeware


Contents

  Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2016-01-19 01:50 +0100
    Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 16:17 +0800
    Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> - 2016-01-19 16:04 +0700
      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 17:11 +0800
        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-19 06:27 -0500
          Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Mr. Man-wai Chang" <toylet.toylet@gmail.com> - 2016-01-19 20:55 +0800
        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2016-01-19 22:55 +0100
          Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-19 15:10 -0700
            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-20 03:30 +0100
              Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-20 09:32 -0500
                Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-20 15:05 -0500
                  Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-20 15:57 -0500
                    Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads G. Morgan <sealteam6@osama-is-dead.net> - 2016-01-31 00:28 -0600
                      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-31 02:24 -0500
                  Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> - 2016-01-20 23:47 +0100
                    AMD vs. Intel vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2016-01-20 23:21 +0000
                      Re: AMD vs. Intel chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 06:48 -0600
                        Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-21 19:30 +0100
                          Re: AMD vs. Intel Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 14:51 -0500
                            Re: AMD vs. Intel Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-21 21:18 +0100
                              Re: AMD vs. Intel Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 17:30 -0500
                                Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-21 20:42 -0700
                                  Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-22 07:15 +0100
                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> - 2016-01-22 08:48 +0100
                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-22 15:24 -0700
                                      Re: AMD vs. Intel Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-01-22 23:34 +0100
                                        Re: AMD vs. Intel Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2016-01-23 01:58 +0100
                                        Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2016-01-23 01:47 +0000
                                          Re: AMD vs. Intel Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-01-23 11:24 +0100
                                            Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-23 10:23 -0700
                                              Re: AMD vs. Intel Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-01-23 18:37 +0100
                                                Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-24 10:23 -0700
                                                  Re: AMD vs. Intel Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-01-24 23:23 +0100
                                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-25 05:04 +0100
                                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-25 07:49 -0600
                                                      Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-25 11:06 -0700
                                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-25 11:05 -0700
                                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2016-01-26 08:02 +0000
                                                Re: AMD vs. Intel Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2016-01-24 19:06 +0100
                                                  Re: AMD vs. Intel Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-24 16:14 -0500
                                            Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-24 15:38 +0100
                                              Re: AMD vs. Intel Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-01-24 15:59 +0100
                                                Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-24 10:25 -0700
                                                Re: AMD vs. Intel JEDIDIAH <jedi@nomad.mishnet> - 2016-01-25 08:11 -0600
                                                  Re: AMD vs. Intel Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-25 10:55 -0500
                                                  Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-25 11:07 -0700
                                                  Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-26 01:58 +0100
                                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-26 02:05 +0100
                                                      Re: AMD vs. Intel Peter Köhlmann <peter-koehlmann@t-online.de> - 2016-01-26 11:24 +0100
                                                        Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-27 12:17 -0700
                                                        Re: AMD vs. Intel Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2016-01-27 21:58 +0000
                                                      Re: AMD vs. Intel Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> - 2016-01-26 19:55 +0100
                                        Re: AMD vs. Intel Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> - 2016-01-23 06:20 +0100
                                  Re: AMD vs. Intel Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-22 10:13 -0500
                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-22 11:57 -0500
                                    Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-22 15:27 -0700
                                      Re: AMD vs. Intel Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-23 09:37 -0500
                                        Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-23 10:28 -0700
                                          Re: AMD vs. Intel Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-24 06:21 +0100
                                            Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-24 10:29 -0700
                                      Re: AMD vs. Intel Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-23 13:06 -0500
                                        Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-24 10:36 -0700
                              Re: AMD vs. Intel chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-22 06:59 -0600
                                Re: AMD vs. Intel GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-22 15:30 -0700
                              Re: AMD vs. Intel chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-22 07:25 -0600
                        Re: AMD vs. Intel Flasherly <Flasherly@live.com> - 2016-01-21 15:10 -0500
                      Re: AMD vs. Intel Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2016-01-21 21:23 +0100
                        Re: AMD vs. Intel Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 17:40 -0500
                    Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Ezekiel" <zeke@nosuchemail.com> - 2016-01-21 10:40 -0500
                      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads PAS <abc@doremi.net> - 2016-01-21 12:16 -0500
                        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 11:26 -0600
                          Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2016-01-21 11:31 -0600
                          Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-21 23:42 +0100
                        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2016-01-21 13:08 -0500
                      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-21 22:31 +0100
                Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2016-01-20 20:29 +0000
              Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-20 11:53 -0700
                Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2016-01-20 20:59 +0000
                  Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-20 14:29 -0700
                    Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Anonymous <nobody@remailer.paranoici.org> - 2016-01-21 05:44 +0000
                      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-21 14:17 -0700
                        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-22 04:31 +0100
                          Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> - 2016-01-21 20:44 -0700
                            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-22 08:35 +0100
                            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-23 06:13 +0100
                            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Anonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org> - 2016-01-23 10:03 +0100
                            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Fritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net> - 2016-01-23 15:39 +0100
                            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Jeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com> - 2016-01-24 05:06 +0100
                            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2016-01-24 10:39 +0100
                            Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2016-01-25 00:22 +0100
      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Paul <nospam@needed.com> - 2016-01-19 05:09 -0500
        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2016-01-30 08:07 +0000
      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Nomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com> - 2016-01-19 22:16 +0100
        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex  Workloads Euclides Zoto <euclides_zoto@optimum.net> - 2016-01-18 18:20 -0800
      Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads Diesel <me@privacy.net> - 2016-01-30 08:07 +0000
        Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads "Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at> - 2016-01-30 10:03 +0100

Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]


#253008

FromGreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>
Date2016-01-21 14:17 -0700
Message-ID<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#252915
On 01/20/16 22:44, Anonymous wrote:
> In article<n7ou3p$fou$1@dont-email.me>
> GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
>>
>> On 01/20/16 13:59, Anonymous wrote:
>>> In article<n7okun$95m$1@dont-email.me>
>>> GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>   wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 01/19/16 19:30, Nomen Nescio wrote:
>>>>> In article<n7mc4p$ktl$10@dont-email.me>
>>>>> GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>    wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 01/19/16 14:55, Anonymous Remailer (austria) wrote:
>>>>>>> In article<n7kufj$v6o$1@dont-email.me>
>>>>>>> "Mr. Man-wai Chang"<toylet.toylet@gmail.com>     wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 1/19/2016 5:04 PM, JJ wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>          From what I can see is that they've haven't tested Skylake well, and the
>>>>>>>>> product is kind of rushed to the market. They *assumed* that such heavy load
>>>>>>>>> will never happen. Well, strike two, Intel.
>>>>>>>>> Regardsless, it's still a fact that there's a bug.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is NOT the first time Intel released a CPU with bug if my memory
>>>>>>>> serves....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Every Intel CPU ever released has bugs.  Most are not critical
>>>>>>> and get fixed during the manufacturing life if deemed important
>>>>>>> enough.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Even tho cpu vendors have errata sheets, IBMs have a much shorter errata
>>>>>> sheets than Intel.
>>>>>
>>>>> Intel is like Cisco, bugs are "features"
>>>>>
>>>>> http://download.intel.com/design/processor/specupdt/320836.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> 136 "No fix" in this one.
>>>>>
>>>>> AMD had a shitwad too.  Really disappointed in AMD.  When they
>>>>> brought those losers from ATI into the fold, the end was written
>>>>> for AMD.
>>>>>
>>>>> http://support.amd.com/TechDocs/25759.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I've been seeing a lot of vendors go down hill for the last decade or so.
>>>> Too bad mips didn't produce a faster processor.  I liked their risc
>>>> paradigm of guaranteeing 1 clock cycle per instruction.  Some of their
>>>> more expensive cpus were multicore.  Now all SGI is using are Intel
>>>> chips and linux on server machines only... their desktops disappeared
>>>> quite some time ago.  I should have grabbed one good SGI desktop on ebay
>>>> a few years ago as it still had Irix on it... I think it was an Indigo.
>>>
>>> Would serve no purpose unless you are building a scrap museum.
>>> I donated my Alpha machines last fall and will clean the garage
>>> of all single core processors soon.  They are of no use now.
>>>
>>
>> Thats true.  Just like to work with the older machines for a while.
>> I've got two vax4000 vlcs sitting on the shelf with vms 6.3 on them.
>> I still like to get them down and fire them up tho, and that is
>> sometimes fun.  But like another poster said, the novelty has worn off a
>> long time ago.  All I see is a stagnant market.  I wonder if Bill Joys'
>> comment on "it's too late to save the industry" had some insight into this.
>
> I run all my PDP/11, VAX and Alpha OSes on emulators now.  You
> hasn't lived until you've run RSTS/E or VMS..  Grabbed the
> Charon Alpha emulator that was free for personal use.  It is not
> there on the site anymore, but you can go back in time and get
> it.
>
Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not 
sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253037

FromNomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
Date2016-01-22 04:31 +0100
Message-ID<672f3747e95accb3374bd846ed85d7f9@dizum.com>
In reply to#253008
In article <n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
>
> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.

emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.  
You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253039

FromGreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com>
Date2016-01-21 20:44 -0700
Message-ID<n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
In reply to#253037
On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
>>
>>
>> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
>> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
>
> emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
>

:-(  That's what I was afraid of.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253045

FromAnonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org>
Date2016-01-22 08:35 +0100
Message-ID<652b00df0ddbc0017bd70a5590253c19@hoi-polloi.org>
In reply to#253039
In article <n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> >> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
> >
> > emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> > You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
> >
>
> :-(  That's what I was afraid of.

Get all you want right here, including PAKs and media.  There is 
no need to go to P2P.

http://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php

https://h41268.www4.hp.com/live/index_e.aspx?qid=24548&design=cs

http://decuserve.org/

Go here to sign up, the telenet signup link on the page is 
borken.

nslookup 104.207.199.162
Server:  es40a.*******.com
Address:  192.168.18.30

Name:    eisner.encompasserve.org
Address:  104.207.199.162

http://104.207.199.162/

telnet 104.207.199.162

Have fun!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253165

FromNomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
Date2016-01-23 06:13 +0100
Message-ID<652b00df0ddbc0017bd70a5590253c19@dizum.com>
In reply to#253039
In article <n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> >> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
> >
> > emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> > You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
> >
>
> :-(  That's what I was afraid of.

Get all you want right here, including PAKs and media.  There is 
no need to go to P2P.

http://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php

https://h41268.www4.hp.com/live/index_e.aspx?qid=24548&design=cs

http://decuserve.org/

Go here to sign up, the telenet signup link on the page is 
borken.

nslookup 104.207.199.162
Server:  es40a.*******.com
Address:  192.168.18.30

Name:    eisner.encompasserve.org
Address:  104.207.199.162

http://104.207.199.162/

telnet 104.207.199.162

Have fun!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253169

FromAnonymous <anonymous@hoi-polloi.org>
Date2016-01-23 10:03 +0100
Message-ID<0c4be89a9b8f2200aa6e23a38611c262@hoi-polloi.org>
In reply to#253039
In article <n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> >> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
> >
> > emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> > You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
> >
>
> :-(  That's what I was afraid of.


Get all you want right here, including PAKs and media.  There is 
no need to go to P2P.

http://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php

https://h41268.www4.hp.com/live/index_e.aspx?qid=24548&design=cs

http://decuserve.org/

Go here to sign up, the telenet signup link on the page is 
borken.

nslookup 104.207.199.162
Server:  es40a.*******.com
Address:  192.168.18.30

Name:    eisner.encompasserve.org
Address:  104.207.199.162

http://104.207.199.162/

telnet 104.207.199.162

Have fun!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253193

FromFritz Wuehler <fritz@spamexpire-201601.rodent.frell.theremailer.net>
Date2016-01-23 15:39 +0100
Message-ID<652b00df0ddbc0017bd70a5590253c19@msgid.frell.theremailer.net>
In reply to#253039
In article <n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> >> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
> >
> > emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> > You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
> >
>
> :-(  That's what I was afraid of.

Get all you want right here, including PAKs and media.  There is 
no need to go to P2P.

http://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php

https://h41268.www4.hp.com/live/index_e.aspx?qid=24548&design=cs

http://decuserve.org/

Go here to sign up, the telenet signup link on the page is 
borken.

nslookup 104.207.199.162
Server:  es40a.*******.com
Address:  192.168.18.30

Name:    eisner.encompasserve.org
Address:  104.207.199.162

http://104.207.199.162/

telnet 104.207.199.162

Have fun!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253227

FromJeremy Bentham <nobody@anemone.mooo.com>
Date2016-01-24 05:06 +0100
Message-ID<90ed2418693fd1f5fa7b0a8ed19316cb@anemone.mooo.com>
In reply to#253039
In article <n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> >> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
> >
> > emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> > You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
> >
>
> :-(  That's what I was afraid of.


Get all you want right here, including PAKs and media.  There is 
no need to go to P2P.

http://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php

https://h41268.www4.hp.com/live/index_e.aspx?qid=24548&design=cs

http://decuserve.org/

Go here to sign up, the telenet signup link on the page is 
borken.

Name:    eisner.encompasserve.org
Address:  104.207.199.162

http://104.207.199.162/

telnet 104.207.199.162

Have fun!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253238

From"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at>
Date2016-01-24 10:39 +0100
Message-ID<8c622927b341577317e760c67511c692@remailer.privacy.at>
In reply to#253039
In article <n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> >> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
> >
> > emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> > You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
> >
>
> :-(  That's what I was afraid of.


Get all you want right here, including PAKs and media.  There is 
no need to go to P2P.

http://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php

https://h41268.www4.hp.com/live/index_e.aspx?qid=24548&design=cs

http://decuserve.org/

Go here to sign up, the telenet signup link on the page is 
borken.

http://104.207.199.162/

telnet 104.207.199.162

Have fun!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253303

From"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at>
Date2016-01-25 00:22 +0100
Message-ID<3f2a8ec99a6b666b522ba0379c7ba1db@remailer.privacy.at>
In reply to#253039
In article <n7s8f8$lrs$2@dont-email.me>
GreyCloud <mist@cumulus.com> wrote:
>
> On 01/21/16 20:31, Nomen Nescio wrote:
> > In article<n7rhot$f3j$1@dont-email.me>
> > GreyCloud<mist@cumulus.com>  wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Yes, I've read where many are now using simh to run VMS on linux.  Not
> >> sure where one gets the VMS cd with the programming languages from.
> >
> > emule.  VMS 73 and 83 isos for VAX and Alpha are out there.
> > You'll need license paks  or it won't do you much good.
> >
>
> :-(  That's what I was afraid of.


Get all you want right here, including PAKs and media.  There is 
no need to go to P2P.

http://www.openvmshobbyist.com/news.php

https://h41268.www4.hp.com/live/index_e.aspx?qid=24548&design=cs

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#252734

FromPaul <nospam@needed.com>
Date2016-01-19 05:09 -0500
Message-ID<n7l1sb$c0r$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to#252728
JJ wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:50:33 +0100, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>> Here’s what Intel has to say about the Skylake issues that 
>> happen in Prime95:
>> “Intel has identified an issue that potentially affects the 6th 
>> Gen Intel Core family of products. This issue only occurs under 
>> certain complex workload conditions, like those that may be 
>> encountered when running applications like Prime95. In those 
>> cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable system 
>> behaviour.”
> 
> From what I can see is that they've haven't tested Skylake well, and the
> product is kind of rushed to the market. They *assumed* that such heavy load
> will never happen. Well, strike two, Intel.
> 
>> Hapkiman • 7 days ago
>> Prime95 is an unnecessary torture test of a processor, that and 
>> it was designed with totally different architecture in mind. It 
>> is no longer necessary and only causes extremely high temps on 
>> Skylake and Haswell processors. Temps they would never hit no 
>> matter what other load you put them under. There are many other 
>> ways to test for a stable system. I use my system several hours 
>> a day, and I know almost immediately if my rig has an issue. I 
>> don't need to punish it.
> 
> Regardsless, it's still a fact that there's a bug.

The conditions required for the bug are listed here.

https://communities.intel.com/mobile/mobile-access.jspa#jive-content?content=%2Fapi%2Fcore%2Fv3%2Fcontents%2F524553

    "Skylake AND

     hyperthreading AND

     CpuSupportsFMA3=0
    "

    "In those cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable
     system behavior.  Intel has identified and released a fix and
     is working with external business partners to get the fix
     deployed through BIOS."

Also, the quote in the OPs link... Fixed it for him.

    "Prime95 is an necessary torture test of a processor"

The purpose of the torture test, is to prove the CPU
being used, is capable of computing a mathematically
correct answer. The same conditions (i.e. level of torture)
exists while actual long-term Prime95 calculations are
ongoing (these can go on for months). The CPU could be
executing a 768K hand-coded FFT module while testing
one 40 million digit number after another, for "prime-ness".
So the torture test, is a precursor to actually doing
calculations which use the very same code. Since the torture
test also knows what the answer is supposed to be, the torture
test can spot a mistake. Before it messes up a real calculation,
perhaps claiming a number is a Mersenne Prime, when it isn't.

Other users, use Prime95, hot CPU and all, as a
simulation of a demanding calculation that proves their
processor can calculate other things with great accuracy.
If I'm doing my taxes on the computer, I want proof it's
a real live 100% functional computer first, so I run Prime95
on it, before running a game or other kind of real application.

If the CPU was actually getting hot, you should fix that.
On my new computer, I have a very large cooler on the CPU,
and the CPU doesn't get hot at all running Prime95. On the
other hand, the VCore regulator gets scorching hot :-)
And that's a motherboard design defect. An underspecified
regulator. An underspecified heatsink. And my mistake for
buying it. The CPU on the other hand, is living in
luxury.

There is actually one piece of code, that gets the
processor hotter than Prime95. But I don't use that
one. I use Prime95, because it knows what the math
output of the calculation should be, and it isn't
there just to make the CPU hot. It's to prove the
CPU works, when as many nodes in the chip are working
as possible.

If you want to make the CPU hot, you can do that
with 7Zip compression just as easily.

    Paul

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253616

FromDiesel <me@privacy.net>
Date2016-01-30 08:07 +0000
Message-ID<XnsA59F20D645CF0F7D9A8@dieselpower.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#252734
Paul <nospam@needed.com> news:n7l1sb$c0r$1@dont-email.me Tue, 19 Jan
2016 10:09:51 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: 

> JJ wrote:
>> On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:50:33 +0100, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>>> Here’s what Intel has to say about the Skylake issues that 
>>> happen in Prime95:
>>> “Intel has identified an issue that potentially affects the 6th 
>>> Gen Intel Core family of products. This issue only occurs under 
>>> certain complex workload conditions, like those that may be 
>>> encountered when running applications like Prime95. In those 
>>> cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable system 
>>> behaviour.”
>> 
>> From what I can see is that they've haven't tested Skylake well,
>> and the product is kind of rushed to the market. They *assumed*
>> that such heavy load will never happen. Well, strike two, Intel.
>> 
>>> Hapkiman • 7 days ago
>>> Prime95 is an unnecessary torture test of a processor, that and 
>>> it was designed with totally different architecture in mind. It 
>>> is no longer necessary and only causes extremely high temps on 
>>> Skylake and Haswell processors. Temps they would never hit no 
>>> matter what other load you put them under. There are many other 
>>> ways to test for a stable system. I use my system several hours 
>>> a day, and I know almost immediately if my rig has an issue. I 
>>> don't need to punish it.
>> 
>> Regardsless, it's still a fact that there's a bug.
> 
> The conditions required for the bug are listed here.
> 
> https://communities.intel.com/mobile/mobile-access.jspa#jive-conten
> t?content=%2Fapi%2Fcore%2Fv3%2Fcontents%2F524553 
> 
>     "Skylake AND
> 
>      hyperthreading AND
> 
>      CpuSupportsFMA3=0
>     "
> 
>     "In those cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable
>      system behavior.  Intel has identified and released a fix and
>      is working with external business partners to get the fix
>      deployed through BIOS."
> 
> Also, the quote in the OPs link... Fixed it for him.
> 
>     "Prime95 is an necessary torture test of a processor"
> 
> The purpose of the torture test, is to prove the CPU
> being used, is capable of computing a mathematically
> correct answer. The same conditions (i.e. level of torture)
> exists while actual long-term Prime95 calculations are
> ongoing (these can go on for months). The CPU could be
> executing a 768K hand-coded FFT module while testing
> one 40 million digit number after another, for "prime-ness".
> So the torture test, is a precursor to actually doing
> calculations which use the very same code. Since the torture
> test also knows what the answer is supposed to be, the torture
> test can spot a mistake. Before it messes up a real calculation,
> perhaps claiming a number is a Mersenne Prime, when it isn't.
> 
> Other users, use Prime95, hot CPU and all, as a
> simulation of a demanding calculation that proves their
> processor can calculate other things with great accuracy.
> If I'm doing my taxes on the computer, I want proof it's
> a real live 100% functional computer first, so I run Prime95
> on it, before running a game or other kind of real application.
> 
> If the CPU was actually getting hot, you should fix that.
> On my new computer, I have a very large cooler on the CPU,
> and the CPU doesn't get hot at all running Prime95. On the
> other hand, the VCore regulator gets scorching hot :-)
> And that's a motherboard design defect. An underspecified
> regulator. An underspecified heatsink. And my mistake for
> buying it. The CPU on the other hand, is living in
> luxury.
> 
> There is actually one piece of code, that gets the
> processor hotter than Prime95. But I don't use that
> one. I use Prime95, because it knows what the math
> output of the calculation should be, and it isn't
> there just to make the CPU hot. It's to prove the
> CPU works, when as many nodes in the chip are working
> as possible.
> 
> If you want to make the CPU hot, you can do that
> with 7Zip compression just as easily.
> 
>     Paul

We tended to use a product (not freeware, sorry) known as HotCpu 
tester for doing burn in/troubleshooting tests. Many times, that 
application would detect a damaged AMD athlon/semperon processor. If 
the customer ran it too hot, even a few times, the l2 cache would 
suffer and eventually no longer be reliable. This would result in 
strange stability issues on the machine. It would resemble, 
completely random crashes with nothing in common. Didn't really see 
this issue much with Intel; I know of only one case where a machine 
failed l2 cache tests under the program using an Intel chip, but, the 
customer told us that the machine was on it's fourth cooling fan and 
they had a tendency to replace the fans only when the computer 
refused to boot. :) So...I suspect it got hot, more than a few times, 
excessively hot to the point of thermal protection shutdown and the 
customer ignored this and continued forcing the machine to try and 
run once it cooled off enough to do so again.

I've owned several older AMD systems and I was always learvy of an 
overheat condition on them, knowing from field experience how 
sensitive the chip was to damaging it's l2 cache if it did get too 
hot.




-- 
Hey listen...
On your way back up, bring some popcorn...With salt. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#252784

FromNomen Nescio <nobody@dizum.com>
Date2016-01-19 22:16 +0100
Message-ID<aa8dee4490f230345e9c0cc3370a614b@dizum.com>
In reply to#252728
In article <11jskwjhlodax$.13onprrtcfbtl.dlg@40tude.net>
JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> wrote:
>
> On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:50:33 +0100, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> > Here’s what Intel has to say about the Skylake issues that
> > happen in Prime95:
> > “Intel has identified an issue that potentially affects the 6th
> > Gen Intel Core family of products. This issue only occurs under
> > certain complex workload conditions, like those that may be
> > encountered when running applications like Prime95. In those
> > cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable system
> > behaviour.”
>
> From what I can see is that they've haven't tested Skylake well, and the
> product is kind of rushed to the market. They *assumed* that such heavy load
> will never happen. Well, strike two, Intel.
>
> > Hapkiman • 7 days ago
> > Prime95 is an unnecessary torture test of a processor, that and
> > it was designed with totally different architecture in mind. It
> > is no longer necessary and only causes extremely high temps on
> > Skylake and Haswell processors. Temps they would never hit no
> > matter what other load you put them under. There are many other
> > ways to test for a stable system. I use my system several hours
> > a day, and I know almost immediately if my rig has an issue. I
> > don't need to punish it.
>
> Regardsless, it's still a fact that there's a bug.

Intel P60 anyone?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#252794 — Re: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads

FromEuclides Zoto <euclides_zoto@optimum.net>
Date2016-01-18 18:20 -0800
SubjectRe: Intel Skylake Processor Bug Causing PCs To Freeze In Complex Workloads
Message-ID<569D9D54.BAB77B5@optimum.net>
In reply to#252784

Nomen Nescio wrote:

> In article <11jskwjhlodax$.13onprrtcfbtl.dlg@40tude.net>
> JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net> wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:50:33 +0100, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> > > Here’s what Intel has to say about the Skylake issues that
> > > happen in Prime95:
> > > “Intel has identified an issue that potentially affects the 6th
> > > Gen Intel Core family of products. This issue only occurs under
> > > certain complex workload conditions, like those that may be
> > > encountered when running applications like Prime95. In those
> > > cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable system
> > > behaviour.”
> >
> > From what I can see is that they've haven't tested Skylake well, and the
> > product is kind of rushed to the market. They *assumed* that such heavy load
> > will never happen. Well, strike two, Intel.
> >
> > > Hapkiman • 7 days ago
> > > Prime95 is an unnecessary torture test of a processor, that and
> > > it was designed with totally different architecture in mind. It
> > > is no longer necessary and only causes extremely high temps on
> > > Skylake and Haswell processors. Temps they would never hit no
> > > matter what other load you put them under. There are many other
> > > ways to test for a stable system. I use my system several hours
> > > a day, and I know almost immediately if my rig has an issue. I
> > > don't need to punish it.
> >
> > Regardsless, it's still a fact that there's a bug.
>
> Intel P60 anyone?

Reminds me of the Pentium Pro 200mhz processor.  I remember when they said it
shouldn't affect your system.  Who computes that high anyway?


[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253615

FromDiesel <me@privacy.net>
Date2016-01-30 08:07 +0000
Message-ID<XnsA59F20D5FBFD1F7D9A8@dieselpower.eternal-september.org>
In reply to#252728
JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net>
news:11jskwjhlodax$.13onprrtcfbtl.dlg@40tude.net Tue, 19 Jan 2016
09:04:36 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote: 

> On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:50:33 +0100, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
>> Here’s what Intel has to say about the Skylake issues that 
>> happen in Prime95:
>> “Intel has identified an issue that potentially affects the 6th 
>> Gen Intel Core family of products. This issue only occurs under 
>> certain complex workload conditions, like those that may be 
>> encountered when running applications like Prime95. In those 
>> cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable system 
>> behaviour.”
> 
> From what I can see is that they've haven't tested Skylake well,
> and the product is kind of rushed to the market. They *assumed*
> that such heavy load will never happen. Well, strike two, Intel.
> 
>> Hapkiman • 7 days ago
>> Prime95 is an unnecessary torture test of a processor, that and 
>> it was designed with totally different architecture in mind. It 
>> is no longer necessary and only causes extremely high temps on 
>> Skylake and Haswell processors. Temps they would never hit no 
>> matter what other load you put them under. There are many other 
>> ways to test for a stable system. I use my system several hours 
>> a day, and I know almost immediately if my rig has an issue. I 
>> don't need to punish it.
> 
> Regardsless, it's still a fact that there's a bug.

This isn't the first time a bug has been introduced in an Intel 
processor. The original pentium had a problem too. [g] If you spec'd 
out a blueprint in Autocad running one of those bad chips and 
actually tried to build the project to spec, you'd quickly notice 
it's not what you expected. :)


-- 
Hey listen...
On your way back up, bring some popcorn...With salt. 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]


#253625

From"Anonymous Remailer (austria)" <mixmaster@remailer.privacy.at>
Date2016-01-30 10:03 +0100
Message-ID<8537e39fc2737268557473b549b9d4da@remailer.privacy.at>
In reply to#253615
In article <XnsA59F20D5FBFD1F7D9A8@dieselpower.eternal-
september.org>
Diesel <me@privacy.net> wrote:
>
> JJ <jj4public@vfemail.net>
> news:11jskwjhlodax$.13onprrtcfbtl.dlg@40tude.net Tue, 19 Jan 2016
> 09:04:36 GMT in alt.comp.freeware, wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 19 Jan 2016 01:50:33 +0100, Fritz Wuehler wrote:
> >> Here’s what Intel has to say about the Skylake issues that
> >> happen in Prime95:
> >> “Intel has identified an issue that potentially affects the 6th
> >> Gen Intel Core family of products. This issue only occurs under
> >> certain complex workload conditions, like those that may be
> >> encountered when running applications like Prime95. In those
> >> cases, the processor may hang or cause unpredictable system
> >> behaviour.”
> >
> > From what I can see is that they've haven't tested Skylake well,
> > and the product is kind of rushed to the market. They *assumed*
> > that such heavy load will never happen. Well, strike two, Intel.
> >
> >> Hapkiman • 7 days ago
> >> Prime95 is an unnecessary torture test of a processor, that and
> >> it was designed with totally different architecture in mind. It
> >> is no longer necessary and only causes extremely high temps on
> >> Skylake and Haswell processors. Temps they would never hit no
> >> matter what other load you put them under. There are many other
> >> ways to test for a stable system. I use my system several hours
> >> a day, and I know almost immediately if my rig has an issue. I
> >> don't need to punish it.
> >
> > Regardsless, it's still a fact that there's a bug.
>
> This isn't the first time a bug has been introduced in an Intel
> processor. The original pentium had a problem too. [g] If you spec'd
> out a blueprint in Autocad running one of those bad chips and
> actually tried to build the project to spec, you'd quickly notice
> it's not what you expected. :)

Intel 915 chipset, "Vista Capable".

Windows got blamed for that Intel POS too.

Extract from MS emails.

"We are really burning HP... We are allowing Intel to drive our 
consumer experience."

"On February 26, 2007, general manager John Kalkman sent an e-
mail discussing the changes to the "Vista Capable" definition."

"In the end, we lowered the requirement to help Intel make their 
quarterly earnings so they could continue to sell motherboards 
with 915 graphics embedded."

Intel has done more to hinder computing OS advancement than any 
OEM on the planet - including IBM.  And that's saying something.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]


Page 5 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5]

Back to top | Article view | alt.comp.freeware


csiph-web