Pentium IV Non-bus Master PCI Bug Lives 79
Barbarian writes "This ZDNN article says that a bug in the Pentium IV chipset that caused a recall months ago and causes a slowdown on systems with a second (PCI) video card still exists. A talkback comment points out that this bug affects any non-bus master PCI device." To be fair, the probable amount of people that it will effect is relatively small, and even if you do want two monitors, most companies are just using the Matrox G450, or one on the AGP, one on the PCI.
Re:Did you read the article? (Score:1)
you can only use the AGP slot for video.
While it is called the Advanced Graphics Port, I would imagine that any piece of hardware which required fast access to the system memory would fit into this port. I could think of some data acquisition equipment which may be able to utilize the features that AGP provides over PCI.
And it is quite possible to install video cards into PCI expansion slots if AGP is available. I've done so many times.
It's "Pentium 4", not "IV" (Score:1)
Re:Not just vid cards affected (Score:1)
I'll be steering clear of the P4 then...
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
I use a Matrox Dual Head G400 Max (Yes, its AGP so its not affected by the bug) with two 17" monitors. I use Multiple desktops in Linux, and now I can use Multiple desktops in Windows as well. Still, what is the big deal right? this is the big deal. [planetquake.com] Take a look at those UT screenshots on FIVE monitors. Sure, I have the ability to use the dual with my 17" monitors, and I do (like the shots of Quake 1 and 3 below), but five? Not yet, but you can be damn sure I am thinking about it. I have enough monitors and cards to do it too.
So, the "big deal" is that this bug prevents me from doing what I would like.
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
Re:G450 use (Score:1)
Why just video cards (Score:1)
Re:And your point is...? (Score:1)
So I won't worry too much. Intel has a record of not testing products enough before releasing them. Sometime you just cannot test everything like it does in the real world. Microsoft is a prime example of that, but Linux is just as guilty. (Don't tell me there were never bugs in a stable Linux kernel)
----------------------------------------------
Re:Matrox G450 not true dual head (Score:1)
Re:Did you read the article? (Score:1)
Re:Go google way ;) (Score:1)
You're forgetting certian laws of physics that basicly say "the heat has to go somewhere".
Refridgerators do a good job of keeping your food cold, at the expence of heating your house. You're still going to have problems with the heat unless you pipe the heat outside somehow (usialy, this means using airconditioning equiptment).
True, but you're still going to use more electricty with a cluster of low power machines than with one high power machine. Not only do you need more power for the additional machines, but you also need to consider things such as cooling, the equiptment thats needed to network the cluster together and manage it, and other considerations. Obviously, there's also maintainace and administration issues as well.
If you want to try it, be my guest.
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
Hardly "legacy hardware"...
Re:G450 use (Score:1)
Re:People really need to read the article (Score:1)
why just video ?
I don't think the PCI bus can detect the kind of data is transporting so it must affect other things as well.
---
Re:The problem is... it's not only video! (Score:1)
To my understanding the problem occurs with every PCI device which isn't PCI master when doing I/O. So you I think you are right and we will see problems with these motherboards in a lot of different installations.
The funny part is that if Intel keeps producing all these flawed chipsets, I think in the end P4 computers will only be used to run Windows ME e.a. in simple home installations, and we won't see it in high-performance configurations. So the problem is solved, and Intel is right..
[offtopic]
you seem to be the only
[/offtopic]
Re:Some bugs just don't die... (Score:1)
Code in the middle
And entertainment to the right (MOVIE). I can't think of a better division, though I use an AGP, a PCI and a TV out (tvtuner piped out) to accomplish it. And yes it's efficient as you don't have to switch screens. To make things really slick, I span the desktop between the two monitors for task switching. One moment I'm coding and the next I'm checking up on the news or something (both monitors, who only reads one website at a time?).
Perhaps some people are just more co-ordinated than others.
And what about netcards? (Score:1)
Today any high-end network server has at least 2 netcards, for routing and/or rendundancy purposes. Even if you don't want your server connected to two networks, you still want to have it rendundant, so it can continue serve data if one of the cards or cables fails.
I think that a highend server, which you would build with such and expensive and fast CPU, would most likely deserve your attention towards rendundancy/fallback.
Also, I wonder if there are any other PCI bus-mastering related bugs in this chipset. I would not risk putting a Gigabit ethernet card in a P4 anytime soon, really.
Re:G450 use (Score:1)
Looks pretty standard for most documentation regarding consumer electronics today =)
The problem IS a big deal. (Score:1)
The bug in the chip-set limits a user to either accepting a system slowdown when they install a PCI video card for their second display; or using the Matrox card which is at the end of its market life and is outperformed by most, if not all other high-end cards currently on the market.
Many users at my employer who need high-end systems also require multi-monitor support. Due to this bug, we will not be purchasing P-IV's with the current available chip-set. We will either wait for a new chip-set or settle for a P-III (my employer still refuses to accept Athlons, although I personally prefer them).
Meanwhile, on an issue unrelated to the bug, most home users who prefer multi-monitor support would, I suspect, prefer to wait for the next generation of P-IV, so there actually exists an upgrade path for the system.
The home power user market will be avoiding the P-IV for now anyways; and the corporate market will have limited use for it at this time due to the chip set bug. Intel's PR department will have to work a lot of overtime to get these things to move off the shelves while they wait for a fixed chip set to come out onto the market.
Try reading the article before flaming away (Score:1)
True, technically you could still use the PCI slots for video on the P4 w/ the 850; but with the performance and image quality problems that result from the bug in the chip set, you would not be very productive on any system configured in that way.
Re:Not just vid cards affected (Score:1)
Not just PCI video cards affected! (Score:1)
Doesn't sound like a trivial problem to me.
Re:The problem is... (Score:1)
-1 Intel (Score:1)
We can see why AMD has been able to gain such a large profit share, new technology faster, more stable and oh in case you didn't know at a fraction of the cost. Lets see... IA-64 Vaporware, Pentium 4 bugs and recalls... I think the choice is obvious don't you.
Re:Some bugs just don't die... (Score:1)
Re:And your point is...? (Score:1)
I realize that some manufactures like Dell sold FX chipset based servers that supported a 333Mhz PII with 66Mhz EDO DIMMs. I don't know if there was a revision to the chipset or if they made some work around. The point is that your father bought a transition motherboard instead of waiting for an LX board with AGP. You can't blame a chipset for not supporting technology that hasn't been released yet. That is a limitation in the future but how are you going to second guess the future. Intel tried with Rambus with less than ideal results.
Re:not at all meaningless (Score:1)
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
electricity charges (Score:1)
Re:Did you read the article? (Score:1)
Not with the P4 - that's why it is a BUG
You can not use PCI for video on this system. The one in the article....
Re:Did you read the article? (Score:1)
See, the "Except" part is what makes the BUG and prevents you from using a PCI video card like you can in a normal system.... When you start using exceptions from the normal or expected behavior, that is what makes a bug. Hope I did not use to many big words for you...?
Re:Did you read the article? (Score:1)
are just using the Matrox G450, or one on the AGP, one on the PCI.
And, whereas the Martox card is a viable solution, placing a second (or even only) card in a PCI slot is not.
What is the actual bug? (Score:1)
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
Might I suggest you try adding:
export TERM="linux-m"
To your
If the linux-m definition doesn't come with your termcap, it is part of the slackware distro.
Drats (Score:1)
Re:The magicians aprentice (Score:1)
Like the P3 1.13GHz?
Intel is losing even that edge. I wonder how much longer they will be considered the top chipmaker
The magicians aprentice (Score:1)
Microprocessors (& Software) got so bloated and complex, that it seems inconceivable that we will ever return to the stability we used to have with far simpler systems.
Of course those lacked dancing paper clips and a kisuaheli spell checker...
Re:The magicians aprentice (Score:1)
Where they ever ?
Maybe, but only in terms of market share. In terms of technological edge Intel seems to have lost it years ago. Compare it with an Alpha and they are probably not yet there where DEC started out in the middle of the nineties.
Now, if DEC would have had such a thing like an only halfwitted sales - and marketing organization in the first place they wouldn't be called Compaq today.
Re:People really need to read the article (Score:1)
Re:Some bugs just don't die... (Score:1)
Hell, the Amiga has offered multiple screens at different resolutions and bit-depths for the last 15 years, folks!
Sure, you need to flip between the screens (simple mouseclick or keypress), but to be totally honest, I do not believe that anyone can productivly USE 3 monitors simultaneously to do different things - you will be concentrating on one of the 3 at any one time.
Just my 2p-worth - interesting to see how technology in the year 2000 goes into overkill to simulate what some of use were doing since the 1980s
--
Re:Why just video cards (Score:1)
1. Most block I/O devices ARE BUS-mastering (all IDE controllers on the market today are, and most SCSI controllers are - unless you are trying to use your cheapo scanner card to run a drive, which isn't recommended anyway).
2. Some PCI video cards made post-1996 are bus-mastering.
3. Some NICs are busmastering.
On older mobos (of the original pentium era), there were usually 4 PCI slots, 2 of which were shared ISA, and the first one was the only one that was busmastering, and this caused conflicts when you had 2 devices that required busmastering (such as a NIC and a Videocard). NICs and Vidcards made during the 486-586 era were busmastering because the PCI bus couldn't be shared efficiently. Nowadays, with a bus speed higher than 66mhz and more than 2 independant PCI slots, it isn't necessary to restrict data transfer to one high bandwidth device at a time.
It is no longer necessary to stick the bus-mastering card in the first PCI slot anymore.
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
"Legacy hardware" is not always old stuff. To me, "legacy" may mean a 64MB video card that I may have purchased a couple of months ago. What if I want to upgrade to a P-IV now, but know that I want a second monitor later? I couldn't even go out and buy a cheap 8MB card (also made by Intel) because it would kill the performance. Does that mean I can't upgrade now? Why should I be forced to go buy a new video card to replace the perfectly good (and very powerful) one I have now? What sense would that make? What I want to put into my computer should not be dictated by a hardware bug that shouldn't even exist, especially if I'm willing to pay that much for it.
Matrox G400/G450 is true dual head (Score:1)
This is NOT a G400/G450 problem, it's a limitation in Windows 2000! Any other OS can take advantage of the DualHead feature, read more about it here [matrox.com]
Some bugs just don't die... (Score:1)
Re:G450 use (Score:1)
And yes... I did submit the changes back to Matrox
What I wonder.... (Score:1)
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
PCs aren't just for Quake any more . .
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:1)
Do yourself a favor -- try a multimonitor display before you make such idiotic claims. Some people don't have $1000 in the bank to lay down on a single investment, and among those that do, most of them would find that fewer pixels spread across more displays are more effective. It allows them to make a REAL mental separation between each region of the screen, and quickly begin to organize and assign special tasks to each one.
yes (Score:2)
Re:It's "Pentium 4", not "IV" (Score:2)
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:2)
Besides, there's this issue of hogging desk space with multiple monitors even if they ARE TFT flat-panel units.
Think about it: outside of developers, very high-end gamers and people in stock brokerages, there's no real need for more than one monitor. Especially now with 21" diagonal displays running 1600x1200, more than enough to do even serious desktop publishing work.
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:2)
While having more than one display is great if you're doing program or web page development, very high-end games or working in a financial brokerage house, that still is only a small fraction of the total computer market out there. For the average computer user out there, you really don't need more than one monitor.
Think about it: a top-quality 21" Sony, Viewsonic, Eizo NANAO or NEC monitor can display even beyond 1600x1200 32-bit color at 85 Hz vertical refresh rate. I believe some 21" monitors can display 1900x1440 at 85 Hz vertical refresh rate with no problems. And these monitors can be had for around US$1,000 to US$1,200.
At 1600x1200, you can easily read two 8.5" x 11" pages side by side; this makes it VERY useful for desktop publishing.
Anyway, most new computer users who buy higher-end systems usually run 1024x768 to 1280x1024 85 Hz with the 19" monitors out there. That's more than enough to see web pages clearly and do fairly decent quality print previews.
In short, while I do agree there is a place for setups with more than one monitor, that setup is not for the vast majority of computer users out there.
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:2)
Actually, I myself stay away from the i820, i840 and i850 chipsets because Intel seems to have WAY, WAY too many problems with these chipsets. They make the slight memory slowness of the VIA KT133 chipsets used on AMD Athlon Socket A motherboards seem like a minor problem in comparison.
But again, we agree to disagree.
But how many people NEED a second graphics card? (Score:2)
Tell me: just how many people out there NEED a second graphics card?
That may be necessary for a very small number of games and some CAD programs, but given today's cheap 19" and 21" monitors running 1600x1200 resolution, you can have lots of display area AND still keep the menu commands on the same screen.
In short, the bug with the i850 chipset only affects people who primarily use legacy hardware. It's not that likely people will put in older graphics hardware into today's P4 systems given how good 3-D graphics cards and their ability to display 1600x1200 32-bit color have become.
Re:The magicians aprentice (Score:2)
I am concerned about the corporate culture at Intel. They have a long history of shipping products that are buggy, inefficient and inelegant, but cheap, fast to market and available in large quantities.
Re:G450 use (Score:2)
You don't need DVD accelerator on a PIV (Score:2)
I think around an Athlon 750 or so, DVD playback in software has been the equal of DVD playback in hardware.
Of course, if you need to do something else while watching a DVD, it could still be an issue, but not many people do that.
People really need to read the article (Score:2)
The sad thing is, this is the first paragraph. Isn't this site supposed to be discussion of *the articles*?
Re:You don't need DVD accelerator on a PIV (Score:2)
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:2)
It won't let you eat, it won't let you breathe, it won't let you go to the can. No computers are NEEDED. What we NEED is food. Maybe shelter.
But you know what I *WANT*? I'd like one of those little 9" black and white monitors you sometimes see working with a cash register. Probably real cheap, too!
Can you say log monitoring? System health? Nethack?
Dave
Barclay family motto:
Aut agere aut mori.
(Either action or death.)
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:2)
You can get them new for under sixty bucks, if memory serves me. Hit up google with the search 'mono vga 9" POS'.
Go google way ;) (Score:2)
Instead, one could go the google way - take as many old computers as you need (486 or something), and use their beauty. Cheap, reliable when plenty, and even more interesting conecptually (networks, clusters, distributed systems, etc).
The drawbacks of course are obvious: space, noise and electricity charges. But if you take a closer look, it becomes even more interesting:
- space and noise (and heat/speed) can be fixed by something like "computer in the fridge", which I am sure everyone read about...
- electricity charges are not that high considering the number of monitors
As I have read somewhere not long ago, Google has now more then 6K Linux servers, with the most powerful one being a P133 or something... That is interesting
Re:No great worry from *this* but... (Score:2)
And for any USB product also.
Re:Some bugs just don't die... (Score:2)
At any rate, the problem *does* affect many people. That being said, the next rev of the chipset will probably fix it. I'd be a hypocrite if I didn't point out that AMD has had similar problems, too, it's not just Intel's fault--anyone remember the bugs in the AMD 750, which was the only chipset available for months after the K7 came out?
Re:Some bugs just don't die... (Score:2)
Add a third monitor and you can do tons of stuff at the same time. Code, troll the net, read docs, IRC, buildworld, watch what packets are coming through your firewall at 3am...etc, and never have to worry about "what window was that again?" Everything is right there in front of you.
Since I do different things, they are all at different resolutions. My primary/gaming monitor (which is the largest) is in the middle (21" 1280x1024) Then (2) 19" monitors on either side. The one I keep things on that I will keep refering to, such as docs is at 1600x1200. The one that I usually keep my remote connection windows on is sometimes at 800x600, sometime at 1024x768, depending on how many machines I am connected to at one time. If I want to play a movie while coding/reading docs I set that third monitor at 640x480.
As far as I know the only way to achieve this setup is with 1 agp card and 2 pci cards. I don't think the Matrox's dual head, which I have on another machine, can do it because it assumes that the two monitors are next to each other, with nothing in the middle. Someone else should confirm that though. The G400 also doesn't support individual monitor resolutions on some os's. (cough...nt...cough)
I use all three of my monitors everyday, and have found it very enjoyable. To the extent that I won't even put a machine in my home because I can't afford more than one monitor. When I get on a machine w/ one monitor I feel like I'm in a box. If I had the room on my desk I would totally add a fourth 15" monitor dedicated to watching the logs that come in from the machines on my network. There must be people out there that do it. So, even then, unless you have a quad-head, you would require at least 2 dual-heads.
The point is...Fix the bug!
No great worry from *this* but... (Score:2)
This makes me wonder if I really want one. Sure, this bug's only with the chipset, not with the chip itself, and it only affects a small percentage of users. I would not be one of them, to be sure. Just the same, this just seems to be one more in a series of errata surrounding this chip and, indeed, this company's products. It seems that poor QA continues within Intel, and they don't even provide best-of-class performance anymore.
Given the QA track record thus far, is there anything else lingering that might cause "slow processing or data corruption" yet is branded minor? I don't think my next purchase is likely to contain this company's products.second graphics card? (Score:2)
Matrox G450 not true dual head (Score:2)
If you want true dual head, get two cards NOT a G400. And the best implementations of this that I've seen are one AGP and one PCI so this P4 bug doesn't really apply here.
Did you read the article? (Score:2)
That's just it, you can not add a video card to any PCI slots, you can only use the AGP slot for video. Since there is only one AGP slot, you can use only one video card!
Re:No great worry from *this* but... (Score:2)
Well... technically... USB is basically their baby. If your next computer purchase has USB support, some of your money is probably going towards royalties to Intel off of the whole USB deal.
http://www.bootyproject.org [bootyproject.org]
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:2)
Oh... I agree, very few people need a second monitor. Definite niche market. However, lots of people would benefit from one. Also, the niche market is growing. Windows2000, which suports dual monitors (NT4 didn't) is just starting to catch on in the professional market. And most people who have tried a dul-monitor setup don't want to go back.
Also, the P4 is supposedly the current top-of-the-line chip you can buy. A lot of P4 users are high-end users, so the percentage of P4 users who need/want dual monitor support is small, but larger than the percentage of general PC users who need/want dual-monitor support.
I mean, how many people need more than 128MB of ram? Very few. But what if the P4 chipsets didn't support more than 128MB of ram? What if the P4 didn't support defragging your disks on the 5th day of the month? What if your car didn't support sharp left turns above 55mph? What if your toilet didn't support more than five flushes an hour?
The point is, it's ridiculous to defend an error by saying "oh, must people don't need that anyway". The point is, some people do need or want those features. Obviously this is another bad mark against Intel's name. Plus, as far as I know, every previous Intel chipset supported dual monitors just fine (MS OS's haven't always supported them... but to the chipset another PCI video card is just another PCI device for the most part). Intel's arrogance and coverups are really ticking people off...
http://www.bootyproject.org [bootyproject.org]
Pentium IV is for Graphics Market (Score:2)
To be fair, the probable amount of people that it will effect is relatively small, and even if you do want two monitors, most companies are just using the Matrox G450
I can't agree with that. The PIV is marketed (and indeed seems only to be good for) graphics and video. This market segment relies heavily on two monitor configurations, and the G400/450 isn't always the card we want.
And for video production, which is the PIV's strongpoint, I guess the Matrox RT2000 (an excellent low-cost real time video production & digitizing card) is out. It uses the dual head G400 as the base video card, but you can only do video editing with it in single-monitor mode (plus a TV screen). To edit video with dual screens, which makes it much easier, you MUST get another G400 video card on the PCI bus. And you're out of luck with the PIV.
And your point is...? (Score:2)
Moore's new law (Score:3)
Not just vid cards affected (Score:3)
I feel that, that makes the bug a little more serious than your standard Intel screwups...
Link at News.com (Score:3)
CNET's News.com had a story on this as well:
Minor bug lingers in Pentium 4 chipset [cnet.com]
Interestingly enough, they originally had it under a very misleading title (it said "Minor bug lingers in Pentium 4 processor" IIRC). They apparently got enough feedback that they retitled it by this morning.
Re:But how many people NEED a second graphics card (Score:3)
Tell me: just how many people out there NEED a second graphics card?
I'll tell you what... two monitors are the way to go. Anyone who's going work that requires a lot of screen real estate (programmers, artists, etc) can benefit from an extra monitor, no matter how big their primary monitor is. Also, a lot of people simply have extra, perfectly good, compatible hardware laying around they'd like to use. Or they can pick it up on eBay or a computer show...
but given today's cheap 19" and 21" monitors running 1600x1200 resolution, you can have lots of display area AND still keep the menu commands on the same screen.
Trust me... in order to get 1600x1200 resolution at a decent clarity and refresh rate that doesn't kill your eyes, you need to buy a pretty nice monitor, NOT a cheap one. The average 19-inch monitor is NOT usable at 1600x1200... cheap ones only do 60 or 70hz at this resolution. Trust me, I did a lot of shopping before I found one and it wasn't cheap. But I love my 19-inch Sony. :)
In short, the bug with the i850 chipset only affects people who primarily use legacy hardware. It's not that likely people will put in older graphics hardware into today's P4 systems given how good 3-D graphics cards and their ability to display 1600x1200 32-bit color have become.
Wrong! A large number of computer professionals/hobbiest have old PCI video cards and smallish monitors laying around. Come on, what computer junkie DOESN'T have a box full of old hardware? :) It's INCREDIBLY USEFUL AND COST EFFECTIVE to use this old hardware for a secondary display on your shiny new PC.
And anyway... your post bothers me on a couple of other points to. The "who really needs all that screen real estate" attitude reeks heavily of the infamous "640k should be enough for everyone" quote. Also, it's none of yours or Intel's god damn business HOW much screen real estate I need. I pay for hardware, it should work whether you think I'm using it in a dumb way or not. If I think I need 3 1600x1200 monitors that's my business. Intel's hardware should simply work the way it's supposed to. If it did, we wouldn't be having this discussion.
http://www.bootyproject.org [bootyproject.org]
Just a reminder for the Pentium complainers (Score:4)
The problem is... (Score:4)
I suspect that the major issue here is that Intel doesn't want to do a recall on the boards that have already been made, like the i820. So they are figuring that this isn't a major enough problem, so they are going to just let it ship.
It doesn't bother me because I'm not going to buy a P4 of this vintage. If I upgrade, it'll either be to a fast P3, the next version of the P4 and chipset, or an Athlon.