atibens
Aktives Mitglied
- Dabei seit
- 17.05.2007
- Beiträge
- 3.504
- Reaktionspunkte
- 488
Das Problem hat grunsätzlich mit der Hitze des GPU und einer Materialunverträglichkeit/ falschen Materialauswahl zu tun - d.h. der Ausfall muss nicht im direkten Zusammenhang mit der Hitze zum Ausfallzeitpunkt sein, sondern die Hitze der GPU bewirkt ganz langsam den Fehler; siehe Originalartikel ( http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquirer/news/2008/07/09/nvidia-g84-g86-bad ) :
The short story is that all the G84 and G86 parts are bad. Period. No exceptions. All of them, mobile and desktop, use the exact same ASIC, so expect them to go south in inordinate numbers as well. There are caveats however, and we will detail those in a bit.
Both of these ASICs have a rather terminal problem with unnamed substrate or bumping material, and it is heat related. If you ask Nvidia officially, you will get no reason why this happened, and no list of parts affected, we tried. Unofficially, they will blame everyone under the sun, and trash their suppliers in very colourful language.
The press is totally stonewalled, but analysts are quite another story. If you call up with Wall Street credentials, they will tell you what is going on, but unfortunately it doesn't seem to be entirely accurate. What analysts tell me they were officially told is that it is a specific batch of parts that only HP got.
The official story is that it was a batch of end-of-life parts that used a different bonding/substrate process for only that batch. Once again, the trusty INQUIRER bullshit detectors went off so loudly that the phone almost vibrated out of my hand. More than enough people tell us both the G84 and G86 use the same ASIC across the board, and no changes were made during their lives.
When the process engineers pinged by the INQ picked themselves off the floor from laughing, they politely said that there is about zero chance that NV would change the assembly process or material set for a batch, much less an EOL part.
