Processor bugs, or errata, seem to be an epidemic lately. After AMD's erratum number 298 found its way onto all quad-core Opterons and Phenoms, word is now going around that Intel has also found a bug in its upcoming 45nm Core 2 Quad processors, causing it to postpone the chips. French enthusiast site Hardware.fr has the skinny:
According to our sources, dual-core Penryn processors (code-named Wolfdale) will indeed launch in mid-January, but quad-core versions (code-named Yorkfield) won't become available until late February/early March. Behind this delay lies a bug that, in some very rare cases, could cause a system to crash. Although the bug has only been detected in the lab through a new validation procedure, Intel has decided to fix it before the chips' launch.
We asked Intel to comment and received this response from the company's PR manager, Dan Snyder:
45nm Core 2 Quad launch is planned for Q1'08, and we are still on track for that. We can't comment on web speculation.
The late February/early March schedule mentioned by Hardware.fr is a far cry from the January 20 date that's been quoted on other sites, but it still fits within Snyder's Q1 2008 time frame. If Hardware.fr is right and the chips have indeed been postponed, though, that could give AMD enough time to prep for Intel's 45nm assault by rolling out bug-free, B3 revision Phenoms and introducing models with higher clock speeds. (Thanks to TR reader Flying Fox for the tip.)
|Rumor: Intel Skylake-X and X299 will headline Computex 2017||55|
|Rumor: Nvidia to answer Radeon RX 550 with GeForce GT 1030||20|
|Samsung Galaxy Book tablets blend Windows 10 and Intel CPUs||17|
|Deals of the week: a mighty PSU, mid-range CPUs, and more||28|
|AMD board partners begin tricking out RX 560s and RX 550s||17|
|Dell shows off a pro-grade 4K HDR display and AIO machines||15|
|Rumor: Google to bake ad-blocking into Chrome browser||57|
|EpicGear's Defiant modular gaming keyboard reviewed||12|
|GeForce cards with faster RAM are inbound from multiple locations||19|
|Those power consumption numbers are very fermi-liar||+53|