標題: 8400和8600嚴重缺陷，一旦過(guò)保我們就有的忙了 [打印本頁(yè)] 作者: warm17325 時(shí)間: 2008-9-17 22:01 標題: 8400和8600嚴重缺陷，一旦過(guò)保我們就有的忙了 NVIDIA空前大危機 所有G84和G86存有致命缺陷 + ]3 b/ N: d! p1 X6 Y, |# V& \' f買(mǎi)了8系列顯卡的筆記本現在就可以默哀了 Nvidia 上一代筆電 GPU 出問(wèn)題,已經(jīng)對股價(jià)造成了極大的影響,但一個(gè)多禮拜過(guò)去了,對一般人而言最重要的問(wèn)題還是沒(méi)有答案:到底出問(wèn)題的是哪些 GPU 啊?據 The Inquirer 躲在 Nvidia 的內線(xiàn)的消息,是所有的 G84 和 G86 芯片,桌上型、筆電型都算,句點(diǎn).這絕對是 Nvidia 空前絕后的大危機.據 The Inquirer 挖出來(lái)的情報,出狀況的原因,是 G84 和 G86 共享的 ASIC 使用的黏著(zhù)材料(之類(lèi)的)在熱膨脹系數上和其他組件不相同,導致每次的收縮膨脹都會(huì )讓鍵結松脫一點(diǎn),長(cháng)久下來(lái)當然芯片就掛了.經(jīng)常性的加溫減溫會(huì )讓問(wèn)題更 加快速的顯現出來(lái),這大概也是為什么 Nvidia 先前只說(shuō)筆電的原因 -- 筆電為了省電,經(jīng)常會(huì )調控 CPU 和 GPU 的出力,因此溫度變化會(huì )遠比開(kāi)了就一直熱著(zhù)的桌上型 GPU 要劇烈.目前的解決方法(在 BIOS 里強制開(kāi)啟風(fēng)扇)根本只是降低溫度的變化率,以求能延長(cháng)這兩顆芯片的壽命到超過(guò)保固而已.這方法不僅治標不治本,而且對電池耐力有很大的影響.對買(mǎi)了相關(guān)產(chǎn)品的用戶(hù)來(lái)說(shuō)是相當不負責的態(tài)度.The Inquirer 這篇報導有點(diǎn)聳動(dòng),但 Nvidia 目前處理整件事情的態(tài)度,卻讓人不得不覺(jué)得這種說(shuō)法有一定的可信度.我們到現在還在猜測出問(wèn)題的是哪一批產(chǎn)品本身就是個(gè)問(wèn)題:Nvidia 什么都不說(shuō)明,不說(shuō)明是什么產(chǎn)品出問(wèn)題,不說(shuō)明是為什么出問(wèn)題,不說(shuō)明影響范圍有多大.為什么不說(shuō)?是一旦說(shuō)了 Nvidia 就完了嗎?我們目前唯一知道的,就是 Nvidia 預留了兩億美元來(lái)擦屁股,但如果真的所有的 G84/G86 芯片都有問(wèn)題,那我們現在看到的恐怕只是冰山的一角而已,隨著(zhù)時(shí)間的經(jīng)過(guò),出問(wèn)題的筆電只怕會(huì )愈來(lái)愈多,更何況還有桌上型的顯示適配器呢?兩億,夠嗎?: q9 W R* [9 b! J! G) X6 P1 Z# S5 I
也就是說(shuō),所有的G84和G86都存在這個(gè)缺陷，只不過(guò)由于筆記本顯卡為了節能不斷調整自身的電壓和頻率的行為會(huì )使這個(gè)缺陷迅速暴露。Nv花的2億美金估計擺不平這事。按照文章的意思應該是在一年或者更長(cháng)的時(shí)間后，所有G84和G86都會(huì )掛掉。買(mǎi)了8系列顯卡的筆記本現在就可以默哀了，桌面型因為溫度變化較小，可以多活一段時(shí)間。All Nvidia G84 and G86s are badhttp://www.theinquirer.net/gb/in ... idia-g84-g86-badG84 系列8600GS8600GT8600GTS8600M GS8600M GT8700MGTG86 系列8300GS8400GS8400M G8400M GS8400M GT8500GT 外國網(wǎng)站消息：" w) q5 D% y& M( U; ~& G" I
All Nvidia G84 and G86s are bad 3 x7 t+ k7 g) ]& M& E+ z) e% qComment No word on MCPs yetBy Charlie Demerjian: Wednesday, 09 July 2008, 5:43 PM THE BURNING QUESTION on everyone's mind is what Nvidia parts are failing in the field? No GT200 jokes here, NV personnel are still quite sensitive about that, but our moles have told us about the bum GPUs.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. On the less technical side, multiple analysts also told us that NV specifically told them that this problem is confined only to HP. I wonder why Dell is having failures in huge numbers for their XPS lines and replacing them with ATI parts? Why is Asus having similar problems? Go check the message boards, any notebooks that came with G84s and G86s have boards filled with dead machine problems. Most of these, especially on the NV forums are being quashed and removed by admins, so act quickly and take screenshots of your posts.Basically, NV seems to have told each analyst a highly personalised version of the story, and stonewalls everyone else who asks. Why? The magnitude of the problem is huge. If Dell and HP hold their feet to the fire, anyone want to bet that $200 million won't cover it? This has all the hallmarks of things the SEC used to investigate in a time before government was purchasable.The other problem is the long tail. Failures occur due to heat cycling, cold -> hot -> cold for the non-engineers out there. If you remember, we said all G84s and G86s are affected, and all are the same ASIC, so why aren't the desktop parts dying? They are, you are just low enough on the bell curve that you don't see it in number that set off alarm bells publicly yet.Laptops get turned on and off many times in a day, and due to the power management, throttle down much more than desktops. This has them going through the heat cycle multiple times in a day, whereas desktops typically get turned on and off once a day, sometimes left on for weeks at a time. Failures like this are typically on a bell curve, so they start out slow, build up, then tail off. Since laptops and desktops have a different "customer use patterns", they are at different points on the bell curve. Laptops have got to the, "we can't bury this anymore" point, desktops haven't, but they will - guaranteed. The biggest question is whether or not they will be under warranty at that point, not whether or not they are defective. They are.If you look at the HP page, the prophylactic fix they offer is to more or less run the fan all the time. Once again, for the non-engineers out there, fan running eats a lot of power, so this destroys the battery life of notebooks. Basically, people bought a machine with a battery life of X, and now it is Y to prevent meltdown from a bum part. It doesn't fix anything, it just makes the failures take longer, hopefully past the warranty period, at a huge battery life cost. Fire up your class actions people, you got shafted.Back to the engineering, we intoned that this was a cover-up of engineering failures by Nvidia. We also said that they probably knew what was happening. Think we were kidding? Read this, twice, linked again here for those that can't move their mouse to the left, it is that important. If we knew a year and change ago that these exact parts had heat problems, think Nvidia did? Think the voltage difference between A02 and A03 is coincidence? This is a classic example of not meeting engineering goals and overclocking through brute force (voltage bump in engineering terms) to compensate.HP and the others were blindsided by this, it happened far too late in the design cycle to compensate, and it looks to have been covered up hastily, badly, and eventually fatally. Blaming suppliers, OEMs and users is completely unfounded and says that NV is unwilling to properly address this issue, only hide from it. NV knew, they made silicon changes to fix another problem that directly lead to this problem.Nvidia is covering this up, hard. All the usual sources are keeping mum on the topic with only a few daring to speak out. Given the sheer magnitude of this, their marketshare for notebooks was huge in the period, this could very well suck up most of their remaining cash. Don't underestimate how bad this is going to be for NV, we highly doubt $200 million will even begin to cover it. Told ya so. µ 0 ?* E& L- E5 m1 g8 h本貼來(lái)自中關(guān)村在線(xiàn)產(chǎn)品論壇：<a >http://group.zol.com.cn/</a>,本帖地址：<a target='_blank'>http://nbbbs.zol.com.cn/37/116_365049.html</a>作者: 會(huì )飛的蜻蜓 時(shí)間: 2009-4-1 07:00
知道了作者: px877606181 時(shí)間: 2009-4-1 07:53
知道了
