[gruez]

>>The roughest era of AMD CPUs was the FX era.

>Ahem. Bulldozer?

Bulldozer is the same as FX.

>AMD FX is a series of high-end AMD microprocessors for personal computers which debuted in 2011, claimed as AMD's first native 8-core desktop processor.[1] The line was introduced with the Bulldozer microarchitecture at launch (codenamed "Zambezi"), and was then succeeded by its derivative Piledriver in 2012 (codenamed "Vishera").

[yread]

>The roughest era of AMD CPUs was the FX era.

Or the early Athlons that would literally burn down without cooling? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YYQSHXNFvUk

[rasz]

Toms Hardware posted retraction over a year later admitting motherboard was at fault and test was proposed and designed by Intel (including picking motherboard vendors) as part of their Pentium 4 promotion drive.

Same as Pentium 3 of same era, thermal throttling on socket A was supposed to be implemented by Motherboard vendors using chip integrated thermal diode. Pentium 3 would burn same way if put on a motherboard with non working thermal cutout.

[whaleofatw2022]

> thermal throttling on socket A was supposed to be implemented by Motherboard vendors using chip integrated thermal diode

TBirds and spitfire didn't have die sensor, that was first on Palomino/Morgan.

That said I've seen P4s die due to cooler failure so it was still dumb.

[rasz]

This is from that Toms article:

"Just like AMD's mobile Athlon4 processors, AthlonMP is based on AMD's new 'Palomino'-core, which will also be used in the upcoming AthlonXP processor. This core comes equipped with a thermal diode that is required for Mobile Athlon4's clock throttling abilities. Unfortunately Palomino is still lacking a proper on-die thermal protection logic. A motherboard that doesn't read the thermal diode is unable to protect the new Athlon processor from a heat death. We used a specific Palomino motherboard, Siemens' D1289 with VIA's KT266 chipset."

Intel suggested Siemens D1289 board for the test, board didnt have thermal protection. Intel suggested (or even delivered) Pentium III motherboard with working thermal protection.

[Rinzler89]

>AMD FX is a series of high-end AMD microprocessors for personal computers which debuted in 2011

Ha, well that's wrong. This is the first time I find a mistake or more accurately, a contradiction in Wikipedia.

AMD's first FX CPU (the FX-51) came out in 2003 as a premium Athlon 64 that was an expensive power hungry beast, which is the one I assume the GP was talking about. Here, also from Wikipedia:

"The Athlon 64 FX is positioned as a hardware enthusiast product, marketed by AMD especially toward gamers. Unlike the standard Athlon 64, all of the Athlon 64 FX processors have their multipliers completely unlocked."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon_64#Athlon_64_FX

[gruez]

It's not contradictory. The "FX" you're talking about is used as "Athlon FX"[1], whereas the "FX" in the article is "AMD FX"[2]. The branding might be a bit confusing, but the article isn't wrong.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AMD_Athlon64_FX.jpg

[2] https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:AMD_FX_CPU_New_logo....