Crunch3r has got an optimised application. But there is isn�t a way to link it in the app_info yet...

Someone had a good question (out of a couple of very good questions) over at Q&P that I can't answer (yet) as my only SE result went up in smoke. ;)

Will SETI correctly crunch the 3 days or so of regular workunits I have in my queue before switching to the new processing mode?

Does Seti and Seti Enhanced switch apps every x amount of time (whatever you set for application switch time in your preferences)? Or does it follow the "list"?

Has anyone here with both results noticed yet?

My point is that using these chips outside of the market segment use conditions should cause premature failures (if the manufacturer's reliability folks are earning their money and not overspec'ing things).

If someone is actually running an AMD (see below) and is getting soft or otherwise errors, this may be an early warning.

Case temps are one thing, but the chip's junction temps are spec'd, at least internally. The junction temp (what the heat sink is trying to cool) is probably 100C. Electromigration and related rel specs are based on this junction tempeature, too.

Oh, yeah, blaming the chip set instead of the cpu manufacturer is hardly honest. The system fails when it fails.

Most processors are rated to around 100C. Traditionally, they have a lifetime of 10y, which is where the manufacturers once decided they could accept the economic risk based on the reliability bath tub curve. More recently the acceptable lifetimes have been pulled in (at least internally to companies like Intel) to 7 y and to 5 y. Again they are accepting more risk by pushing the operating conditions. (If the customer dumps his laptop after 4y why warrant anything beyond 5y, is the argument.) In the same vein, they have convoluted 'market segment use condition' with lifetime, which on the surface is very objective, but proves a risk for gonzo's like the people in here who are using their laptops as desktops. For example, the Pentium M was meant for a laptop which has a totally different use condition (always on) than a desktop (frequently off, little number crunching), so it's performance and reliability 'curves' were adjusted accordingly.

With that long winded preamble, when I read the comment above regarding AMDs' pooping out at 75-80C, it makes me wonder what AMD has fiddled with on the reliability side to get the performance. (They don't have a good track reliability track record, at least a few years ago.) These temperatures are on the low side, especially since lifetime failure mechanisms are thermally activated (exponentially turned on for those folks in Rio Linda). Could we be looking at a rash of early wearouts in two years, in part because we gonzos have them going full blast all the time? (Well some of you do; I've stuck with Intel for now.) Something to ponder.