SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)
AMD 253.73+1.6%Jan 22 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: wanna_bmw who wrote (53584)9/1/2001 5:30:16 PM
From: porn_start878Read Replies (1) of 275872
 
If there's one thing I dislike, it's circular reasoning

Believe me I hate it just as much, and that's why I read back the whole thread to see if I could find any. And in retrospective, I can understand you had the impression of it, but I'll show you how I never ignored any of your arguments (which is the behavior that fuels circular reasoning IMO).

You said Intel claims 65% extra from .18 to .13 move while AMD claims 30%.

I disagree and I try to argue that most of those gains are or will be achieved because of core optimizations and that, in fact, only 30% will be due directly to the move to .13u. I think those core optimizations could benefit the .18u process just as much.

Re-read all my replies with that reasoning in mind and you'll find out that was really bringing new points by forcing you to compare apples to apples, IOW core stepping X to core stepping X.

Maybe at last there is no such thing as core optimizations, and you can NEVER apply optimizations made to a .XY micron version of a core to a .UV micron of the SAME exact core. If so, I understand why you've been lead to think I was ignoring your arguments, while I was thinking we were talking of different things.

Max
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext