Intel Corporation (INTC) Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 49.36

+1.3%

9:57 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Windsock who wrote (169572)	8/18/2002 2:27:42 PM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) of 186894

"Unless you are looking at a table in a software reference manual describing individual instructions" I must be a while when you looked at those manuals. Since incorporation of Out-Of-Order architectures, Pentium-Pro/Pentium-II/K6, both Intel and AMD stopped publishing any clock numbers for individual instructions, e.g. developer.intel.com because they make no sense, are not individually measurable, and sometimes appear as absurdly negative. "The indicator of "IPC" is almost exclusively used to explain away the low and embarrassing clock speed of the Athwiper." There is not much of embarrassment if AMD processors still post equal or better scores on user applications than the majority of mass-produced P4/SDRAM systems. What is really embarrassing is that the bloated frequency of P4 does not automatically translate into higher user application performance, unless you recompile all software. Which is a pretty expensive undertaking. As result, an average user may expect higher speedup on his software investments when upgrading to AMD, or at least it is more cost effective. - Ali

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next