Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) 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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD)

AMD 203.76

-1.1%

Nov 21 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Joe NYC who wrote (228831)	3/24/2007 8:10:36 PM
From: Sarmad Y. Hermiz	Read Replies (1) of 275872

>> Looking at parameters of the 65nm chips (as far as power consumption), it is better than 90nm process. Intel's power reduction for D830 compared to D930 was 130 Watt to 95. With adding 2 MB to the D930 cache. Surprisingly, the 95 W is listed for up to the D960 at 3.6 GHz. I believe AMD's was 89 W to 65, while keeping cache the same, and unable to get up to upper several speed bins. Whereas Intel missed only one bin. So AMD definitely did not get as much benefit from the 90nm->65nm transition, as Intel did. Even for the (so far) limited set of products that it was able to transition.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next