Advanced Micro vs Intel (AMD / 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 : Advanced Micro vs Intel (AMD / INTC)

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: chipguy who wrote (2435)	9/21/2007 8:01:09 PM
From: pgerassi	of 2596

Dear Chipguy: You take result which is peak and not base when comparing SPEC scores (per spec.org). And you use the same compiler version since SPEC results are highly dependent on compiler (proven many times, just look at the results). So using peak and Intel C++ version 5.0.1, you get 749(/720) for Athlon XP 2100+ (256KB L2 cache showing its a Palomino, not 512KB for Throughbred) versus 643(/641) for 2GHz Williamette (again with 256KB L2, not Northwood which has 512KB) on SPECint_2000. Athlon is 12.8% ahead of Williamette. For SPECfp_2000, Athlon XP 2100+ gets 660(/613) versus 734(/731) for 2GHz Williamette. Williamette is 11.2% ahead. Taking the geometric mean of those two benches shows 1.73GHz Palomino 0.7% ahead of 2GHz Williamette, 703 to 698. Another time you tried to slide base instead of the result (peak) as stated by spec.org. So even when recompiling, Williamette is slower than Palomino. When software isn't recompiled for the P4, it loses badly to Athlon XP. X87 was a particular nasty achilles heel for P4 wrt Athlon. And with 98% of the software at that time not updated/recompiled for the P4, Williamette loses badly to Palomino. Pete

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next