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.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Kevin K. Spurway who wrote (26253)11/29/1997 11:19:00 PM
From: Ali Chen  Read Replies (2) of 1572642
 
Kevin, <one reason Intel can clock its chips faster is that Slot 1 is a superior device for dissipating heat.> This is one of the reasons, and the weakest one. There is no problem to attach a similar big brick to a K6 and provide the same heat dissipation ability. (John Wang will probably disagree here and bring the bigger die size of P-II as a big advantage. May be true to some degree.)

In my opinion, the tiny differences in process implementation do not play significant role in the final speed grade of a CPU. The basics of the process was developed at Sematech and transferred equally to all members of the consortium.

The main reason why the Slot-1 CPU runs faster is the internal design methodoligy that Intel stole from DEC Alpha design - a RISK-like "short-tick" approach, when the complex logic is broken into longer processor pipelines. It takes more clocks to execute the same things, but the clock may be much shorter. However, the net output seems to be exactly the same.

If you would ask why the Slot-1 design shows slightly better performance, the answer is: due to additional "back-side" bus into L2 cache. AMD is going to fix this in K6+3D chip with on-chip L2 cache, as per my understanding.

Regards,

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