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: Elmer who wrote (39964)10/24/1998 10:49:00 AM
From: Jim McMannis  Read Replies (3) of 1573986
 
Based on you logic Intel should have put the L2 in the Pentium II die from day one.
I think it's AMDs strategy to get the K7 in production as soon as possible at the highest yields. By dedicating the whole K7 project to having an on die L2, the introduction of the K7 would have been much more at risk. The safest way is to pay the extra bucks and get the darn thing out there. You will say that it's an admission that AMD has no faith in their process technology, whereas AMD sees it as the prudent and safe thing to do.
As far as performance, the K7 w/o L2 in die may be slower than with L2 "in die" but on a relative basis it likely will be much faster than anything Intel has at the time of launch. If AMD screwed around trying to get an on die L2 K7 to yield then who knows what Intel would have at that later date. Remember that the target is always moving and time is of the essence. The L2 on die can come later.
Jim
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News