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 (50513)2/22/1999 5:47:00 PM
From: kash johal  Read Replies (6) of 1572705
 
Elmer,

Re: k-3 power and voltage.

The dixon runs at 16W at 366 Mhz.

It would take around 20W at 400Mhz.

It runs it bus at 66Mhz while K-3 bus runs at 100Mhz.

Also interface to l-3 cache requires power.

If the Dixon ran with a 100Mhz bus and external L3 cache my estimate is that the power would be in 22W range.

So 26W for K-3 is not great but certainly no problem for the desktop.

For the laptop market they may not run the bus at 100Mhz or run with the extra L3 cache to reduce power.

Even then I guess AMD's mobiles will run maybe at 18-20W max.

I suspect folks who want longer batter life will go with the Dixon.

Folks who want extra horsepower and want to pay 30-40% less are likely to go with the K-3 Mobiles as long as 20% less battery life is OK.

I can see no compelling arguments for anyone to go with PII or Celeron mobiles frankly.

In terms of an indicator of process capability, I think it shows that Intel is about 20% better on power, and on raw clock speeds.

PS the power data on the PIII's running at 450/500Mhz should be pretty interesting.

As far as Paul and the gang jumping for joy on the k-3 power issue, it just goes to show how desperate he has become to dump on the k-3.

Regards,

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