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: Petz who wrote (50805)2/24/1999 2:30:00 AM
From: Tenchusatsu  Read Replies (1) of 1571929
 
<Winstone 99 IS the most important benchmark, even for "high end" users.>

Oh yeah? According to Apple, BYTEMark is the "industry standard" benchmark. And Apple says that the iMac with its 233 MHz G3 processor scores higher on the "industry standard" than Pentium II 400. Do you know how many Mac fanatics fell for this marketing stunt?

Petz, let's get one thing straight. There is NO single most important benchmark out there, because people buy computers for different reasons. Some need just office productivity apps. Some (like myself) are hardcore gamers. Some like to surf the internet and download MP3 files or just chat. Some use heavy-duty 3D modeling or CAD applications, or write complex simulations. Some host Web pages or do other sorts of Web page development.

It's that market segmentation thingy. Intel segmented the market not to crush AMD with low Celeron prices, but because Intel realized that the x86 processor market is maturing and diversifying. Having one single processor doing everything makes no sense anymore, unlike yesterday.

The K6-3 has its place. The Pentium III has its place. K6-2 and Celeron have their place as well. Heck, even the iMac has its place (right next to the 1998 VW Bug).

But AMD marketing hasn't figured this out yet, or care to. They're too obsessed with trying to push back a tidal wave of Pentium III marketing that they've even called their new processor the K6-III! Therefore, people are expecting a little too much from the K6-III, and thank God we have guys like Anand and Tom to set the record straight and show that the K6-III is not the Pentium III killer that all the anti-Intel zealots were hoping for.

So why shouldn't AMD position the K6-III against the Pentium III? After all, Apple's marketing department proves that a little anti-Intel FUD can go a long way. Unfortunately, AMD has a history of "Pentium killers" which failed to do just that. K5 was supposed to be the "Kryptonite" which cripples the Pentium. K6 and K6-2 was supposed to be the Pentium II killer. Now the K6-III is trying to be the Pentium III killer? Fat chance. (On the other hand, AMD will have better luck killing the Pentium III with the K7 than the K6-III.)

Tenchusatsu

P.S. - Oh well, I guess my whole rant here will be for naught, now that someone has managed to throw more fuel into the serial number issue.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext