Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices 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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Paul Engel who wrote (59498)	5/24/1999 8:09:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (4) of 1574070

Possibility for low FPU benchmarks. The FPUmark score is certainly anomalous since they are inconsistent with a fully pipelined FPU as opposed to Intel's partially pipelined FPU (Intel FPU has 2 cycle throughput for multiplies, AMD one cycle). Rather than one of the three FPU units not working, my guess is that one or more 80387 instructions are not working, but are being emulated in software. The firingsquad article made a vague reference to "exceptions." Certainly the processing of a CPU exception, followed by software emulation of the instruction would skew a benchmark by 50%, even if it only involves 1% of the code in the benchmark. This could even be a software problem that WIN98 will need a patch to enable all of the K7 performance. Did firingsquad reinstall WIN98 and wipe out any drivers AMD had set up? Petz

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next