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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: fyo who wrote (61224)6/10/1999 12:33:00 AM
From: Paul Engel  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1572711
 
FYO - Re: ". W.r.t. the .25mu process, AMD had a much weaker design, yet they managed to keep 'relatively' close to Intel. To me that indicates that their process can't be that far behind, if at all."

FYI - AMD had to JACK UP their already high 2.2 volt Vcc to 2.4 volts just to overclock their 400 MHz parts to 450 and 475 MHZ for the K6-2.

However, the Kmart 63 required the 2.4 Volt JACKED UP Voltage just to get it to run at 400 MHz !

Intel's 550 MHz Pentium III runs at 2.0 volts, for your reference.

Paul



To: fyo who wrote (61224)6/10/1999 1:56:00 AM
From: Elmer  Respond to of 1572711
 
Re: "I agree with you on the process bit. W.r.t. the .25mu process, AMD had a much weaker design, yet they managed to keep 'relatively' close to Intel. To me that indicates that their process can't be that far behind, if at all."

Well you don't know how much material AMD has to scrap or how many K6-2s are stacking up in the warehouse due to binsplit problems. Bottom line is AMD posted a $128 Million loss and Intel posted a $2Billion+ profit. Expect more of the same for both.

EP


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