Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cirruslvr who wrote (61461)	6/11/1999 12:41:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1571935

Re: "I can't wait to see how the K7 performs running the normal gaming benchmarks on a TNT2 w/3D Now! drivers. Other benchmarks I want to see run on the K7: High End Winstone on both Microsoft OSs One of those pure FPU apps like a rendering of some sort The K7 vs. the PIII in one of those programs w/massive amounts of SSE code Intel distributed to Tom and Anand And finally the normal Winstone." How about real numbers to back up the SpecInt95 comparisons? A report on another website says the Xeon was 23.6 and the K7 was ~25 based on an eyeball extrapolation. The best published Xeon result @550MHz is actually 24.4 not 23.6. That would make the difference only 1/2 what AMD claimed at ~2.5%. It is my guess that a Coppermine will match or slightly beat an equally clocked K7 in Integer performance. We will know before long. Floating point is another matter. At this point I can't see any other way to interpret the K7 results. It appears to have a clear and definite lead that Coppermine will not be able to close, regardless of cache size. EP