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: Jim McMannis who wrote (65729)	7/16/1999 1:02:00 PM
From: Process Boy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574004

Jim - <OTOH, I'm surprised the P-III scales to 600 on .25, thought that 550 was about it. I wonder what the yields are on a 600MHZ P-III?> Pretty damn good, IMO. PB

To: Jim McMannis who wrote (65729)	7/16/1999 1:33:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574004

<OTOH, I'm surprised the P-III scales to 600 on .25, thought that 550 was about it. I wonder what the yields are on a 600MHZ P-III?> The prevailing notion on the overclocking web sites (Sharky Extreme, Anandtech, Tom's Hardware Guide) is that the main thing limiting the Pentium III's clock speed is the off-chip L2 cache. There have been a few occasions where disabling the L2 cache allows for higher overclocking speeds. Moving the cache onto the processor die could allow the CPU to scale to higher frequencies. (Then again, this begs the question of how Coppermine ran into speed problems in the first place, which I can't explain.) As for the P6 core itself, I think Intel considers that core to have a lot of life left in it, even well after Willamette. Tenchusatsu