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: Ali Chen who wrote (66511)	7/23/1999 10:47:00 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Respond to of 1574094

From JC's "Only three or four days ago I'd started asking around on what AMD's plans are to combat Intel's Geyserville ("turbo" for the nineties, for those who don't know). From Daiki, in his own words: "AMD disclosed they will support the technology like Intel's Geyserville. This technology realizes dynamic change of MHz of AMD's Mobile CPU. This means that this technology is very similar to Geyserville. But It is not perfectly same as Geyserville. It is still AMD's original technology. AMD didn't disclose that what CPU they intended to adopt this technology at, but they disclosed it will appear in 2000's their Mobile CPU." " jc-news.com Maybe we will see it in the notebook Athlon to come out next year.

To: Ali Chen who wrote (66511)	7/23/1999 10:50:00 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1574094

Re: "Could you please post your average time per work unit?" I am a little disappointed to report that multi processors are of no overall benifit for memory bound applications such as SETI but perhaps that should have been obvious before I started. Furthermore the 2 processors do not run at the same frequency. One is a 433/66 & the other is a 366/66. I will try overclocking tonight. For those thinking about getting this MB, I think the 333/66 Celeron might be the best bet because that will most likely overclock to 500/100. EP

To: Ali Chen who wrote (66511)	7/23/1999 7:36:00 PM
From: fyo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574094

Ali - Re: Could you please post your average time per work unit? As advised in some non-obvious place on 3dnow.org, I tried running SETI minimized. This dropped my time/unit from just over 40 hours to just under 20 (K6-2/333). Since I am running Win95, I cannot use the NT text client, although by the numbers I have seen there seems to be little different between the text client and running minimized. As we know, SETI is cache bound in the extreme. It seems to me that the graphics that are presented when not running minimized, while not using many clock-cycles as such, completely ruin the cache efficiency. --fyodor