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: kash johal who wrote (69753)	8/24/1999 6:59:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573924

<Frankly the poor performance of Merced at 90% of current HP technology shocked everybody.> What were they running? Native Merced code, or translated PA-RISC instructions? It would come as no shock to me if it's the latter. PA-RISC compatibility is very important for customers of HP servers, especially those using the "N-class" servers which won't move to IA-64 until McKinley. Maybe when you guys say that Merced won't be able to match Athlon, you mean when Merced runs translated x86 code (a.k.a. IA-32). That would also come as no shock to me. <810 - Was supposed to kill all the cheap clones - its been a fiasco and exacerbated the BX chip set situation.> Fiasco? Maybe the initial glitches weren't a good sign, but the roadmaps still call for 810 to be a major part of Intel's Celeron roadmap. That hasn't changed, despite the BX/ZX chipset shortage. By the way, I'm ordering an 810 motherboard right now for a $650 computer I'm building for a friend. Tenchusatsu P.S. - Your other points are more of the same; they aren't worth addressing.

To: kash johal who wrote (69753)	8/24/1999 10:07:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573924

Re: "Frankly the poor performance of Merced at 90% of current HP technology shocked everybody. And remember this assumes that the chips meet target speeds - something that is not guranteed (just look at cumine flap)." Kash, I think that there is a great deal of confusion over that statement. It is unclear as to what was meant. Did it mean that Merced running HP binaries @440MHz was 90% of the 440MHz HP machine? Did they mean the Merced binaries on Merced running at 440MHz were 90% of HP binaries on HP hardware or Merced binaries at full frequency? EP