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: Charles R who wrote (71006)	9/4/1999 1:19:00 PM
From: grok	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573437

MTH, Via, Coppermine with BX/810e, ... To all: It seems incredible that we are now in September and the public knows so little about the dram/chip set situation for Coppermine. Does anyone have a link to technical info on MTH? Do we really know if Via works with Coppermine? Does BX or 810e or something else work with Coppermine without MTH? How much does MTH degrade performance? How would Coppermine+MTH+PC100 compare in performance to Athlon? How many drdrams will there actually be in the near term? How many PC models with Rambus are actually in the pipeline for fall? How many have been decommitted from Rambus recently and what are they switching to? What is going on inside Intel? What are they telling OEMs behind closed doors? What the hell is going on around here???????????

To: Charles R who wrote (71006)	9/4/1999 1:22:00 PM
From: Charles R	Respond to of 1573437

<I thought I had answers for these questions a few weeks back but Intel's positioning statements sent me back to square one. Right now the mess out there is pretty complex.> The confusion reigns - like what I have heard before, Sharky's seems to say Camino supports PC133 too - directly contradicting what Intel said at IDF. Isn't this getting prettier by the day? Also, note Sharky's comments on CuMine speed grades. And, we know Sharky's is not a AMD fan. sharkyextreme.com Chuck

To: Charles R who wrote (71006)	9/5/1999 12:01:00 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1573437

Chuck, re:<One thing for sure - VIA seems to be biggest beneficiary - looks like they are getting pretty much all the desktop PC133 design wins right now> This brings up a point about VIA that bugs me. Their chipsets are just not as fast as Intel's. The benchmarks I've seen (Anand, I think) show not much benefit from PC133. Acually, they showed that in four out of six applications, the Intel BX outperformed the Apollo PRO 133 (both chipsets at 100 MHz); running the Apollo PRO at 133 MHz was barely enough to make it as fast as the Intel BX at 100 MHz. In the other two applications this situation was reversed with the VIA chipset beating the Intel. For these two apps, going to 133 MHz added 2 to 7% additional performance. The VIA Apollo PRO 133 is particularly weak on AGP performance. Unfortunately (for AMD) VIA's chipsets seem to penalize a CPU by a few percent, and their AGP performance is particularly poor. (AGP 2X, who knows what 4X will look like!) I doubt that the engineers at VIA are dumb, its just that there are tricks that can be done in the chipset if you know the innards of the CPU. Hopefully, the Athlon chipsets will have this "inside knowledge" advantage. Petz