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: Scot who wrote (81602)	12/1/1999 10:25:00 AM
From: Scot	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572512

Sales figures: news.cnet.com For October Microprocessors made by Intel powered 63 percent of all PCs sold at retail stores in October and 59 percent of those costing less than $1,000. Advanced Micro Devices' share of the overall retail market was 33 percent, and 35 percent for the sub-$1,000 market. I dug up this report from August: news.cnet.com. Market-share figures for Intel in the low-cost market are solid, a segment it had once all but lost to Advanced Micro Devices. In the sub-$1,000 market, despite the fact that AMD offers eight speeds of chips below $1,000 and Intel offers only five, Intel remains dominant with 44.4 percent of unit sales, according to Boswell. "Although AMD improved their marketshare to 42.5 percent, it was not enough to surpass Intel. Cyrix picked up the slack with 13.1 percent marketshare at this price." If I read these articles correctly, I would appear that AMD has lost market share in the sub $1000 market (no surprise). Of course the important question...what are the percentages of over $1,000 retail sales? I tried finding this info on pc data's site and on CNET, but without luck. If AMD now has 33 percent of the overall retail market..this would seem to support that they are picking up market share in the high end. Anyone know the split between sub-$1,000 and over $1,000? -Scot

To: Scot who wrote (81602)	12/1/1999 10:31:00 AM
From: Elmer	Respond to of 1572512

Re: "is this the same benchmark EP was blathering about? Whatever, this version shows the 750 over the 733 in both floating point and integer. " Would you believe an Athlon benchmark published on the Intel website? I didn't think so. But you are quick to believe AMD's phoney CuMine benchmarks. Why not take Compaq's word for it with their official SPEC scores? specbench.org Compaq says the CuMine is the fastest integer processor in the world. EP

To: Scot who wrote (81602)	12/1/1999 12:51:00 PM
From: Windsock	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1572512

Scot - Re: "Including Spec-95 scores....is this the same benchmark EP was blathering about? Whatever, this version shows the 750 over the 733 in both floating point and integer." If you want another comparison use the AMD benchmarks for the 750 against the Intel Benchmarks for the 733. Each should put their best foot forward. amd.com intel.com SPECfp95 -> AMD-750 24.3 Intel-733 28.1 Whoa, what happened here !! If you look at the AMD benchmark configurations you discover that an old driver was used, DX6.1A instead of the current DX7 driver. The DX6 driver enables the AMD fp extensions but NOT the Intel fp extensions. The current DX7 driver enables BOTH the AMD and Intel extensions. This is a very nice way to rig the benchmark results. Generally, the benchmark comparison game is played with more subtle bias than this. It will be interesting to see some independent comparisons of the AMD 750 and the Intel 733