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: Goutam who wrote (83692)	12/20/1999 5:03:00 PM
From: Charles R	Respond to of 1572502

<Here is a good explanation from JC on this, and it makes pretty good sense -> JC seems to be explaining exclusive caches - not necessarily why 64k makes sense. One other possibility assuming the 64k number is valid is that 64k may be the performance point required to pull even with CuMine on some of the integer benchmarks (I keep coming to the benchmarks because I fail to see the risk reward ratio in going to 64k instead of skipping it altogether and making Spitfire a L2 less chip).

To: Goutam who wrote (83692)	12/20/1999 6:13:00 PM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1572502

RE <<<Good try. You always look for a way to raise doubt pointing to some kind of problem or weakness in any AMD decision - don't you? ;o)>>> Goutama, I concur...what's so annoying is that he and his buddies think we are not smart enough to see thru their agenda. ted