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: Process Boy who wrote (90331)	1/28/2000 8:42:00 PM
From: Epinephrine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1574054

Process Boy <You are welcome, and same here> Hehe then allow me to push for an answer to my last question listed as follows: (thanks for your patience) :) <My most convincing reason for not releasing 1GHz even if they have it now is the lack of on die cache. Without on die cache speeding up the processor clock brings diminishing gains in performance. AMD cannot afford to make their 1GHz processor look like a dud because it only performs marginally better than an 800 or 850Mhz version due to cache performance limitations. So as long as they stay on par with Intel in speed it behoves them not to release hamstrung implementations of their core and hold off on the faster versions until they can take advantage of on die cache. I would greatly appreciate your opinion on this guess. Is this reason convincing?> Without regard to whether or not AMD might actually have 1GHz now, does this reason for not releasing it have any merit in your opinion? Thanks, Epinephrine