SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (93350)2/15/2000 5:54:00 PM
From: Scumbria  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1571216
 
Ten,

I honestly don't know how Willamette can achieve 3.0 GHz in some parts of the chip.

It would require an extremely deep pipeline and incredibly fast transistors. The cycle time would be 330 ps, which is about the delay for the fastest single latch I've seen. That would allow for zero logic per pipe stage!

Scumbria



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (93350)2/15/2000 6:14:00 PM
From: kash johal  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1571216
 
Tench,

re:"anand is right"

Well I sure am impressed.

At regular business stuff this chip should scream.

The Athlons FPU may be able to keep up however - assuming AMD can match the MHZ rate.

Was any info on cache sizes disclosed?

regards,

Kash



To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (93350)2/15/2000 11:11:00 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1571216
 
I honestly don't know how Willamette can achieve 3.0 GHz in some parts of the chip. I'm also not sure whether there are some parts that run at 750 MHz. All I know is that Willamette will be one killer (overkill?) chip, and that 1.5 GHz is really the base frequency.

Tenchusatsu, what would be the advantage of having one part of the chip running at one speed and another part at another speed?

ted