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: Elmer who wrote (114450)	6/5/2000 6:40:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572704

Elmer, Does the term 'what a maroon' as a descriptor of you and your comments about the old 1995 core strike your heart? Well you know that old 95 core has been radically upwired to bring a 256 Bit wide cache pathway into it, so it is no old antique "stanley steamer" with intrinsic abilities that exceed the Athlon. In fact the core itself is inferior to the AThlon. The cahe allows it to creep ahead due to the wider pathway Bill. AMD needs to do the same, get some parrallelism into that cache, ASAP. bill

To: Elmer who wrote (114450)	6/5/2000 6:47:00 PM
From: Eric K.	Respond to of 1572704

You can post this as many times as you want but it won't make it true. Intel is shipping GHz PIIIs in volumes very similar to AMDs GHz Athlons. How many fabs does Intel have producing Coppermines? You should perhaps think about the intelligence of your statement in relation to binsplits if AMD produces as many 1 GHz parts with 1/5 of one fab as Intel produces with four or five. -Eric

To: Elmer who wrote (114450)	6/5/2000 7:43:00 PM
From: Cirruslvr	Respond to of 1572704

Elmer, Where is Willamette? Why hasn't Intel freed it yet?

To: Elmer who wrote (114450)	6/5/2000 7:53:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572704

Elmer... Why do you suspect AMD didn't use a 256k data path to the cache? Jim

To: Elmer who wrote (114450)	6/5/2000 7:55:00 PM
From: Gopher Broke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572704

just tells you all GHz PIIIs go to business or direct sales There must be a few other people reading this thread have experience of that business world, probably with higher performance processor demands than most business segments. Anyone seen a GHz PIII at work yet? I haven't. Nor a GHz Athlon for that matter, but I suspect I will soon. Seems crazy but we still buy mostly PIII 700 systems at work. The high performance stuff is left for the home market! Perhaps we are seeing a predictable inversion here. Want a company car then you get a fleet model. Want a Porsche, you go buy it yourself. Intel are becoming the Ford of the processor world.

To: Elmer who wrote (114450)	6/5/2000 9:30:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 1572704

Elmer, You can post this as many times as you want but it won't make it true. Intel is shipping GHz PIIIs in volumes very similar to AMDs GHz Athlons. I have evidence: pricewatch.com There is not even a category for 1 GHz PIII. By the way, I think the evidence that even you don't believe your own BS was when you chickened out of the 1 GHz contest we had on Goutama's site: epscontest.com I bet you knew that Intel was not capable of delivering 1 GHz parts, as is still the case today. One good news is that AMD has resisted the temptation to get into contest with Intel in who can BS the public more. AMD left Intel to be the champion BS artist all alone. Joe PS: When I am talking about CPU, I mean just that: CPU. Not a $4,000 air conditioner from Dell. PPS: Can you prove Intel is shipping as many 1 GHz parts as AMD, or is it only your assumption? I don't see any GHz Athlons in the business world, does that mean AMD isn't shipping any or does it just mean you're looking in the wrong place? Back in the good old days, Intel was able to supply top speed chip to business, retail, direct and DYI. Intel clearly can't do it any more. Actually, the difference is that Intel doesn't define the high end any more. If there was no Athlon, the high end would be 750 or 800 MHz, and Intel would be able to supply those just fine.

To: Elmer who wrote (114450)	6/6/2000 4:18:00 AM
From: porn_start878	Respond to of 1572704

Elmer, your apologist accusations are irritating : You're just acting as AMD's apologist. There were many reasons posted here why AMD should come out with a 1.1GHz TBird and now that they didn't you guys are working just as hard explaining why there aren't any. So Cu offers no frequency boost and the minor performance boost gained by on-die L2 is not nearly as great as everyone had already taken for granted. I really hope that is what intel management dream. Ok! on-die cache didn't bring the enhancement we were waiting for but, maybe the Athlon's performance isn't THAT affected by L2 cache speed, since L1 is FOUR times bigger than the coppermine's one. 16-way associative and exclusive cache are technical facts that pretty impressed me, maybe we would have needed 512K of a regular cache to get a performance boost without AMD's talented engineers efforts. As for the frequency boost, fasten your seat belt : Did you ever see a new processor launch without further speed grade release? Your dear Intel released PIIIE at 733 (a speed at witch it was pretty hard to find at the time) and is up 33% (virtualy) from that mark. First AMD .18 Athlons were from 550 to 800. Now they are 650 to 1000. First TBird are 750 to 1000, they will be 850-900 to 1.25-1.33. Things will go fast, AMD will be agressive if they feel any menace from Willy. YOUR NAIVE DANCE IRRITATES ME! They weren't enough to offer a clear lead over that old 1995 P6 core with less cache. In short, the claims of superior design and superior Cu process just don't stand up now that the facts come out. They sure were superior before the announcement when you guys could let your imaginations run wild. That sounds apologies to me! Aren't you apologise the fact that intel isn't totally dominating AMD given it's a bigger company, with better funds and better employees and better everything... If you excuses Intel's non-dominance because it's 4-years old core, now HOW DO YOU EXCUSE THEM TO STILL BEING STUCK WITH THE OLDEST CORE IN THE INDUSTRY? Now compare apples to apples, PIIIEB with i840 is at its full potential. Don't forget the K7 platform comes with the EV6 bus. Compare those PIII/i840 with the full potential of the K7 platform : Mustang, 400 MHz bus and DDR400 (as stated in AMD's doc). You won't beleive your eyes how fast it will be. At least wait for a memory that fills the possible EV6 memory bandwidth : DDR266. Or, if you prefer, compare the actual AMD750 with a PIIIEB + 66 MHz bus chipset to mesure (and predict) accurately the advantage of our 7th generation platform. I liked better the Elmer of a week ago. But, once again, he lost his judgment. Max Your willy better be fast, or you'll lost the face.