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 (120362)	7/16/2000 11:39:32 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571788

Elmer, what I consider to be 6th or 7th generation processors is unimportant I think we can all agree about this! Scumbria

To: Elmer who wrote (120362)	7/16/2000 7:00:48 PM
From: Epinephrine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571788

Elmer, I simply can't believe that you are making the outrageous claims that you are making. Time and time again you have stated your contempt for "cheerleading" by AMD longs on this thread. Is cheerleading only wrong if you are long AMD? Why is your cheerleading not to be judged by the same standard? Your recent statements throw logic to the wind so completely that they embody the pure definition of cheerleading. 1) You state that Coppermine and Athlon are neck and neck on optimized code and you concede that Athlon is superior on unoptimized code. Message 14053550 So let me get this straight. You are comparing optimized code performance and thus making comparisons based mainly on code based optimization technologies and techniques and from those results you are making negative conclusions about Athlon's architecture even though you admit that Athlon clearly wins on code that relies strictly on the architecture itself? The lack of logic in that makes my head spin!! BTW, putting aside the issue of architectural superiority, if I was to make a purchasing decision to buy either a processor that is faster on unoptimized code and equal on optimized code or one that is only competitive on optimized code which one do you think that I would pick? Which one would you pick??? 2) Athlon trounced Katmai. It was consistently double digit percentages ahead on benchmarks. From what I can gather Coppermine is just Katmai with greatly enhanced on die cache. So unless I am mistaken in that claim then the assumption can be made that Coppermine is competitive with Athlon only because of it's awesome cache. Now if you want to claim that core architecture includes the L2 cache subsystem then I will concede that Coppermine has a superior cache at this point and thus scores architectural points in that regard. In fact Scumbria has stated many times that the Thunderbirds cache subsystem is very conservative. But in my opinion we should be comparing cores because caches change. The core is the architectural issue. Do you really think that AMD won't improve it's cache when Mustang comes? and what about Sledgehammer? Just as Intel improved the cache from Katmai to Coppermine. AMD will improve it's cache in future products. The fact that Intel's 6th generation with an awesome cache subsystem is competitive (only on optimized code by your own admission) with AMD's 7th generation and it's current mediocre cache subsystem does not invalidate the claim to 7th generation status or to superior core architecture If you want to argue that Coppermine is as good of a processor as Athlon then fine. I won't even argue. But to suggest that the K7 core is not architecturally superior to the P6 core is just ridiculous. Nevertheless, if you want to ignore all this and continue cheerleading for Intel then go ahead. Just don't expect to be taken seriously when you criticize others for cheerleading and I guess it also means that you can stop feeling morally superior to the "AMDroids" who had faith in AMD when the going was rough. You are clearly showing that you are just as biased as any of them (us). Regards, Epinephrine