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.

Technology Stocks : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Charles R who wrote (11217)	10/3/2000 1:41:46 AM
From: Cirruslvr	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Chuck - RE: "I don't know about your needs but I find a 233MMX performance quite acceptable even today." Still chugging along with that fifth gen processor? ;) Scumbria has you beat. I believe he uses a slower Winchip. What do you think of the TI-AMD announcement? TI's the best in DSPs so AMD's partnering with them is great, but a TI rep said the agreement wasn't exclusive to AMD...

To: Charles R who wrote (11217)	10/3/2000 3:51:27 AM
From: peter_luc	Respond to of 275872

"I don't know about your needs but I find a 233MMX performance quite acceptable even today." Oh, I'd LOVE to have a 233MMX in my office! There, I still have to struggle 8-12 hours a day with a Pentium 133. And that with Windows NT! At least, the RAM was upgraded from 32 MB to 64 MB... It's nice to work for the government, isn't it? AAARGH!!!

To: Charles R who wrote (11217)	10/3/2000 10:03:28 AM
From: that_crazy_doug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

<< I don't know about your needs but I find a 233MMX performance quite acceptable even today. The only real way to say something is good or bad is relative to competition. >> You're right, the only way to say it was good or bad was relative to the competition. It was bad relative to the competition. It suffered more configuration problems, slower clock speeds, and horrible floating point. Duron compared to celeron is an excellent reason to own AMD stock now (which I do 15k shares), but it's not particularly relevent as a reason why Dell should have second sourced back with the k6-2. I still think they would have been crazy to do so. All things being equal I'd want a second source, but all things weren't equal. Intel had a much better product. << I don't ever remember Celeron trouncing K6 by as much as Duron is trouncing Celeron. Competitively speaking, it seemed to have done fine except in FPU which is hardly used by most main stream users. >> Did ever see a k6-2 and celeron next to each other? The performance difference at the same clock speed was easily noticed just running a few simple tasks at the same time (like playing an mp3 while browsing the web). I never had a compatibility issue with a celeron either, while I had several compatibility issues with video cards on the k6-2 line. << If Paul Demone thinks Willamette IPC will be better than Athlon IPC, I would welcome his rights to have a different opinion but would hardly consider him as an expert. >> I would consider the p4 engineers experts, but they're not talking. Out of the opinions I've seen on the various hardware threads Paul seems to go into much more technical detail then anyone else (and therefore seem more knowledgeable on the subject) My only point in referencing Paul is that educated people disagree on the topic which leads me to the 'wait and see' attitude instead of the 'assume p4 will have bad ipc' one.