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: combjelly who wrote (19953)	11/20/2000 11:13:00 PM
From: Bill Jackson	Respond to of 275872

commbjelly, Are not these needs intercepted upstream and the proper pathway selected for whatever CPU you have?? Does this have an overhead? How big is it? how does it compare with the advantage conferred? In any event it is easy to make these choices at installation time. the program loads for SSe_2 or for x-86. While running it knows not the other world. bill

To: combjelly who wrote (19953)	11/21/2000 12:32:13 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

combjelly, I don't think loops have to be made smaller to fit within the trace cache of P4. Its not that small. I think the P4's quirkiness will disappear somewhat when it gets to 0.13u and its IPC will improve. It will be able to have larger caches which mitigate the huge branch mispredict penalty. If it gets DDR support about the same time, it could be quite formidable. So I think AMD has a window of vulnerability if the P4 on 0.13u process precedes the Clawhammer, but based on what I see now, AMD will continue to expand market share until then. I'm convinced the word will get around about the low performance per MHz of P4. I'm not convinced its a good idea to resurrect PR ratings, but AMD does have to do some advertising. EDIT - just saw the low/high quality MHz idea, that's great. How about a slogan contest to support the high quality MHz idea. Petz