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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (118979)	11/22/2000 6:24:34 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: "Did you compare the P4 against the Athlon on hand tuned optimized assembly code. I have not seen those benchmarks. I have always said that the SPECmark as currently used is broken. And the P4 does not perform far better than a Athlon given equal optimization" I gave you data you gave me opinion. As always, you're all mouth no data. P4 uses P4 optimizations and posts the highest Integer scores ever recorded, despite your claim it performs poorly. If you think Athlon scores better then show us the benchmarks where Athlon is optimized vrs P4 optimized. The only ones I know of in existance is SPEC. Athlon SPECFP scores are posted and they do use an Athlon optimized compiler, Compaq Visual Fortran 6.5 Beta. You know what? Athlon still get's it's butt kicked by a slower 1GHz P3. Athlon has never been able to catch even a P3 when running optimized code. That's optimized code vrs optimized code. The only way you can make a case for Athlon performance is to trot out old x87 code with no prefetch, which everyone agrees will look good on an Athlon. Nobody is arguing with you there, we're just saying who cares? Re: "All currently available compilers (there does not exist one publically yet for SSE2 (IFC 5.0 is not yet available last I looked)) do not have SSE2 optimizations" Once again you are wrong. The compiler used for the SPEC scores is a commercially available product. intel.com I hope you're right about no SSE2 support because that would only extend the P4 lead from it's current 80% advantage over Athlon in FP to who knows how much farther out in front. EP

To: pgerassi who wrote (118979)	11/22/2000 7:24:42 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Pete, <And the P4 does not perform far better than a Athlon given equal optimization.> Nice try, Pete. Given no optimizations, Athlon does better. But given all the chance for optimizations (as proven by SPEC2000), Pentium 4 does better. The fact that Athlon lags in SPEC2000 tells me one of two things: 1) Athlon does not benefit from optimizations as much as Pentium 4. 2) Athlon could indeed benefit as much as Pentium 4, but AMD didn't bother or didn't have the resources to do just that. Which is it, Pete? Can Athlon really benefit from optimizations? Or will AMD marketing try and spread the message, "Optimizations are bad! Buy an Athlon!" Tenchusatsu