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: Dan3 who wrote (119418)	11/28/2000 12:12:10 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: "The P4 optimzed FlasK results that wowed Tom: Original Optimized P4 1.5GHZ 3.83 14.03 P3 1GHZ 4.39 8.03 Athlon 1.2GHZ 6.43 11.14 tomshardware.com Now here are Athlon optimzied results using Microsoft VC++ - a real commercial compiler: Original Optimized Athlon 550 3.10 8.13 Athlon 1.2GHZ DDR 6.85 17.75 amdzone.com Face it, the Athlon is a better chip" Dan the P4 scores you posted are for running X87 code and they show the improvement using the Intel compiler for x87 code. You're comparing P4 running x87 code to Athlon running 3DNOW optimized code. How about comparing 3DNOW to SSE2? Tom's next page shows SSE2 code where P4 completely blows away the 3DNOW scores you posted using the Microsoft VC++ compiler. tomshardware.com P4 SS2 score 22.85 from Toms's hardware Athlon 3DNOW score 17.75 from amdzone.com P4 beats Athlon running x87 code from the Intel compiler but Athlon does score better running Athlon optimized x87 code. Everyone seems to accept this so there's no surprise. But P4 beats Athlon running 3DNOW code from the Microsoft compiler compared to the P4 running SSE2 code from the Intel compiler by 29%. You may think Athlon is a better chip but the benchmarks say otherwise. EP