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: kapkan4u who wrote (48422)	7/19/2001 6:33:20 PM
From: Gopher Broke	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Why mess around with all this PR stuff. The CPU external clock feed seems to have little to do with any of the other system clocking save that it takes some multiple. So AMD should just insert a 2/3 divider inside the CPU and require a 50% faster clock. Athlon 1.2 would become 1.8, it would perform on a par with a P4 1.8 and everyone would be happy. It would then be up to Intel to try and explain that while the two processors performed the same and clocked the same AMDs was really running slower.

To: kapkan4u who wrote (48422)	7/19/2001 6:42:19 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

Kap, <I think there is a good chance that P4 has three (not two) clock domains and that P4's decoder is running at half the speed. That makes a 1.5GHz P4 a 750MH/1.5GHz CPU.> Aren't you ignoring the fact that some parts of the P4 run at twice the speed? That makes a 1.5 GHz P4 a 750MHz/1.5GHz/3.0GHz CPU. Boy, won't that label be as clear as day to your average shopper at Circuit City/Best Buy/Fry's/Costco? <If Intel is hiding this fact they are perpetrating fraud and false advertising.> Don't forget that Intel is also hiding the fact that the FSB only runs at 100 MHz. What a scandal! Tenchusatsu