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: Ali Chen who wrote (52554)	8/27/2001 12:13:33 AM
From: deibutfeif	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Hi Ali, re:Athlon was stubbed (sic) in the back by ineptness and ignorance of AMD systems platform engineering. I couldn't help but think I was reading a post from PaulE - as an example of "AMD - executing itself flawlessly". You're not his alter ego, are you? ~dbf

To: Ali Chen who wrote (52554)	8/27/2001 12:29:48 AM
From: jcholewa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

> Because it is called "Pentium performance rating", > and it failed to work in the past. It didn't fail on its own. It failed because the companies using it exaggerated the rating (eg, a 6x86 running at 133MHz was rated as a "P166+", but really ran sometimes slightly slower than a P166, sometimes equal to a P133, and often as slow as a P100). They lied about the rating. Additionally, they got more and more desperate as time continued. > Unfortunately, > 20-stage pipeline will always run faster than 10-stage. That's not quite true. A really well balanced 10 stage pipe will outrun a really horrible balanced 80 stage pipe. In the case of the K7 and Netburst, though, it is probably true. Unless Intel decides to cancel their 130nm plans. > Athlon was stubbed in the back by ineptness > and ignorance of AMD systems platform engineering. I cannot find fault with your comments that lead up to this, though.