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: jjayxxxx who wrote (52990)	8/29/2001 12:22:43 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

JJ, Re: "In place of merely comparing clock rates, AMD proposes uses a technical formula to rate processor performance, essentially multiplying the number of instructions per clock times the frequency." And what allows AMD to come up with the magic IPC number? Clearly any application they use can be argued as not equaling true performance. Additionally, all Intel has to do is introduce an optimized application, making any comparison moot. But let's say AMD were aggressive at marketing the IPC of a given benchmark, say Winstone 2001. A) What happens when Winstone 2002 is released, and it favors the Pentium 4? B) What happens when the industry is indecisive over the benchmark, and some retailers use the new method, while OEMs opt to stick with megahertz? C) What happens when micro-architectural enhancements allow Pentium 4 (Northwood core, for example) to perform better in this benchmark? D) How does AMD go about differentiating between different memory technologies and the Pentium 4, since performance varies widely between SDRAM and RDRAM? E) What happens if Intel drives a new campaign to demonstrate more applications that are optimized for Pentium 4, and suggest that competitors that use older benchmarks to demonstrate superiority are misleading the customer? Countless other possibilities exist, including that which many other AMD and Intel investors have expressed on this thread. And that's the possibility that this will alienate more people from AMD's marketing then they could possibly gain. You can convince a buyer who is illiterate in computers that architectural advantages make AMD's core faster clock-for-clock. They simply won't understand, and they'll get the impression that the wool is being pulled over their eyes. Then again, maybe I'm wrong, but the amount of risk involved suggests that AMD wouldn't consider this if they weren't especially desperate right now. wanna_bmw P.S. I'm not arguing with you. I'm arguing with the article.