To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (142627 ) 9/2/2001 1:52:24 PM From: tcmay Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894 Lies, Damned Lies, and Benchmarks <<Dirk Meyer himself used SPEC to launch Athlon. AMD even used SPEC in their "IPC matters more than MHz" white paper. AMD continues to publish SPEC scores for Athlon. Obviously AMD finds SPEC to be valid, or else they wouldn't bother submitting and publishing scores in the first place. Your rants should be directed toward Dirk Meyer and the rest of AMD. Obviously you know something that they don't.>> To paraphrase advice from the law industry, "When the benchmark supports your processor, argue the benchmark is good. When the benchmark supports your competitor's processor, argue the flaws in the benchmark." When Athlon was riding high, AMDroids liked to tout the various gaming and SPEC benchmarks. Now that Athlon seems mired at 1.4 GHz while P4 pushes ahead to 2 GHz, AMDroids are saying these benchmarks don't give the true picture. Right. You betcha. Intel made a strategic design decision to move to long pipelines, to take advantage of speedups in the shorter stags, for an overall performance improvement. Their decision is now looking pretty good. AMD is failing to deliver on their promises to introduce a wide range of usable processors. And the industry momentum building behind IA-64 is in sharp contrast to the deadening silence in support of the Krauthammer. I sympathize with their plight. Going head-to-head with a powerhouse like Intel is not for the faint of heart. Especially in a downturn, as in a downturn the ability of a powerhouse to outlast and outspend the weaker competitor is even more pronounced. AMD got a big boost during the '98-99 boom period when Intel couldn't keep up with demand. Now that supplies are plentiful, vendors like IBM are cutting AMD off at the knees. And Gateway signed on with the mothership again. Perhaps AMD will buy Transmeta and gain access to their proprietary managerial morphing technology. --Tim May