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: milo_morai who wrote (63442)	11/12/2001 10:46:51 AM
From: dale_laroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

>Your IPC is wrong. <font color=red>M3400= 2Ghz </font>based on Jerry's comments that the work of the Hammer was 3 times a 1Ghz Athlon running at 2Ghz that works out to 50% greater than a Athlon if the hammer was the same clock rate.< Actually, this is wrong. According to Paul DeMone's tests, the TBird scales at a 6.3% increase in performance for every 10% increase in clock rate, versus 7.9% for every 10% for Willamette. I can not verify the actual percentage, but it is fairly obvious that performance does not scale directly with clock rate. Assuming the 6.3% per 10% ratio is correct, for 2.0 GHz Clawhammer to provide three times the performance of a 1.0 GHz TBird, it would have to be equivalent to a 4.1+ GHz TBird. Perhaps fairly accurate statements would be that, "Clawhammer will deliver about three times the performance at 2.0 GHz that TBird does at 1.0 GHz.", or "The performance that Clawhammer delivers at 2.0 GHz is equivalent to what TBird would at 4.0 GHz.".