SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: ptanner who wrote (154975)1/12/2002 2:49:52 AM
From: wanna_bmw  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
Ptanner, Re: "comparisons which are made to the P4 2GHz."

Good thing they didn't use a 2.0AGHz Pentium 4. They had a tough enough time trying to outperform the 2.0GHz Willamette as it was in some tests. I noticed that they dropped a number of benchmarks from their repitoire. To their credit, most of the ones they dropped were the ancient and outdated benchmarks (the ones with the '99 at the end - CPUMark99, for example). Still, their choice of games was obvious. They had to balance out Quake III and Dronez by adding Expendable and Serious Sam (two tests that perform poorly on the Pentium 4). They are getting *better* at improving their credibility, but I still don't see a well rounded or balanced test suite. And many of the results will change now that Northwood is out. Does AMD expect to add extra L2 cache to a processor core in the near future? If not, there is nothing that will maintain the lead that they claim, and they'll eventually fall behind at higher clock speeds (and model numbers). They just can't add 100 every time they increase clock frequency by 67MHz. Eventually, it will catch up to them.

wbmw

P.S. What about comparing SPECint2000? Did AMD quit that as soon as Northwood scored a 771, outperforming the highest recorded Athlon score by 14%?

intel.com



To: ptanner who wrote (154975)1/12/2002 9:22:16 AM
From: herb will  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 186894
 
Pt,,"3rd party audits" You really have to wonder about an accounting firm which is supposed to remain independent that would get in the middle of this. I find it laughable that their opinion relates to only a three day period which begs the question, what would your opinion be on December 7th? Below is the auditor’s opinion.

Also note that Arthur Anderson has got big problems in the Enron scandal and read this statement lifted from the following URL “ As Enron's independent auditor, Andersen vouched for the flawed financial statements.” Interesting?

washingtonpost.com

Herb

Andersen Benchmark Audit
Report of Independent Public Accountants

To the Management of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc:

We have examined the assertions in the Report of Management on Processor Performance Benchmarks for the AMD Athlon™ XP 2000+ processor for the period from December 3, 2001 to December 6, 2001. These assertions which include the benchmark results and related business practices are the responsibility of Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.'s (AMD's) management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertions based on our examination.

Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the assertions made by AMD Management and performing other such procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

Readers of this report should be aware that:
· It is not Arthur Andersen LLP's policy or intent to endorse the product or services of an organization.
· The compliance of any product to a benchmark has certain inherent limitations. As a result, exceptions to benchmarks could potentially occur and not be identified.
In our opinion, management's assertions referred to above are fairly stated, in all material respects.



Austin, Texas
December 14, 2001