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

To: Joe NYC who wrote (155662)	1/16/2002 10:53:43 AM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Jozef, Re: "But why NW 3.4 GHz? It's kind of backwards. I seem to recall a statement of Hammer beeing rated 3400+ at some point in the future. I guess that's where NW 3.4 GHz is coming from. And you are saying that Hammer 3400+ will not beat NW 3.4 GHz? That's back to model ratings." My argument is based both on model numbers and performance. Since AMD gains credibility in their model numbers by having the performance to match them, it is in their best interest to match up model numbers to the frequency of the equivalent Pentium 4. Therefore, if Hammer were to launch at M3400+, like it does in the following roadmap, then it would have to match or outperform a 3.4GHz Northwood. event.mediaondemand.com Re: "If the introduction of Clawhammer is the end of 2002, it will need to outperform NW at 2.8 or 3 GHz, running at 133 MHz FSB x 4, possibly with SMT, with 512K L2." I don't think SMT will be enabled in the desktop parts until 2003, but for everything else, yes. Clawhammer will have to outperform that. Re: "My guess is that it would take a hypothetical Palomino/Thoroughbred/Barton at 2.3 to 2.5 GHz to match it. With some improvements that will go into Hammer, it would probably take 2 GHz to 2.2 GHz Clawhammer to match the top of the line NW, which seems like a very realistic clock speed expectation for Clawhammer." That's reasonable, given the extras going into each of the contenders. I also expect Hammer to launch at or very near to 2.2GHz. However, I don't think Barton will get as high as 2.5GHz (or even 2.3GHz, for that matter). That's why AMD needs Hammer. Re: "Of course this is in 32bit apps. There will be an app here and there that will benefit from being compiled to 64 bit executable, and with those apps, in the long mode, with additional registers available, Clawhammer should pull away. But in 32bit, where 99% of the processors will b used, I think it will be a horse race again." In terms of 64-bit apps for Hammer, I think that they will be very far between. Hammer doesn't even have a Microsoft OS at launch. While some of the AMDroids think they can make a case based on lines referencing x86-64 in the Windows header files, the fact is that Microsoft has still not announced any support for the x86-64 platform, and they surely would have by now. The next intercept point would be towards the end of 2003, when Microsoft readies their next big OS release. For all practical purposes, then, considering 64-bit performance in Hammer would only be of an academic nature. wbmw