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: pgerassi who wrote (70542)	2/5/2002 2:52:19 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Pete, Re: "Barton will be somewhere in that range if a little slower say 2.33 to 2.53GHz by year end. Of course, unlike many here, I assume that Clawhammer would arrive too late for Christmas builds except in SD shops but be as fast as a 3.7GHz NW some 50% ahead of the performance of the top NW at that time where even the most highly P4 optimized tasks will be lost to it (excepting those like WME 7.0)." Is it just me, or do you happen to be scaling back a little from your earlier performance prediction? Message 17009753 "Are you falling into that other trap, that MHz equals performance? A 2.33GHz Throughbred (=Palomino) (assuming dumb shrink), would beat a 3.3GHZ NW (if it has 512K cache and a 166MHZ FSB, it would beat a 4GHz NW). A 2.67GHz Barton (=Palomino) would beat a 3.8GHz NW (if it too has a 512K L2 and 166 FSB, a 4.8GHz NW). However, since the NW 2.2GHz really only NCT (non clock throttled) to 2.6GHz at best, it is debatable if NW will reach 3GHz on 0.13u copper. A 3GHz Clawhammer will have about twice the IPC with lower latency to boot would out run a 4.5GHz NW and a 3GHz Sledgehammer would outrun a 10GHz NW (the ultra high multipliers will start taking a big chunk out of the NW's performance)." wbmw