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 (73085)	3/3/2002 6:14:22 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

Milo, Re: "Why is it noone but Intel is using SysMark 2002 right now?" Because SysMark 2002 is only one month old, while the article from your links is two months old. Newer articles like this one show the newer versions of benchmarks. www6.tomshardware.com Re: "FUD and Propaganda" That certainly depends on your definition of the above remarks. I only find it interesting that Intel was able to find plenty of quotes showing AMD to be the fickle party in terms of model numbers. It always seems that when AMD has megahertz, they flaunt it, but when they don't have megahertz, they hide behind model numbers. But the most interesting quote is the last one. “AMD’s model system is a bridge metric while we work with the major entities in the industry to develop a new metric...” What do you think about that? Basically, AMD is saying that Quantispeed is an inefficient measurement, and as soon as they find a new one, they'll go with it. We'll, I'd be happy if and when they find a new measurement, but the fact of the matter is that AMD is content on using a sub-standard measurement until that time - even to their own admission. How is that you don't find that FUD or Propaganda, yet you find that Intel's response is? wbmw