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: Windsock who wrote (169887)	8/23/2002 3:34:57 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Respond to of 186894

Windsock, Re: "AMD should call this out of gas AthWiper a Model 2200 ??" That depends. Is it with respect to a Pentium 4 with RDRAM or DDR? Is the code using SEE-2 or standard FPU? Is the test cache resident, or memory intensive? As I see it, comparing against DDR gives AMD more of the benefit of the doubt, but this is a change from their previous benchmarking methodology. Using SSE-2 puts the advantage squarely in Intel's court, while cache resident applications seem to do much better on the Athlon. Here is how I would rank the performance. 1) DDR+FPU+Cache : 3000+ 2) RDR+FPU+Cache : 2800+ 3) DDR+FPU+Memory: 2600+ 4) RDR+FPU+Memory: 2400+ 5) DDR+SSE+Cache : 2400+ 6) RDR+SSE+Cache : 2200+ 7) DDR+SSE+Memory: 2000+ 8) RDR+SSE+Memory: 1800+ On average, the performance is more like Model 2400+. Given how many applications these days that are memory intensive or SSE-2 enabled, 2600+ is really stretching the model number scheme, IMHO. Tom's Hardware seemed to test a greater than normal mix of these kinds of applications, though, which is why the Athlon 2600+ seemed to perform more like a 2200+. Overall, I think there are still plenty of applications where it can do better. wbmw