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 (148598)	1/20/2005 11:32:24 PM
From: Elmer Phud	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Dear Pete: That is not what I claimed. I claimed that a 2.8GHz Smithfield is probably slower on the typical office app or game than a 1.8GHz Opteron. No Pete, that is not what you claimed. You claimed this: The $240 part is likely to be the equivalent of two Prescott Xeon 2.8GHz DPs. Those have less than the performance of 1 Opteron 244 on single threaded apps like Office or games. You were comparing a dual core Smithfield to a single core Opteron running a single thread. I pointed out that it makes no difference how many processors are in the system when there is but 1 thread running. A 512-way supercomputer is no better than a single processor when running a single thread. While your point may have been correct, it was misleading to suggest that it was in any way meaningful when comparing the single processor Opteron performance to a dual core Smithfield when there is no added benefit in a dual core when running a single thread. My pointing out that a 4-way 2.0GHz Opteron is slower than a single 3.6GHz P4 when running a single thread is equaling misleading. That's what it was intended to be.