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: Joe NYC who wrote (197000)	5/16/2006 1:03:48 AM
From: firthoffourth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

edit - Building on AMD's success in the blade and general purpose server markets with the AMD Opteron(TM) processor, energy efficient AMD desktop processors can deliver greater performance-per-watt over standard power AMD desktop processors and can reduce overall power consumption. For instance, energy efficient AMD desktop processors can provide up to 37 percent greater performance-per-watt than standard power AMD processors, while energy efficient small form factor AMD Athlon 64 X2 dual-core desktop processors can provide up to 154 percent greater performance-per-watt than standard power AMD desktop processors. When running typical workloads, as reflected in the SYSmark(R) 2004 SE benchmark, end users could experience their energy efficient dual-core processor consuming 14 watts.+ Results based on preliminary testing of a system with an AMD Athlon(TM) 64 X2 dual-core processor 3800+, 512MB DDR2 667 memory and NVIDIA GeForce 6150 graphics running the current version of Microsoft(R) Windows(R) XP Home in Windows "portable" power scheme and with Cool'n'Quiet drivers installed. Tests and results obtained using a specific computer system and components, and do not reflect approximate performance of any specific AMD part. Actual results will vary based on system type and configuration. I wonder if the system tested was using a 65nm CPU?