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 vs Intel (AMD / INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: pgerassi who wrote (2433)	9/20/2007 8:58:30 PM
From: FJB	Respond to of 2596

As to 180nm, 1733MHz Athlon XPs (180nm Palomino) kicked the crap out of 2GHz P4s (180nm Williamette) in performance in both integer and FP. P4 was designed for clock speed and had a 20 stage pipeline, so P4 vs. Athlon on 180nm is not a good indicator of where processes were at that node.

To: pgerassi who wrote (2433)	9/20/2007 9:00:04 PM
From: chipguy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 2596

If they get past 3GHz on 65nm, will you concede that they beat Intel again? Uh, no. It is clear Intel could go much further in 65 nm than 3.0 GHz but they never had too. I'd be surprised if less than half all of all Conroes made these days couldn't clock 3.2 or 3.3 GHz. AMD is way behind that despite having the complications and expense of SOI and 2 or 3 more layers of interconnect. As to 180nm, 1733MHz Athlon XPs (180nm Palomino) kicked the crap out of 2GHz P4s (180nm Williamette) in performance in both integer and FP Really? SPECint/fp_base2000 P4/2.00 - 681/735 K7/1.73 - 720/613 K7 is 5.7% ahead in integer and the P4 is 20% ahead in FP. Nice try.