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: wbmw who wrote (255532)	8/13/2008 10:06:56 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Wbmw: You forgot to say from your link that a 733MHz P3 took 4:54 or 1.3 times as long. Thus a P3 to match would have to run at 950MHz. And a P3 is at least twice as fast as a Pentium MMX, thus at a minimum, a 1.9GHz Atom would be required to match that performance. Oops, with Atom being slower than a Geode LX running at 30% of the power must be devastating to you. Pete

To: wbmw who wrote (255532)	8/13/2008 12:24:52 PM
From: fastpathguru	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

The Geode @ 500MHz takes 3:47 to render a scene. A 3.0GHz Pentium 4 takes 0:30 to render the same scene. If you normalized the clocks, it means the Pentium 4 would take 3:00 to render the scene, and that's if the scaling were linear. Most likely, it would take <3:00 for Pentium 4 to render the scene @ 500MHz. That means Geode is clock for clock slower than Pentium 4. But it only runs at 500MHz. Damn wbmw, talk about apples to oranges... Geode is designed for low power, critical in OLPC. Care to speculate as to how your "clock normalized P4" would compare in perf/watt? perf/watt/dollar? PCB footprint? etc. etc. etc. fpg