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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Petz who wrote (26376)	12/3/1997 1:42:00 PM
From: Petz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573430

Elmer, FYI, Table 46 from amd.com is stamped PRELIMINARY DATA. Perhaps that is the source of your confusion. An honest mistake, I suppose. Petz

To: Petz who wrote (26376)	12/3/1997 11:59:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1573430

<Elmer, stop posting lies your URL does not exist, "DOCUMENT NOT FOUND ON SERVER". From table 47, section 14.4, "Typical and Maximum Power Dissipation, the numbers are 17w to 28.3w, NOT 30w. What will you invent next?> Petz, I can see that you are up to your old ways. Allow me to hold your hand and guide you thru it. Go to amd.com Download the document named AMD K6 MMX 3.3V 233mhz AMD processor soecifications. Get some grownup to help you read it. Then you can post your apology. You continue to post false information. I post real data that anyone can download and read for themselves. On the front page it says maximum power 30.2 W. However it also says max icc 9.75 A. Anyone (even you) can do the math and see that 9.75A * 3.3V = 32.175W, almost exactly what Intel publishes for the max power for their 233mhz PII. Again you have been caught in a false post. Not opinion, just the facts. I'm getting real tired of holding your hand because you are too lazy to read what AMD clearly posts for all the world to see. EP