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: Steve Porter who wrote (33179)	6/8/1998 12:52:00 PM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573835

<They seem to pretty much be mirror images of each other, wouldn't you agree. While the implementations are a little different the underlying idea is the same and only the clock speeds and pipe widths differ.. thoughts?> This is largly my take also. Alpha has been running at higher speeds, but then again they can afford to pay the power price because their target market is very high end. There is not need to be frugal with pincount or power. AMD won't be doing that on a desktop, just like Intel hasn't, not to mention a laptop. SlotA's big plus is they already have it running in systems at the highend. Slot1/2/? can also scale very well with the GTL+ specification. There is no reason why the data path can't go from 64 bit to 128bit (or more) other than added cost. Not a problem on a highend Merced system. Frequencies should go to 133mhz and then 266mhz without a basic change in the bus definition (other than timing plus double pumped clock?). This could raise bandwidth dramaticly with or without increasing pincount significantly. This then raises questions about the value of large L2 in a single processor system. Question for you: Does SlotA use some kind of a split transaction protocal? I assume it must. EP