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: Maxwell who wrote (36987)	9/11/1998 11:07:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570362

1) Intel is the ONLY company that is releasing new chip that is SLOWER than the new chip (Pentium 300 vs CeleronA 266). Their engineers are just absolutely BRILLIANT. Apparently the Intel engineers are much more brilliant than you are. The Pentium 300 MHz is strictly for mobile, while no Celeron will ever be in a notebook computer because of its higher power consumption. Perhaps the mobile Pentium is there to cover any niches that IDT and Rise want to hit. Or did you think that developing a mobile processor is as simple as soldering an existing one to the motherboard? 2) I expected Katmai to hit in Jan. 1999. But the release date is March. By then AMD would have over 15million 3DNOW chips in the market. This is much better than I had hoped. Also Katmai is not very affordable as you can see. K6-2-300 is now selling for $110. Hmmm. Katmai is necessary in order to take the thunder away from Sharptooth. Now that the report gave March as a release date for Katmai, perhaps we'll see the reverse effect if AMD can stick to their Q1 target for Sharptooth. Not only that, but it seems that Intel will not be able to advertise Katmai during the Super Bowl. Bummer for Intel. But do you really think that the $110 price for K6-2 300 MHz is good news for AMD, considering that they're still trying to raise ASP? 4) K7 will be the world fastest X86 CPU in 1999. K7 logic core is significant superior to K6 and K6 already matches PII. First of all, K6 is still a notch behind Pentium II. Or did you miss the benchmarks back in Tom's Hardware Guide? The K6 is even slower than Pentium II when it comes to Windows NT. Before you denounce WinNT as irrelevant, let me remind you that the K7 is going to be competing against Intel's server and workstation platforms, which certainly aren't going to be running Win98. Second, we still don't know anything about the K7. The link you provided did not mention the K7. Man, and you got my interest all worked up over nothin' ... Tenchusatsu

To: Maxwell who wrote (36987)	9/11/1998 11:13:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Respond to of 1570362

Maxwell, Intel is the ONLY company that is releasing new chip that is SLOWER than the new chip (Pentium 300 vs CeleronA 266). Their engineers are just absolutely BRILLIANT. There is no such thing as a CeleronA 266. That's the only part of the above that I could comment on, because, FWIW, I have no idea what you are talking about. I guess I must be as BRILLIANT as Intel's engineers, huh? Tony

To: Maxwell who wrote (36987)	9/11/1998 11:44:00 PM
From: kash johal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1570362

Maxwell, Intc roadmap sucks IMHO except for higher end Server market. I suspect that AMD could be profitable this quarter - if they ship 3.5M units with average ASP of >$100 or at least a breakeven. If they can get the K7 out they could ship 30M chips next year with average ASP of $120 and blow Intel to kingdom come. I just hope they work a deal for capacity with MOT etc. Looks great for AMD to me. PS on forecast release I suspect they will wait for end of month and then release positive surprise. Regards, Kash

To: Maxwell who wrote (36987)	9/12/1998 12:33:00 AM
From: Merlo	Respond to of 1570362

Bought 500 shares of AMD at $16 yesterday hope I did the right thing. Merlo

To: Maxwell who wrote (36987)	9/12/1998 1:43:00 AM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 1570362

Maxwell - Re: " K7 will be the ticket that takes AMD beyond $40/share by next year. " That was the K6 that did this - but 18 months ago. Paul

To: Maxwell who wrote (36987)	9/14/1998 2:13:00 AM
From: Petz	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1570362

Maxwell, good news on K6-3 performance. I built a mathematical model which predicts performance of the K6 core with various speed L2 cache and memory bus. The model very accurately predicts performance of K6-2's running at various L2 cache speeds of 112MHz, 100 MHz, 95 MHz and 66 MHz, with either 66 MHz or 100 MHz SDRAM as measured using Winbench 98 testing by tomshardware.com. My assumptions for the K6-3 are 1)the K6-3 core will be marginally faster than the K6-2 core (5%). Only about 1/3 of this improvement gets translated into higher Winbench 98 scores because memory wait, I/O and other factors are more significant. 2)the K6-3 L2 cache will operate at the clock speed of the chip, e.g., 400 MHz for a 400 MHz chip. 3)the K6-3 L2 cache of 256K will experience 30% more L2 cache "misses" than the 512K cache of the typical Super Socket 7 motherboard. 4)the penalty for an L2 cache "miss" will be 20% lower than with the K6-2, because 50% of these L2 cache misses will be satisfied by the L3 cache on the Socket 7 motherboard. Here is the table, all benchmark scores are Winbench 98 under Windows 98. There are two prediction columns, the first one is for a run of the mill system used by "Patrick" at tomshardware.com. The "PredSuper" column is for a system with ultra fast components (IBM Ultrawide SCSI, 128M SDRAM etc.) used by the big CPU comparison at tomshardware.com CPU_Type CPUClk L2Clk MemClk Pred Actual PredSuper Actual NearestIntel K6-2-300 300 100 100 22.12 22.1 25.66 25.7 P2 300/66 = 25.4 K6-2-333 333 95 95 22.68 ---- 26.36 26.2 CeleronA 333/66 = 26.3 K6-2-350 350 100 100 23.29 ---- 27.12 27.2 P2 350/100 = 28.3 K6-2-400 400 100 100 24.25 ---- 28.34 ---- P2 350/100 = 28.3 K6-3-350 350 350 100 26.13 ---- 30.75 ---- P2 400/100 = 30.8 ""-variantA 350 350 100 26.23 ---- 30.87 ---- P2 400/100 = 30.8 ""-variantB 350 350 100 25.70 ---- 30.19 ---- P2 400/100 = 30.8 K6-3-400 400 400 100 27.45 ---- 32.45 ---- P2 450/100 = 31.4 K6-3-450 450 450 100 28.57 ---- 33.91 ---- P2 500/100 est32.0 K6-3 variant A assumes no improvement in core CPU speed, instead of 5% K6-3 variant B assumes a 5% smaller L2 cache miss penalty The bottom line, a K6-2-400 will just equal a P2-350, but a K6-3-400 will equal a P2-500 while a K6-3-450 will definitely outclass it.