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: Brian Hutcheson who wrote (39628)	10/19/1998 9:31:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1578705

<The competition is real and its time you took your Intel tinted glasses off .> Brian, it's time you stopped accusing other people of being biased. Face it, we're all biased, especially you and I. Your statements here, especially the one below, show that you've got some heavily-tinted AMD goggles on. <PS if as you claim you are a designer of CPUs , how come you do not realise the inferiority of PII ? The only thing that saved it from being celery was the L2 cache bus .> That's interesting, considering that the P6 core had a pipelined FPU worthy of triple-imitation in the K7. (Quiet, Ali, I know what you're going to say in response to this.) I'll bet that in theory, a K6 without an L2 cache on the motherboard, running at 266 MHz on a 66 MHz bus, will be slower than a Celeron 266 without L2 cache, even more so when running Windows NT and 100% 32-bit code. So much for the "superior" K6. Tenchusatsu

To: Brian Hutcheson who wrote (39628)	10/19/1998 9:54:00 PM
From: Pravin Kamdar	Respond to of 1578705

Brian, Scumbria does not wear Intel tinted glasses. Pravin.

To: Brian Hutcheson who wrote (39628)	10/19/1998 9:59:00 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 1578705

Brian - Re: " The only thing that saved it from being celery was the L2 cache bus . " No, Brian. The K6 and K6-2 saved the Pentium II . Because they are significantly slower. ANd because they have to sell at a deep discount to the Pentium II and Celery chips. Isn't that a bummer when Intel's Celery chips are faster than the K6-2 ? Paul

To: Brian Hutcheson who wrote (39628)	10/20/1998 12:23:00 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578705

Brian, The competition is real and its time you took your Intel tinted glasses off . I think if you read through my posts you will find that I am not an Intel fan by any stretch of the imagination. You will also find that it was Yousef criticizing you, not me. how come you do not realise the inferiority of PII ? The only thing that saved it from being celery was the L2 cache bus . The importance of the L2 cache can not be overstated for any CPU. Most of the other architectural stuff is in the noise. Scumbria

To: Brian Hutcheson who wrote (39628)	10/20/1998 10:37:00 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578705

Brian, <..realise the inferiority of PII ?> I do not think we need here to talk anything up or down. A CPU does not run in a vacuum but is integrated into a system. P-II systems are very well "balanced" in terms of memory latency/bandwidth, we need to face it. It is not an easy task to beat this implementation, and there is not much room left in the x86 for improvements. I would not expect any major performance breakthrough from any x86 implementation, especially on current M$ code. However, if your statement was intended as a probe stone into the Intelafelon's pond, that's ok with me. Have you seen the Pal's responses to a single CitrusLover post? These shorts are getting funnier every day... they triples:) Tells something about the level of their despair. Take care, - ALi