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: Badger who wrote (41274)	11/11/1998 5:22:00 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571415

Badger, I am not surprised that a 300 MHz K6-2 runs 25% slower than a 450 MHz PII. I am surprised that a respectable magazine would compare different clock speeds, and compare the average AMD system price vs. the lowest Intel system price. I suspect that being editor of a major computer magazine could be a very lucrative position, for a person with the appropriate ethical standards. Scumbria

To: Badger who wrote (41274)	11/11/1998 6:23:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571415

<"We looked at six systems based on the AMD K6-2 CPU (300- to 350-MHz models). Their processor test scores were about 25% lower than the Pentium II systems, and they weren't the bargains we expected, typically priced within $350 of the least expensive 450-MHz Pentium II."> Badger, you can argue that the article is not very fair towards AMD because it's comparing the 350 MHz K6-2 to the 450 MHz Pentium II. On the other hand, Michael Miller may have been referring more to the price/performance index table that they have on page 104 of PC Magazine. Here, most of the AMD K6-2 systems appeared in the upper-left area of the table, meaning that their prices are low, but the performance/features indices are also low. The closest to the upper-right corner (labeled "Most Bang For the Buck") was the Unicent system. Most of the Pentium II systems appeared in the middle-right area of the table, meaning that the price is in the median range, but the performance/features indices are high. This is very interesting to note, since these systems feature Intel's top-of-the-line. Only a few years ago, systems featuring the top-of-the-line processors cost in excess of $3000. Now they're costing around $2500. Also, note one more thing. The article was entitled "Professional PCs." As we all know, AMD has been mainly focused on retail PC's, where the consumer is very sensitive to price. AMD is still planning on making inroads into the professional PC market, but the full attack hasn't started yet. Tenchusatsu