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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (42181)	11/25/1998 7:59:00 AM
From: Ed Sammons	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1586426

You chose to cite a reference that states the K6-3 400 outperforms the PII-450 in Winstone. Then dismiss that citation by giving your opinion, pulled out of thin air, without any data to back it up. This is just intellectual laziness or confusion. From the article you cited: "included two identically outfitted PCs with one exception: The first had an AMD K6-3 400 CPU while the second held an Intel Pentium 2-450." This means the only differences are the CPUs and chipsets. So, which part of the system is faster: a Taiwanese chipset vs. the Intel BX, or the AMD K6-3 400 vs. the Intel P2-450, or both? Do educate us. If you are going to ignore your citation and make a statement that directly contradicts it, at least provide a shred of evidence to back up your claim. Your "feelings" do not count. By making the statement, "I doubt that the K6-3 can beat a Pentium II which is one speed grade higher.", you are making a conclusion, albeit contrary to the evidence provided by the article. If you are going to tell someone "wrong" in a post, at least be sure you are right. Ed Sammons ------------------------------------------------- From Reply # 42178: Tenchusatsu states: Hmmm. Seems like we'll have to wait for Tom Uberclockermeister (tm. PREngel) to benchmark the K6-3 before we make any conclusions about it. It may well be that K6-3 beats an equivalently-clocked Pentium II, but by how much is uncertain. I doubt that the K6-3 can beat a Pentium II which is one speed grade higher. -------------------------------------------------- To: Ed Sammons (42180 ) From: Tenchusatsu Wednesday, Nov 25 1998 2:43AM ET Reply # 42181 of 42181 <1. K6-3 400 loads 7-8 seconds faster vs PII-450. 2. K6-3 400 finished test 15 seconds faster than PII-450. Result: K6-3 400 test runtime is 7-8 seconds faster than PII-450. Conclusion: The K6-3 beat a Pentium II which is one speed grade higher.> Wrong. The benchmark Winstone isn't processor-only, you know. There's a whole lot of everything going on in the benchmark, from disk accesses to graphics to processor-intensive stuff. A faster disk is definitely going to help benchmark execution as well as the loading times. Like I said before, I'll wait for Tom's Hardware Guide to do some benchmarking before I start making any conclusions about the K6-3. <PS: Given the same hard drive, which machine would you expect to load the test suite faster: the faster or slower machine?> The faster machine, of course. But by a whole 7 to 8 seconds? You don't get that kind of improvement with just a processor upgrade, you know.