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 (42634)	12/2/1998 11:39:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1577903

Maxwell, I hope you weren't calling me an Intel Buffoon <G>. Frankly I was shocked <G> that the K6-2-400 (Warp core) beat a Pentium II by a full 1.2 Winstones. No wonder Intel had to get a new benchmark.... Jim

To: Maxwell who wrote (42634)	12/3/1998 12:58:00 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 1577903

<There is your damn benchmark. You always asked for it. Under Winstone98> Wasn't Winstone 97 more favorable toward AMD and Cyrix chips than Winstone 98? Seems like every new benchmark from ZD Benchmark Operations (ZDBOp) favors Intel processors a little more. Three possible explanations come to mind: 1) ZDBOp is conspiring with Intel to make AMD chips look bad. 2) Coincidence. 3) Intel chips are designed with the future in mind, while AMD chips are stuck in the past. Personally, I think it's #2, with a little bit of #3 mixed in. On a similar note, I don't buy Anand's explanation that Winstone 99 needs a fast L2 cache. Multitasking generally requires a larger cache, not a faster one. In this case, the only benefit of a faster L2 cache is the shorter time it takes to refill the L1 cache with new instructions and data. But from the processor's point-of-view, context switches occur very infrequently, on the order of several milliseconds. That means that there are millions of processor clocks between every context switch, more than enough to drown out the switch penalty. Two more things. First, remember that AMD's K6 is much better at 16-bit applications that Intel's Pentium II. If people are so bent on rejecting Winstone 99 because of its apparent bias towards Intel, perhaps they should just stick to legacy 16-bit applications, where AMD processors shine. Second, if Intel is cheating on Winstone 99, I trust that Herr Uberclockermeister will catch them in the act. He's done it before when he found a discrepancy in the Winbench Disk scores running under Intel's Ultra DMA drivers. He did it again when he showed that 3D Winbench 98 gives abnormally high scores to Intel's i740 graphics chip. Tenchusatsu