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: DRBES who wrote (51218)	2/27/1999 7:39:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572384

Interesting quote from JC... "he K7 has an immense floating point unit, I'm running it through paper simulations against the P3 currently, and it looks like we'll get a serious benefit of the K7 over the P3 (it's much more than a clock speed faster in fpu from the looks of it), especially since the internal scheduler is so damn big, a great boon for o-o-o execution. The integer unit is also amazing (three issue with better caching, compared to the generally dual issue of the P2. Like I said, I'm running simulations. With 1:1 alternating multiply/add instructions, the K7's fpu can do twice the rate of the P3. Likewise for all multiplies, though all adds would be about equal speed for P3 and K7. Those matrix operations for 3D processing is more of a mix of the two. In trancendental (FSIN, FCOS, etc) and complex fpu code (FSQRT, FDIV), the K7 has much lower latencies and pretty low throughput (at least on the sqrt and div) compared to the P3, so high end engineering stuff may just kick ass on the K7 over, say, the Xeon. I'll post up numbers on my site if I discover anything. BTW, I don't mean to imply the K7 will run twice as fast as the P3. That's peak performance levels, which is affected by logic & integer instructions (which are always intermingled) as well as caching issues, which I'm not qualified to handle.".... Jim