Re: AE PC Transporter Questions...

[mjmahon@aol.com (Michael J. Mahon)]

Long wrote:

>Exegete <millers@noneofyourbusiness.com> wrote in 
>3D3B3029.7080909@noneofyourbusiness.com:">news:3D3B3029.7080909@noneofyourbusiness.com:
> 
>> No doubt that is why AMD is doing so very well in the market today....
>> 
>> Roy
>
>Financially I don't think AMD are doing that well.  But, as for technology 
>they lead in the performance per cycle race.  With the upcoming Hammer 
>processor with integrated memory controller they could have a nice lead.  
>They just need to partner with a good foundry.

It's not that simple.

There is a tradeoff between how much work is done in a cycle and
how many cycles it take to complete a task.  AMD has chosen to
do more work per cycle, which requires more logic levels, and more
time between clocks.  Intel has made the opposite choice, going
for simple pipe stages and higher frequencies.

Intel's microarchitecture will always run at a higher frequency in
the same process as AMD's.  (And with higher yield, which is the
economically critical parameter.)

Although the techniques are technologically comparable, history
has shown that higher clock frequencies win in a marketing race.

And in marketing, perception _is_ reality.  ;-)

-michael

Check out 8-bit Apple sound that will amaze you on my
Home page:  http://members.aol.com/MJMahon/