Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[chipguy]

Thats 9 months later, which fits right into my given
timeframe (6-12 months) and it gave (your right) "only"
33% performance increase?

I will ask you again. Do you suppose the same again?

Wow, you saying Willamette performance and clock rate
track 100%? You have used performance and frequency
interchangeably. :-P

I don't know if Prescott clock rate will go up 33% in
the first year but with the move to a 1066 MHz FSB
and dual channel 667 MHz DDR2 I think performance
should go up more than it did with Willamette.

Anyway you are sidestepping the critical point that
with Athlon vs Willamette AMD had a substantial cost
advantage while with A64 vs Prescott it is probably
at a substantial cost disadvantage. The dreamer's
talk of inflicting material "damage" on Intel is
laughable.