Replies to post #68169 on Advanced Micro Devices Inc (AMD)

[KeithDust2000]

HailMary, These next gen cores lengthened the pipeline compared to today's Yonah. Was IPC sacrificed to do so?

No. Keep in mind they have, among other things, twice the L2, a much faster FSB, and a more integrated cache "architecture" that allows direct data transfer between the L1 caches of the cores to offload the FSB further and improve performance. INTEL claims IPC is going up significantly over Yonah.

As an AMD shareholder I'm not going to count on Intel screwing up again.

Like me. I find myself agreeing with your posts 100%.

[BUGGI1000]

@HailMary
I could somewhat agree with you, but I can't say it enough times.
Most of the people seems to OVERESTIMATE the ramp speed of a
new product design from INTEL - WAY overestimate.
I will ask you, how many Conroe parts will replace PIV in
Q3-2006? How many will it be in Q4-2006? How many PIV are
left, which have to compete with A64, X2?
The next amusing thing for me is, that most "AMD'ler" have
FEAR, when Intel could catch up. I could remember times,
where Intel ALWAYS claimed the LEAD and now, sometimes in
the future, they could finally catch up. Mhhhh ...
Don't get me wrong, when Conroe will released with good
clockspeed, it will be a tough competitor, but we all don't
have to forget, where AMD is STILL standing now with its
marketshare. Is it sooooooooo unreasonable to assume, that AMD could
reach over 20% volume share with a product which is equal
to INTEL? Is that so hard to assume?
I don't want to go further and could now write a few lines
to AMD, but these would be only wishes and guesses, like the
same, all seems normally do in respect to CONROE. Wouldn't it
be fair, to wait, what AMD could do with F-Steps to make some
future predictions?