Author: Mogens Larsen
Date: 23:34:59 06/14/00
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 2000 at 22:10:17, David Franklin wrote: >Why *shouldn't* it start at 1.4Ghz? There are always tradeoffs to be made; one >possible tradeoff is to accept a low number of instructions/clock, if that >allows you to have a very high clock rate. Basically there's no problem starting at 1.4GHz, but that would probably mean too expensive for the ordinary consumer. Strategically it would be better to try and wrestle the low-to middleend market from AMD. The highend market could be a sensible decision if it's fast enough. Time will tell I suppose. Is the current Pentium unable to reach the clock rate we're talking about? Or is the gain just too small in performance/speed ratio? >Of course, it seems Intel have gone a *long* way down that route with Willamette >- some parts are actually double pumped (effectively 2.8Ghz), but the tradeoff >is a *really* deep pipeline, and pretty high latencies for a lot of >instructions. It doesn't look like a winning strategy to me, but only time will >tell. Can you explain what double pumping is in layman terms? Best wishes... Mogens
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.