Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Introducing "No-Moore's Law"

Author: Jeremiah Penery

Date: 19:06:53 03/04/03

Go up one level in this thread

On March 04, 2003 at 00:24:27, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On March 03, 2003 at 22:33:57, Jeremiah Penery wrote:
>>On March 02, 2003 at 23:24:16, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>And I'm going to buy the fastest thing I can at the time I purchase.  If they
>>>lag with clock speeds, I may well go with someone else.  And I believe they
>>>know that.
>>Funny then, that you've never had an AMD machine, since they were faster than
>>Intel machines for quite some time.
>As I mentioned, we _had_ a few K5 processors.  They left a _terrible_ taste.
>I helped a Ph.D. student debug for a couple of weeks, only to find it was an
>unreliable AMD processor.  Ran fine on equivalent Intel chips.  Not on K5.
>We later find that that batch of K5's had some problems.

I never claimed anything about the K5.  K5, by all accounts, pretty well sucked
anyway.  I'm talking about the last couple years, where Athlon was clearly
dominating performance numbers everywhere.

>>The issue is that _nobody else has anything faster_.  Intel releases just enough
>>to be faster than the competition.
>If you believe Intel is that much better than AMD in terms of design and
>fab, they why bother buying AMD as they _must_ be grossly incompetent to be
>unable to keep up in speed?

If you have 100x less cash than a competitor, and R&D, engineering, and
marketing budgets several times smaller as well, would you expect to remain
anywhere in the same league as that competitor?

Maybe Intel is the one who is grossly incompetent, because they can't blow the
competition away in performance.  Or maybe the simpler explanation, that it's
all about marketing, is the correct one.

>You offer _zero_ evidence.  Engineers say they push as hard as they can.
>You say they don't.  So why would I admit I am wrong when you offer _nothing_
>to _prove_ that I am???
>I can't find an engineer to support your theory.  Because it makes no sense from
>any angle.  You might try asking a couple to see if you get different answers
>from what I got.

Again, engineers don't control marketing.  Engineers don't have anything to do
with marketing.  Marketing people often have no clue about engineering.  Just
read a few Dilbert comics, and you'll see satire which is often remarkably close
to the truth regarding marketing.

You're trying to use engineering as explanation for marketing.  That will fail
100% of the time, especially when dealing with a huge marketing machine like

This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.