I see we are getting to close to a pissing match so this will be my last post on this thread.
1. I have shown AMD increased its stated clockspeed by 50% in 18 months. Numerous sites have history of CPU release dates and benchmarks. Check Ars, Tom, manufactuerer's own site, whatever. There is no guessing or hypothesizing on my part.
Your reply is not that AMD has not increased its stated clockspeed by 50%, but "ventured to guess" that 3200+ is not as really as fast as it is and "anyone with a brain" can see this. Hardly a convincing argument.
2. You claim Intel made only a ~30% increase and I showed you how that is incorrect and it is ~50% over an 18 month period. Now, you are saying that is "atypical" and want *another* instance.
So we are on a moving target exercise? What if I produced another one and you are not happy with that?
3. Lastly, you repeatedly and adamantly want me to admit that IBM can go from 2-3 ghz in 12 months. Have I said that that IBM cannot? Have I implied IBM cannot? No, I have not; it may well be they can.
However, this is a classic distraction argument. What does my opinion on what IBM can or cannot do in 12 months have to do with your citing incorrect numbers or equate performance to clockspeed?
Eugene: Nothing personal but your argument is filled with straw man, slippery slope, post hoc, appeal to ridicule, and all sorts of fallacies. I am not sure see how I can convince you otherwise. If you wish, let's take this off-line via PM or e-mail. Otherwise, last post for me on this thread.
I see we are getting to close to a pissing match so this will be my last post on this thread.
1. I have shown AMD increased its stated clockspeed by 50% in 18 months. Numerous sites have history of CPU release dates and benchmarks. Check Ars, Tom, manufactuerer's own site, whatever. There is no guessing or hypothesizing on my part.
AMD did nothing of the sort. They increased an arbitrary value by another arbitrary value. Your justification of AMD's Pseudohertz ('stated clockspeed') is especially damning.
Tom's Hardware, Anandtech, Extremetech, etc. all clearly admit that AMD has lost touch with reality with their 3 times retooled Quantispeed ratings.
In addition, your one example of Intel increasing clockspeed by 50% marked a major three stage transition from .18µ Willamettes to .13µ Northwood A, B and C.
By claiming Intel and AMD do this with any frequency at all detracts from Jobs' claim. Unfortunately, you seem to think it's a common occurence when it's not.
Comments
1. I have shown AMD increased its stated clockspeed by 50% in 18 months. Numerous sites have history of CPU release dates and benchmarks. Check Ars, Tom, manufactuerer's own site, whatever. There is no guessing or hypothesizing on my part.
Your reply is not that AMD has not increased its stated clockspeed by 50%, but "ventured to guess" that 3200+ is not as really as fast as it is and "anyone with a brain" can see this. Hardly a convincing argument.
2. You claim Intel made only a ~30% increase and I showed you how that is incorrect and it is ~50% over an 18 month period. Now, you are saying that is "atypical" and want *another* instance.
So we are on a moving target exercise? What if I produced another one and you are not happy with that?
3. Lastly, you repeatedly and adamantly want me to admit that IBM can go from 2-3 ghz in 12 months. Have I said that that IBM cannot? Have I implied IBM cannot? No, I have not; it may well be they can.
However, this is a classic distraction argument. What does my opinion on what IBM can or cannot do in 12 months have to do with your citing incorrect numbers or equate performance to clockspeed?
Eugene: Nothing personal but your argument is filled with straw man, slippery slope, post hoc, appeal to ridicule, and all sorts of fallacies. I am not sure see how I can convince you otherwise. If you wish, let's take this off-line via PM or e-mail. Otherwise, last post for me on this thread.
Take it easy people.
(edited to correct darn typos)
Originally posted by klinux
I see we are getting to close to a pissing match so this will be my last post on this thread.
1. I have shown AMD increased its stated clockspeed by 50% in 18 months. Numerous sites have history of CPU release dates and benchmarks. Check Ars, Tom, manufactuerer's own site, whatever. There is no guessing or hypothesizing on my part.
AMD did nothing of the sort. They increased an arbitrary value by another arbitrary value. Your justification of AMD's Pseudohertz ('stated clockspeed') is especially damning.
Tom's Hardware, Anandtech, Extremetech, etc. all clearly admit that AMD has lost touch with reality with their 3 times retooled Quantispeed ratings.
In addition, your one example of Intel increasing clockspeed by 50% marked a major three stage transition from .18µ Willamettes to .13µ Northwood A, B and C.
By claiming Intel and AMD do this with any frequency at all detracts from Jobs' claim. Unfortunately, you seem to think it's a common occurence when it's not.