Message-ID: <377E2701.7193D95E@lycosmail.com>
Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 11:06:41 -0400
From: Adam Schrotenboer <ajschrotenboer AT lycosmail DOT com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.6 [en] (Win98; U)
X-Accept-Language: en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: K7 potentials
References: <000401bec489$71489b60$41d16482 AT ellemtel DOT se>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Reply-To: pgcc AT delorie DOT com

David Jonsson wrote:

> >
> > At 05:48 PM 5/19/99 -0400, Adam Schrotenboer wrote:
> > >I was wondering if there is any speculation, q's, etc about what the K7
> > >may be capable of.
> >
> > well i don't expect too much.
>
> Expect 10-50% more than PIII. Look at www.amd.se
>
> > >For example:
> > >    Will the K7 be less "register starved" than the rest of the x86
> > >archictecture, or was this simply not possible while maintaining x86
> > >compatibility????
> > >    If it will have more registers, how much difference will this make
>
> The only way to increase register amounts is to introduce new CPU states just like they have with PIII.
>
> David

Have they done so??? With the K7 (Athlon) processor now in revenue shipments, the specs should now be
available to know this, right????