Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: dumbmoney who wrote (50207)	2/20/1999 5:47:00 PM
From: Michael DaKota	of 1581493

re : PIII is SLOWER than PII : dumbmoney "Wrong. PIII is faster than the PII. (The article is correct, it's you who are wrong)." kevin is not the queen, you know:) Kevin and Spurway are 1 and the same, yust to inform you ;) PIII cache is 4ns, but around 30 mb/sec slower in troughput compared to pIII333 > 500 MHz... All this is already mentioned in the bxboards article... Intel reduced the cache troughput to guarentee stability at 500 MHz.. still remains fact that a pII333 at 500 , and a CeleronA500 are indeed faster than a pIII500...without KNI support that is... But albeit the KNI support pIII is just a no-go until the speed is really higher than pII or celeronA can get ....let's say 650 MHz.. Reports that pIII would be running in "the lab" at .25 uM at 650 mhz I consider rubbish, or at least a little inaccurate, just taking in mind that a 500 mhz pIII overclocked at 574 already gets boiling hot.... so 650 is reachable, no doubt, but not with conventional cooling.. my 0,02 $ FHWL, Michael da Kota

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next