Intel Corporation (INTC) 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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC)

INTC 35.81

+0.2%

Nov 25 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dan3 who wrote (129756)	3/10/2001 11:47:25 AM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (1) of 186894

Dan, > But a strong Tualatin would destroy P4, Itanium, Foster, and McKinley - How could a strong Tualatin destroy Itanium, Foster, and McKinley? It's a completely different animal from those three, being intended for notebooks and low end servers. 1. It doesn't have a 1M/2M cache, which immediately puts it out of server mid-range applications or upper range database type applications. It also doesn't have extended addressing like the 64 bit chips. 2. It isn't intended to scale in clock speed with P4/Foster, maybe also McKinley, I don't know. Saying Tualatin could destroy any of those server intended chips is like saying PIII >800 MHz could have destroyed the big cache Xeons. WRT AMD, it looks like they've caught the slipitis bug on the SMP and horsey projects. Wha hoppen? TV

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next