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 48.72

+3.0%

Jan 14 3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Elmer who wrote (130677)	3/22/2001 9:58:35 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (1) of 186894

Re: You're wrong about the P4... Give it the same time PPro took and you'll see. It's time for the Intellabees to at least glance away from fantasy land and face reality. Pentium Pro provided superb performance on many benchmarks from the day of its release. It didn't need to have synthetic benchmarks created for it, either. It ran existing windows applications that were designed for the original Pentium faster, clock for clock, by a good margin. It did not do as well in windows 3.1, but it was superb on the existing NT operating system and existing applications that had been designed for the original Pentium. Pentium Pro did well on then existing applications and benchmarks. Pentium Pro was not a wounded duck on virtually the entire X86 code base like P4 is. eoenabled.com For example, on Byte magazine's technical applications suite of tests, a Pentium Pro 150 performed 2.2 times as fast as a Pentium 90. Applications in Bytes suite were "legacy" applications from the existing code base. There was no need to hand code synthetic benchmarks to keep the Pentium Pro from looking bad. Now compare that to P4...

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next