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 48.60

+3.5%

3:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Ali Chen who wrote (24913)	6/18/1997 2:42:00 AM
From: Elmer	of 186894

Ali, here I am jumping in again, but you just aren't making any sense. You said to Paul you didn't want him to use terms like "real slow" or "not real slow" and them you go ahead and use terms like "x86 can't generate large number of back to back cycles". Get it straight Ali, either allow others to generalize or stop doing so yourself. As for the x86 not generating "large numbers" of back to back cycles, you should know that the P6/P2 archeticure can no longer be concieved of as a single processor. It is a multiprocessor archeticure and therefore is capable of almost unlimited back to back transactions. In fact your use of the term "cycle" is no longer applicable to the P6 archeciture at all. There are no cycles, only transactions and a multiprocessor system can keep them queded up almost indefinately. Your description of the x86 "problem" is a perfect description of the K6/M2's limitations, not the P6/P2's. Get it straight Ali and stop mixing subjects. You're not the only one on this forum who knows the architecture. El

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next