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 36.15

-0.6%

Dec 24 12:59 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (154714)	1/10/2002 4:13:24 PM
From: Charles Gryba	Read Replies (1) of 186894

wbmw, I disagree completely. If you use model designations that have nothing to do with Mhz you are not lying. To bring more automotive examples, a lot of manufacturers afix the engine capacity to their cars. the 325 is a 2.5liter engine, the 330 is a 3 liter engine. The Jaguar LS has a 3.0 model and a 4.0 model both designations denote the size of the engine in liters. To say that because so far Mhz was the designation does not preclude AMD or Intel from incorporating new designations especially at a time when CPU architectures diverge and Mhz is not the best way to denote performance. Mhz only makes sense as a designation only in the context of a given cpu thus P3 Mhz is different than P4 Mhz, different than Itanium Mhz , different than Celeron Mhz. If I was in charge of marketing at AMD I would have designated the XPs as 1.5, 1.6, etc. Intel almost did that with the P3. You had many flavours of the P3 600 each with a diferrent letter combination which only makes sense if you are an enthusiast. The consumer has no clue about these things. C

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next