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 37.29

-0.6%

3:01 PM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: willcousa who wrote (163420)	4/3/2002 2:03:37 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) of 186894

Willcousa, no problem. My beef with it was that AMD is willing to use the same formula for the Duron as they are for the Athlon. There are several things wrong with this. First, the Duron that the article claims will use QuantiSpeed will be based on the Appoloosa core. However, this core contains no micro-architectural improvements over the Morgan core, which does not use QuantiSpeed. How does AMD then justify a Duron as being 1600+, when it is only 100MHz faster than the one they call 1.3GHz. I'd like to see them post those benchmarks on their site. Second, AMD's QuantiSpeed loses the whole concept of "performance" if a Duron 1800+ does not equal the performance of an Athlon 1800+. Will AMD have to explain to consumers that 1800+ does not equal 1800+ if you buy a Duron? Then why have a "performance" standard? Doesn't make any sense, does it? That's why I think that the Aberdeen Group is correct about what they call the "Pinnochio Factor". As AMD milks QuantiSpeed for all it's worth, it will soon become obvious to the rest of the industry that there is no substance behind AMD's arbitrary measurement. wbmw

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next