Hi h0db; The evidence suggests that you're still fooling yourself. Re: "... just refers to a generation of P-4 chipsets, probably sharing a common southbridge." Okay. Name a single time that Intel has ever used a code name for "a generation of chipsets sharing a common southbridge."
I mean really! You guys accuse me of spinning, but the fact is that whenever any piece of obviously fallacious information comes in you guys fall all over yourselves to believe the hell out of it. Magee makes mistakes all the time. Remember this from just last week when we both agreed that he screwed up? #reply-17275160
Let me remind you that you were taken in a year ago when you thought that Brookdale wouldn't have DDR support. This is another classic example of self-deception through ignoring the majority of the evidence, and amusingly enough, it's also a misconception from none other than Mike Magee!
h0db, May 23, 2001
Intel says, "No support for DDR in Brookdale chipset for desktop Pentium 4 family." #reply-15841564
You were wrong in assuming that the Magee article said that DDR (as opposed to DDR266) wasn't going to be supported, but Magee was wrong about DDR266 anyway. Here's the article:
Intel to increase Rambus rebate
Mike Magee, TheInquirer, May 23, 2001
...
In other news, Intel has told its PC customers that PC266 DDR (double data rate) memory will not be supported in its up and coming Brookdale chipset for the desktop Pentium 4 family.
This message, apparently, was delivered by Peter MacWilliams, an Intel fellow, who has often claimed that Moloch-originated RIMMs offer ultimately far better performance than any species of DDR.
...
213.219.40.69
-- Carl |
