Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (76887)	10/25/1999 6:28:00 PM
From: Steve Porter	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1576893

Tench, I don't think if you need a fast desktop system today you can consider using an 840. It just seems to the price/perf ratio will be all out of whack.. My gripe comes from people comparing CPUs on TOTALLY different sets of test equipment. One CPU benchmarked on one type of 'average' motherboard, and then another on the top of the line board. Does seem like it accomplishes anything. Steve

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (76887)	10/25/1999 11:54:00 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1576893

Re: 840-based systems.... The poor guys at Intel that got pushed into using dual channel rambus must be fuming as they watch AMD prepare its rollout of DDR 266. What costs $850 in paired RIMMs + $250 in motherboard to achieve will come from a single $250 DDR SDRAM and a $150 motherboard. (the 2.1 Gbyte/sec of DDR takes a little longer to fill a cache line than the 3.2 Gbyte/sec of dual channel rambus, but the lower latency of DDR makes up for it - should be a performance tie. But in terms of expandability, memory density, and, of course, price! DDR flat out slaughters Rambus. Dan