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: Charles R who wrote (102711)	4/6/2000 8:56:00 PM
From: kash johal	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575596

Charles, re:"This is the first time that I can recollect mainstream media using "scam" to discuss the MHz issue. As more people realize this the consumer and business product mix will increasingly shift to the low-end. " This guy was interviewed on CNBC today as well. Once folks figure this out both AMD and Intel will suffer BIG time. regards, Kash

To: Charles R who wrote (102711)	4/6/2000 9:00:00 PM
From: chic_hearne	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1575596

Re: This is the first time that I can recollect mainstream media using "scam" to discuss the MHz issue. As more people realize this the consumer and business product mix will increasingly shift to the low-end. Chuck, I disagree 100%. Nothing is even close to fast enough yet. We have at least 5 years of growth in the speed game, but by 5 years time there will be new apps to take advantage of a 5-10 Gzh processor. Bandwith: I have a cable modem, it's slow!!! I won't be happy until I have fiber to the backbone. CPU: Try using something like "via voice" with a 500 Mhz processor. It pisses me off my NT system (with 256 MB of RAM I might add) still takes over 1 minute to boot up. Netscape takes 5 seconds to load. Lotus notes takes 10 seconds to load. I won't be happy until I can do all of these simple tasks in less than 1 second. chic PS- Time is money. For a few hundred dollars more if I can save 100 hours time over the life of my processor, it's worth it.

To: Charles R who wrote (102711)	4/6/2000 9:46:00 PM
From: crazyoldman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575596

Hello Charles and thread, Charles, good to see you back from vacation, was about to ask where you were when I saw your post last night. re: As more people realize this the consumer and business product mix will increasingly shift to the low-end. Today I accomplished part of a project I've been trying to finish since I built those 3 Athlon machines back in February. That project was to get NT server 4.0 SP3 installed on one of those 700 MHz Athlons. After installing my SQL database server (software) on the NT machine and getting the database files moved to that machine, I was ready for my test. The client machine (a second 700 MHz Athlon) ran a 4.3MB SQL application I had written a couple of years ago. The existing hardware at our site is a 200MHz pentium classic in our server, and 400MHz pII as client. One process in my application was requiring 13 min. 4 sec. to complete. The same process using the Athlon 700's required 3 min. 29 sec. The Athlons completed the task in nearly 1/4 the time required for our pentium based equipment. All parts of my application are blindingly fast as witnessed by my personal familiarity with the program. I'm not sure I can agree with your conclusion that the business product mix will or even can shift to the low end. I suppose the real test of my statement would have to be run on two 500MHz Athlons. Still, my feeling is when performance counts, go for the power. There are many places in great need for the kind of power AMD is offering on the market. I might also add there were no adverse incidents with NT or the application concerning the Athlons. The application is optimized for the pentium by the C++ compiler. Kindest regards, CrazyMan

To: Charles R who wrote (102711)	4/7/2000 9:57:00 AM
From: that_crazy_doug	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1575596

<< This is the first time that I can recollect mainstream media using "scam" to discuss the MHz issue. As more people realize this the consumer and business product mix will increasingly shift to the low-end. >> I don't think high mhz parts are a scam at all, and they are well worth their money. YOu may ask what do you really need all that speed for. The answer is you want your computer to be useful in 2 years. go back about a year and a half ago. The fastest pc was the 400 mhz pentium 2. At that time you didn't need it to run anything. Divide that speed by 1/4th. You'd have a pentium 100 which was starting to get a bit crippled, but could still run anything you need, just not quite as well as you'd like. The low end back then was probably a 300 celeron, and it'd still run everything you'd want it to very well, and people would argue why buy anything better? Take a look at the speeds now. The fastest is 1 ghz, divide that by 4 and you get a 250. It will basically run everything you need, but it's getting to the point you need to replace it. The low end now is probably around 500 mhz, it will also run everything you want it to, but a year to a year and a half from now, I bet you'll want something a lot faster. I think this pattern has been around for as long as pc's have been around. You can argue that you can basically do everything you want to on a 100 mhz pc today, however I think the common applications demand more and more power. I thought every time I bought a new pc, that I was so far ahead I wouldn't need a new one for years. However, I've been wrong every time, and I think even if I get a 1ghz machine today, that 2 years from now it will be puttering around slowly. In general, everyone who has ever called out "You'll never need that much power!" has been proven wrong faster than you'd imagine. How many people mock the famous bill gates quote today? "Who will ever need more than 640k of memory?"