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.

Technology Stocks : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (104325)	6/10/2000 10:06:00 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 186894

Hi Skeeter Bug; Re need for higher speed CPUs. Interesting article on the Nvidia website on the subject of CPU vs GPU (i.e. Graphics Processing Unit). They say that in order to get to where game players want to go we need them both, and quite a bit more than can be delivered on current hardware. In short, they are saying that the need for higher speed gaming platforms will continue for at least another two years: Balancing Bottlenecks: The Partnership Between the CPU and GPU In the end, we're dealing with two problems that have no boundaries. The game play elements - physics, AI, collision detection and so on - will eat up all the CPU that AMD and Intel can throw at them. By the same token, creating those photrealistic worlds at 60fps will take all the creative and engineering talents that a company like NVIDIA can devote to the solution. nvidia.com -- Carl P.S. Re the Tom's article. Seen it. In fact, if an article mentions RDRAM and has been posted on the net for longer than 10 minutes, it's likely been linked to on the RMBS thread.

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (104325)	6/11/2000 5:16:00 AM
From: JDN	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dear Skeeter Bug and Bilow: I read the ENTIRE missive you posted. I am NOT a Rambus shareholder but I am not only an INTC shareholder but also as many of you may know trying to decide WHAT computer system to buy for myself this fall. I am not technically qualified to judge complexities like this. The article you posted seems to horrible that I have to ask the question, how is it INTC with all its brilliant, and experienced engineers could not have determinded that information on their own before insisting on implementing RMBS? Since it drives the overall cost of computer systems up considerably, it would seem to me to be no boon economically for INTC as unless you sell the computer you are not going to order the microprocessor. I seriously doubt the comment that was made about intc getting a million shares of RMBS stock if certain shipments happen as having any effect on the decision of INTC to push RMBS unless INTC themselves were convinced it was the better technology. At this point, I am leaning toward 256mb SDRAM over RDRAM which I think Dell is using the 700mh RDRAM and not the 800 system. I dont want to make a mistake here as this will be a costly computer (over 3,000 with peripherals) and I wish it to be competive for several years. JDN