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: Elmer who wrote (104383)	6/13/2000 1:19:00 AM
From: Jim McMannis	Respond to of 186894

ELmer, RE:"Yes with a motherboard that won't be available until 2H '00 and drivers and operating system components unavailable as well." Compaq motherboards are notoriously slow...unless this is an exception. Jim

To: Elmer who wrote (104383)	6/13/2000 1:45:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Elmer, Jozef this is totally false and lame. Compaq published SPEC benchmarks and they chose to use an Intel compiler. They are a big supporter of Athlon. Did they conspire with Intel? Dell chose to publish SPEC benchmarks and they chose to use an Intel compiler. Did they conspire with Intel? Fujitsu published SPEC benchmarks and they chose to use an Intel compiler. Did they conspire with Intel? Siemens published SPEC benchmarks and used an Intel compiler. Did they conspire with Intel? In fact AMD published SPEC benchmarks and used an Intel compiler. Did they conspire with Intel????? No. My point is that it is not a real compiler. It is a SPEC compiler, that nobody uses anywhere else. This is a complete affront to the spirit of benchmarking, and it is violating the spirit of the SPEC benchmarking itself. Please read the following: spec.org Especially section "1. General Philosophy". I understand that you could weasel out of all points using Clinton-like logic, to most observers, it is clear that you are not operating well within the limit of what's acceptable. It is further evidence that Intel is fully aware that under fair rules (third party compiler) Intel would lose, so faced with inability to design a faster processor, Intel designed a fake compiler to make a mediocre processor look good. CuMine is by the claims of the AMD zealots, a 6th generation processor. I think it is Intel terminology. TTurd is supposed to be a 7.5 generation processor produced on copper technology. AMD claims Athlon core to be 7th generation. But you may be well aware that these "generations" are not real. A 486 processor running at 1 GHz with 128K of fast L1, 256K of fast L2, 64bit data bus would be surprisingly competitive with Pentium III. But it is unlikely that the 486 core would be able to run at 1 GHz given the same process technology. P6 can (barely), P7 (Willamette) will be able to run at 1+ GHz easily, while it may underperform P6 Coppermine clock for clock. The "generation" stuff is meaningless in the context it was used in the past (8086 -> 286 -> 386). The new "generations" may be defined by scalability, if the term has any relevance left. It appears that K7 is somewhat more scalable, so under the scalability definition of generation, it may be somewhat ahead, but this whole thing is like arguing how many angels fit on a head of a pin. Joe