SI
SI
discoversearch

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: Elmer who wrote (121353)8/1/2000 12:51:31 AM
From: Joe NYC  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1574854
 
Fresh from Yahoo. Intel's answer to Copper Athlons:

messages.yahoo.com

Both Intel and AMD have decided not to pursue silicon chips. But whilst AMD has decided to use Copper, Intel has decided to use Paper.

Paper was always thought to be a poor conductor until Intel started releasing all its latest chips which all ran on paper, not on Silicon.

An Intel spokesperson listed sever advantages that Paper has over Copper.

1. Cheaper distribution as chips can be Faxed to the customer. (stole this one from JC's)
2. Paper chips are cheaper to make.
3. Paper chips run the Internet faster.
4. Helps rid the planet of those pesky trees.
5. Paper chips are more reliable, as they run cooler.

Also today, Barnes and Noble was announced as supplier of the "paper wafers" used to make Intels newest chips. Paper wafers are distributed not in "pods" like traditional wafers, but in "books".



To: Elmer who wrote (121353)8/1/2000 1:31:35 AM
From: Cirruslvr  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1574854
 
Elmer - RE: "Yes that's right, and you have no trouble accepting that Intel is pushing the limits yet when AMD does exactly the same thing don't you think they are pushing the limits too?"

I was just pointing a couple of things out to you. I don't see where you get those thoughts.

I've never had anything against raising the voltage. You and Paul once did, until Intel started to do the same thing.

Shouldn't you be pointing out 1.13GHz SPEC scores to me? ;)