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: semiconeng who wrote (106964)	8/4/2000 10:36:35 AM
From: pgerassi	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Semiconeng: Do you have a reading comprehension problem? The 850 MHz is the same CPU run at a FSB of 100 MHz instead of a FSB of 133 MHz (1133 MHz). Did you really read what tom and Kyle wrote? (Kyle's letter is in this update: www6.tomshardware.com ) Since it is the same CPU, underclocked, then it can not be process related difference. Except it was supposed to run at 1133 MHz and it fails like an overclock too far. If it is a process problem, Intel has got a lot to worry about as a fix is at least 3 months away. Its starting just like the FDIV bug did. Intel at that time put out a release that it was inconsequential. They found out otherwise. At least you do not hear Intel publicly denying it. OTOH, Intel is not affirming it either. If any other reviewer or OEM states this is a problem before Intel acknowledges it (assuming it was not a glitch (still could be)), it will be the FDIV bug all over again. One of the good ways to check this out would be for one of the reviewers whose review you like, to test Prime95 on their 1133 P3 platform. You or I can not do this as machines have not arrived into public hands yet. At least it will be another datapoint in this problem. Pete