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 (114996)	10/27/2000 12:09:36 PM
From: jcholewa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

> Interesting how they only posted one benchmark. If they had a system and time to run benchmarks, you'd think > they'd have quite a few more. Yet they only posted one. What do you want to bet that if this one is correct, the > others showed P4 winning dy a good margin so they left those out, just like you would if given the chance. I don't think that's iXBT's style. Far, far more likely a possibility is that the system was not in their actual labs and, as such, they had to follow the time constraints of the friendly NDA-breaker that gave them the peek. Hence, they only had time to do the one benchmark.       > Edit: Intel's website shows a 933MHz P3 running at 192 Sysmark2000. Do you really think a 1.5GHz P4 is going to > come in at 160? I have not seen Intel's exact SYSmark2000 numbers but I can assure you that the one you posted is > wrong. Sorry to disappoint you. Keep digging in the dumpster and better luck next time. The low score (imho) is probably a bad configuration issue. Maybe they don't have the latest drivers for i850, for example, and that's causing issues with its bus mastering capabilities. 160 seems awfully low. Intel's normalized scores are much more optimistic, claiming that the 1.40GHz P4 slightly outperforms the 1.00GHz PIII. Given that 933MHz score you referenced up there, this would likely mean that 1.5GHz P4 scores at least a 210 in SM2k. Still, it is a valid point that SysMark2000 -- a benchmark which Intel fully endorses and of which has a strong hand in the design of -- is the weakest (comparative to PIII 1.00GHz) performer in Intel's normalized benchmark list. It just happens to be not nearly as low as is suggested by iXBT Labs and referenced by Dan3. -JC