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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (118252)	11/17/2000 6:41:15 PM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Ten, Remember when the Pentium Pro had lousy performance on 16-bit apps? Boy, did that shortcoming turn into big opportunities for AMD and Cyrix to cash-in on! Interesting analogy. Are you implying that P4 has lousy performance on 32-bit apps? Scumbria

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (118252)	11/18/2000 7:25:36 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: Scumbria, remember when the Pentium Pro had lousy performance on 16-bit apps? Boy, did that shortcoming turn into big opportunities for AMD and Cyrix to cash-in on! Neither Cyrix nor AMD had anything better than Pentium MMX at that time. And the Pentium Pro was pretty much a failure. The Pentium II, which performed much better on legacy software, was what successfully replaced the Pentium MMX. Relatively few people were interested in the Pentium PRO. The relevant benchmark here would appear to be Sysmark 2000: SYSmark 2000 contains twelve application workloads and a "workload manager" application responsible for setting up the workloads, timing their execution, and reporting performance results. Each SYSmark 2000 workload consists of a real application (for example, Adobe Photoshop) and a test script that sends commands to the application. The workloads are divided into two categories. The Office Productivity category contains CorelDRAW* 9, Microsoft* Excel* 2000, Dragon Systems* NaturallySpeaking* Preferred 4.0, Netscape* Communicator* 4.61, Corel* Paradox* 9, Microsoft* PowerPoint* 2000, and Microsoft* Word* 2000. The Internet Content Creation category contains MetaCreations* Bryce* 4, Avid* Elastic Reality* 3.1, Adobe* Photoshop* 5.5, Adobe* Premiere* 5.1, and Microsoft Windows Media Encoder 4.0. bapco.com and here are the comparative scores: Benchmark P4 1.6 P4 1.5 P4 1.4 K7 1.2 (DDR) K7 1.2 (PC133) SYSMark 2000 (W98) 193 185 177 220 205 SYSMark 2000 (W2K) 217 208 199 232 221 This isn't good news for P4. The P4s tested used a more expensive dual memory channel motherboard with twice as much memory each byte of which cost twice as much. To achieve this uninspiring performance required that 4 times as much money be spent buying memory. It was the fastest RDRAM (PC800) but not the fastest DDR (which would have been CAS 2). Benchmark systems: - Pentium 4: 1.5 GHz (over- and underclockable to 1.4 - 1.6 GHz), Intel i850 reference board (boards from Asus made no difference), 256 MB PC800 RDRAM (under Win98 limited to 128 MB, but not under Win2000), Asus 77000 GeForce 2 GS with Detonator 3 v6.31, DirectX 8.0 Beta 219 - Athlon (DDR): 1.2 GHz, 128 MB PC2100 DDR RAM CS2.5, AMD760 reference board, Asus 77000 GeForce 2 GS with Detonator 3 v6.31, DirectX 8.0 Beta 219 - Athlon (SDR): 1.2 GHz, 128 MB PC133 SDRRAM CS3, Asus A7V motherboard, Asus 77000 GeForce 2 GS with Detonator 3 v6.31, DirectX 8.0 Beta 219 Dan PS - By the way, if you had anything to do with the chipset, congratulations. Every analysis I've seen calls the chipset phenomenal and the CPU, well, not phenomenal. There are some benchmarks where the systems look good, and they are all benchmarks where the main factor is the chipset rather than the CPU.