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 : Advanced Micro Devices - Moderated (AMD) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (19834)	11/20/2000 3:49:42 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Daniel, The PPro looked great on 32 bit code at introduction. The P4 looks great on SSE, SSE2 and bandwidth limited code at introduction. It was Intel's fault that they screwed up 16 bit mode in the PPro, though. It is Intel's fault that they screwed up legacy mode in the P4, though. Intel never pushed the PPro as its mainstream chip because the original packaging was expensive and required fabbing 2 processor-sized chips for each processor shipped Intel isn't pushing the P4 as its mainstream chip because the current memory needed is expensive and the die size is twice that of the PIII. See why I say there are a lot of similarities? The biggest difference is that 32bit x86 mode had been around for several years (ever since the 386), while SSE2 is just now being introduced. I doubt that'll make much of a difference, though. In the (admittedly few) apps where it makes a big difference, SSE and SSE2 will do just fine in the coming years. 32bit software didn't exactly just pop into existence when the PPro was launched, either. One if the advantages the P4 has is hardware prefetching. That should help nicely in a lot of software. -fyo