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: Paul Engel who wrote (127060)	2/9/2001 11:34:57 PM
From: fyodor_	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul: BULL SHIT - you're just PLAIN WRONG. IBM's paper describes a TWO CORE design - at 115 WATTS - at 1.1 GHz Get your facts straight before you start accusing others of the VERY THING YOU ARE GUILTY OF. No, you are trying to spin something out of nothing. It's that simple. Alpha makes a single core processor, running at 600MHz(!) that consumes just as much as the 2 core IBM Power4! Per core, it still consumes roughly as much as the Athlon. So IBM is hardly setting a record! It's power consumption is high, sure, but hardly anywhere NEAR out of line with what other processors are doing. Oh, and do you want to talk about your pet processor? The Merced? rofl, try and rescale that to 1.5GHz like you were doing the Power4 and then compare the two (remember to multiply by two to get 2 cores ;p). rofl Lastly, it looks to me like the off-chip L3 cache might very well be included in the Power4 specs (then again, it might not - I don't know how IBM plans to package it). That would wreck your claims even further. FACT: The IBM Power4 doesn't consume unusually much power. Live with it and don't try spinning your way out of it. -fyo