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: Road Walker who wrote (129868)	3/13/2001 9:54:26 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (5) \| Respond to of 186894

John, looks like P4 has a lot of clock speed headroom, power not that bad also. - Tony For those of you who are lucky enough to have a shiny new Pentium 4 processor under the hood of your computer, you're probably already aware that the P4 runs very cool for the high frequencies it runs at. For example, the Pentium 4 1.3, 1.4, and 1.5 GHz processors use up 48.9, 51.8, and 54.7W of power, respectively. Comparing that to the AMD Thunderbird Athlon processors at 1.0, 1.1, and 1.2 GHz, which use 60W, 63W, and 66W, you'll see that Intel has really gone the extra mile to ensure that their chips don't burn up within seconds if a cooler is attached wrong. Although the Pentium 4 runs relatively cool, there's always a market for bigger and better coolers to help users overclock their chips to higher speeds. While it voids the warranties on the chips, many users are finding their expensive new Pentium 4's overclock exceptionally well, many users even breaking the 1.8 GHz barrier with their new chips. Over in Japan, they've hit over 2.2 GHz with current Pentium 4 chips. That's definitely exciting news. gamepc.com

To: Road Walker who wrote (129868)	3/14/2001 7:44:59 AM
From: GVTucker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

John, RE: The FOMC was reacting. Indeed. To Greenspan's credit, he has been in a reactive mode for some time. Rather than get proactive and anticipate what rates should do (as was his wont a decade ago and was the tendency for most Fed charimen before that), he pretty much has followed market rates. Given that our economy really is unlike any other in history, that probably was a smart decision. It meant that he kept rates lower than most economists thought wise throughout the 90's. Of course, it is also arguable that he kept rates higher than was otherwise necessary last year.