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: Dan3 who wrote (132176)	4/11/2001 11:45:55 PM
From: kapkan4u	Respond to of 186894

<P4 and Itanium both seem to be great DSPs but mediocre CPUs. Unfortunately for Intel, DSPs are cheap compared to CPUs, and when you need blazing DSP performance, it's usually better to dedicate $25 worth of embedded silicon to that purpose than to bog down your $50,000 server.> Bravo. How come the most intelligent opposing thoughts always go unanswered on this thread? Kap

To: Dan3 who wrote (132176)	4/12/2001 1:23:34 AM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Blow Hard Dan - Re: "P4 and Itanium both seem to be great DSPs but mediocre CPUs. Unfortunately for Intel, DSPs are cheap compared to CPUs, and when you need blazing DSP performance, it's usually better to dedicate $25 worth of embedded silicon to that purpose than to bog down your $50,000 server" Let me guess - PaloMeatHead and 760MP have slipped another three months - and the Sludgehumpers are now due out late in 2002? Paul

To: Dan3 who wrote (132176)	4/12/2001 2:14:37 AM
From: KSHITIJ DOSHI	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

> "In an attempt to contradict leaks showing that > Itanium didn't provide performance worthy of its > cost, Intel issued a press release showing that > a $50,000 4-way Itanium system was great for > providing secure (encrypted) transactions. > > Unfortunately, at about the same time, they released > info on their new $300 NIC that includes an onboard > dedicated processor that provides secure (encrypted) > communications." I think the dedicated processor on the NIC speeds up symmetric encryption, while Itanium speeds up both symmetric and asymmetric (public key) encryption. Unless the NICs do the latter, justification for Itanium should not diminish. Of course, as you noted, offloading DSP, symmetric encryption, and similar operations from the pricey Itanium would indeed free the latter to support all other use, including the computation intensive SSL/TLS handshake operations.