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: Petz who wrote (37482)	4/26/2001 4:13:03 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Petz, The FSB bandwidth is already 3.2 GHz. Intel doesn't need to increase it. They could introduce 128bit (2 channels) to memory, use PC-1600 and match the FSB bandwidth this way. Joe

To: Petz who wrote (37482)	4/26/2001 5:01:03 PM
From: Win Smith	Respond to of 275872

Intel's pins needle us theinquirer.net In which Mike Magee has his take on the extra pins, or rather a reader's plausible countertake, which I think is the same as Scumbria's from long ago. 55 extra pins wouldn't be enough for another 64 bits on the bus, anyway. Foster has 603 pins, presumably to make up for all the pins Intel is saving by using Rambus. Right to Reply To which a lovely reader was fast off the mark with the following at 08.47 BST: "I'm assuming your smart comments are due to the fact that you live in the U.K. and therefore grew up with the unrest in Ireland and violent football games. "However, I would like to point out that the increase in pin count is really nothing more than adding PWR/GND pins. Electrical switching can cause significant noise which effects signal stability and is reduced by having an extremely stable power/ground plane. "As frequencies rise, this is more and more necessary, otherwise both clock speed will be limited or random failures may occur. The reason why this is not done from the start is that this adds to the cost of the system. However, only having a one year lifetime for the 423-pin socket is a bit odd. (Our italics) "I can almost guarantee you that the Hammer family will move to a different socket for essentially the same reason. Or, look at RealWorldTech's Silicon Insider on IBM's Power4 processor, where the core is so huge that it has no less than 5,000 pins, with over half being nothing but power and ground pins."