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: Windsock who wrote (133468)	4/27/2001 8:55:40 AM
From: Scumbria	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Wind, Your statements below are nonsense. The high bandwidth dual channel MC on P4 systems may offer some benefit, but this can also be implemented in DDR. (Not to say that Intel will be bright enough to do a two "channel" DDR.) Athlon has a much larger L1 cache and larger L1/L2 effective size, which guarantees that it will scale better than P4 for CPU apps. The only cases where Willy will scale better are for memory bandwidth limited apps like low-rez Quake (where it already is known to have an advantage), and the few SSE apps. This is somewhat true for the same processors with the same subsystems. What you are failing to consider is that the AthWipe scales poorly while the P 4 scales well because of its new technology, including the deep pipeline. Cache designs and many other techologies also respond differently to frewuensy scaling. The difference between the two is likely to become become greater as frequency scales. There are even some indications that RDRAM will gain an advantage over conventional memory systems as frequency increases.