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 (38683)	5/9/2001 12:48:04 PM
From: AK2004	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

John I like athlon 5 - good idea. How about athlon XP? <ggg> Regards -Albert

To: Petz who wrote (38683)	5/9/2001 2:24:41 PM
From: DRBES	Respond to of 275872

re: "I don't like 'Athlon 4.' " I have no problem with it. I do like "Athlon 5" better as you do. I also like Athlon 2001 or Athlon 2002 as well. I am reminded of the initial (mostly negative) controversy over the "Athlon" name itself on this very thread. The actual name is very secondary to respective performance comparisons and other issues of real substance. Patient Regards, DARBES

To: Petz who wrote (38683)	5/9/2001 2:25:30 PM
From: eCo	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

I dislike Athlon4 since, to me, it connotes IPC parity with the P4. If Athlon can't (or chooses not to) achieve and maintain MHz parity with the P4, such a connotation can be negative eCo