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 (137864)	6/21/2001 11:23:34 AM
From: fingolfen	Respond to of 186894

The specs have now been released and there is almost no difference in power consumption between .18 coppermine and .13 tualatin. That Intel has nothing better to produce with the early limited number of .13 wafer starts than PIIIs, including some as slow as 866MHZ, is striking. Either their new product lines are in complete disarray or their .13 transition is a failure. AMD's emergency effort to add SOI to their .13 process seemed to indicate that .13 on conventional wafers provides little or no benefit in terms of speed or power consumption. Intel's recent actions may be a confirmation. AMD lowered power consumption more from a re-layout of Athlon on an existing .18 CU process than Intel gained from a a re-layout and a move from .18 AL to .13 CU. Ummmmm.... Dan.... you DO of course remember that the Tualatin mobile has twice the cache of the coppermine, and that additional cache appears to take up almost 25% of the silicon of the Tualatin chip based on pictures on the web??? No, clearly you don't remember that, or you would have taken it into consideration... Furthermore, why don't you wait until someone tries to overclock an 866 part before you declare Intel's 0.13 micron process a failure? Even with the extra cache, the die size of the Tualatin is much smaller than the coppermine... It makes good economic sense to move over to the new design as quickly as possible in a variety of speed grades...

To: Dan3 who wrote (137864)	6/21/2001 11:56:05 AM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 186894

Dan, <there is almost no difference in power consumption between .18 coppermine and .13 tualatin.> You're getting giddy over nothing. Tualatin has higher clock speed, lower power consumption, smaller die size, smaller packaging, and (likely) higher performance than Palomino. You'll have plenty of reason to brag once Thoroughbred is out, but that won't be out for six months. Geez, that's quite a long time to wait, huh? Luckily for an AMDroid like yourself, the economy is in the gutter right now. Tenchusatsu

To: Dan3 who wrote (137864)	6/21/2001 12:33:27 PM
From: Paul Engel	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Blow Hard Dan - Re: "The specs have now been released and there is almost no difference in power consumption between .18 coppermine and .13 tualatin." Are you really stupid - or just IGNORANT ? A 0.18 micron 1.13 GHz Pentium III Coppermine had a Vcc of 1.75 volts and a maximum Icc of 22 amps. That is a "rough power estimate" of 38.5 watts. A 0.13 Micron Pentium III Tualatin has a Vcc of 1.45 volts and a maximum Icc of only 19.4 amps. That is a "rough power estimate" of 28 watts. If you can't tell the difference between 28 watts and 38.5 watts - then you are as stupid as a screen door on a submarine. Hint - it is a 27% POWER REDUCTION !! Not only that - you're too stupid and lazy to even look at Intel's data sheets which would have TOLD you this - before you shoot off your ignorant mouth - AGAIN ! Paul