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: andreas_wonisch who wrote (138509)	7/2/2001 12:08:43 PM
From: The Duke of URL©	Respond to of 186894

>>below 10% make no sense IMO because the additional performance is almost negligible. I wonder what's the benefit of that?<< I had heard that the reason was to simply fill gaps in the product line, nothing revolutionary. That would make it more of a labeling issue.

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (138509)	7/2/2001 12:29:47 PM
From: Paul Engel	Respond to of 186894

Re: "BTW, looks like this is the smallest speed-bump Intel ever made" This 100 MHz Speed Bump is 33 MHz BIGGER than the last AthWiper speed bump - and you weren't splurting your drivel all over the AMD God Thread with that relevation.

To: andreas_wonisch who wrote (138509)	7/2/2001 2:50:44 PM
From: Robert Salasidis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Andreas, "BTW, looks like this is the smallest speed-bump Intel ever made. I thought they wanted to do bigger leaps now? Imagine a Pentium 100, 105, 110, 115 etc. a few years ago. And before you complain: Yes, AMD does just the same (Athlon 1.4 GHz vs. 1.33 GHz, Duron 950 vs. Duron 900 etc.) Clock-speed differences below 10% make no sense IMO because the additional performance is almost negligible. I wonder what's the benefit of that?" For one thing, tt gets the ASP up - which makes sense from a shareholder point of view.