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: milo_morai who wrote (62688)	11/7/2001 5:19:30 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Respond to of 275872

Milo, Re: "My point was P4 is misleading the public about it's performance. Do you disagree on this? i.e. 1.2Ghz Piii vs 1.3Ghz P4?" The 1.2GHz Pentium III didn't exist when the 1.3GHz Pentium 4 was launched. The 1.3GHz Pentium 4 was discontinued before the 1.2GHz Pentium III was launched. You are comparing two products that didn't even meet once during their life cycle. If you want to complain about the 1.5GHz Pentium 4 vs the 1.2GHz Pentium III, go ahead, but since the Pentium 4 is priced at less than half the price of the Pentium III, I don't think you'll be proving anything. wanna_bmw

To: milo_morai who wrote (62688)	11/7/2001 5:19:45 PM
From: jcholewa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

> My point was P4 is misleading the public about it's > performance. Do you disagree on this? i.e. 1.2Ghz > Piii vs 1.3Ghz P4? It could be thought of in that way. I will agree, at least, with the assertion that the vast majority of consumers only look at the number next to the cpu name and assume that it describes the cpu's performance, and that many people have bought a higher number without realizing that this higher number has performance that is not higher than lower numbered processors. Whether this is misleading or not is debatable.

To: milo_morai who wrote (62688)	11/7/2001 5:37:06 PM
From: rsi_boy	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 275872

I think the real swindle is not that the P4 has a disappointing IPC but rather the bait and switch of publicizing rdram based benchmarks but then oem's selling sdram based systems. (Note, this strategy (it's really both evil and brilliant) was not even invented by Intel. For years graphics card makers have launched high-end cards with great fanfare to establish a brand-name and benchmark expectations only then to flood the OEM Channel with bandwidth-crippled cheapo units).