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: qgambit who wrote (67272)	1/7/2002 1:39:50 AM
From: jcholewa	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

> The same thing happened with every new version > of sysmark since sysmark99. There was no sysmark99, if I recall correctly.

To: qgambit who wrote (67272)	1/7/2002 8:26:59 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

RE:"This isn't surprising at all. The same thing happened with every new version of sysmark since sysmark99. Each new version makes intel chips look better vs amd chips than the previous version." Not surprising that B0pco and Intel share the same address either. An enlightened hardware site wouldn't use B0pco or would put asterisks by the results. I saw one that didn't use the WME AMD patch, stated it and then said how far behind the XP was to the Northwood...<G> Jim