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: Charles Gryba who wrote (155164)	1/13/2002 11:38:26 AM
From: Elmer	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

( especially with the fact that Intel is trying to sell < 2 Ghz Nwoods under the "low power" disguise Nonsense Dan. Intel even offers a 2.0GHz low power P4. There are customers who want low power and performance. At 2GHz the LP .13u P4 allows the customer to save over 30 watts compared to the .18u version. At 1.6GHz it still saves over 23 Watts. It shows how good the process is. Your spin is pure BS. EP

To: Charles Gryba who wrote (155164)	1/13/2002 1:42:31 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Constantine, Re: "my question is, was the Nwood launched at 2 and 2.2Ghz or just 2.2Ghz?" Why ask such a stupid question? We all know damn well it launched at 2.2GHz and 2.0GHz, but I believe that the conversation started because someone wanted to compare Northwood's launch with a perspective Thoroughbred launch. In that case, you would compare the highest frequency available at launch - not the downbinned parts. And the thing is - you obviously know better, but it seems you are taking on more and more of the qualities of your buddy Dan3, and trying to tap-dance around the issue. You're now trying to prove that you won the argument, just because you knew that Intel launched at 2.0GHz, as well as 2.2GHz. You are changing the rules in mid-stream to argue on a subject that nobody cares about - and in fact, everybody already knows that it's correct. This is all while conveniently ignoring the original argument, which you had apparently not had much of a case against. wbmw