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: wanna_bmw who wrote (157613)	2/3/2002 1:26:06 AM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: The real reason is most likely that if you turn the feature on, software that doesn't need multiple threads will go slower. It's a downside of much of the Pentium 4: ... Old software -- which is everything you and I run today -- will go slower This story sound somewhat like the pictures of the supposed "secret" Athlon 3000+ that were floating around the web last week. But perhaps there's some truth to it. One other question is, what happens if code recompiled for P4 using the "super secret" compiler is run on the installed base? Would the new code run slower on the half billion PIIIs that constitute the installed base in corporations today, or would performance be unaffected or improved? P4 is starting to sound like Alpha - it runs the installed base of X86 code only fairly well, and specially modified code quite well. But it basically isn't performance compatible with the present installed base of hardware and software. Intel expects its customers to rearrange their systems for Intel's convenience. If there's no alternative, they will. As long as AMD keeps providing alternatives, Intel will have to work awfully hard to convince its customers that pitching the last 5 to 10 years of developed software is worth doing just so Intel can sell its fussy, fragile parts. Meanwhile, AMD will be advertising chips "designed to work with the software you have, not the software we'll make you re-write."

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (157613)	2/3/2002 12:06:50 PM
From: Charles Gryba	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

wbmw, there are three things that bug me about it that's why I posted. First, ms compilers still don't have any decent support for the P3, why do you think that support for the P4 is imminent? There are many more P3's out there than P4s. Second, who is to say that Intel's compiler not only contains p4 optimizations but specific cpu vendor checks to disallow optimizations on the athlon ( like sysmark2001 did before it was patched ). Third, since Intel's compiler is proprietary I don't think MS includes any source code from Intel into theirs. I think MS may give users the option to compile through to the Intel compiler but I don't think anyone would especially if they make mass-produced shrink-wrapped software. c