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: Paul Engel who wrote (158362)	2/11/2002 3:47:08 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, Re: "Casey added that both chips are expected to use anywhere between a quarter to three quarters less power than the StrongARM SA-1110.... Burden said that if Intel's battery claims prove to be accurate, it could give Intel a significant advantage in the handheld market." Greater battery life in these power sensitive embedded market will be the key. Probably the reason why X-Scale hasn't launched in the beginning at the originally touted 1GHz was because the power levels at that speed were prohibitive to the markets that X-Scale is currently being aimed at. I'd like to see some real measurements on these chips, in milliwatts, just for comparison. It should be interesting. Edit: I just checked Intel's web page and found this link. It compares X-Scale to StrongARM, both in MIPS and Power. developer.intel.com; wbmw