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: AK2004 who wrote (72927)	3/2/2002 2:53:53 AM
From: peter_luc	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Albert, "itanioum soon will be 4 times slower than p4 any arguments against that would be sorta hypocritical now <gggg> wonder why intel is playing with such a slow, hot and large chip <gggg>" Have you seen this funny quote: ''Intel and H-P are holding a party, and nobody's coming,'' says analyst Peter Kastner of the Aberdeen Group. (It's from the article "Intel antes up $1B on success of Itanium line of chips" by Michelle Kessler, USA TODAY. See story.news.yahoo.com - found the link via Tom's Hardware Guide.) Peter

To: AK2004 who wrote (72927)	3/2/2002 1:15:34 PM
From: Tony Viola	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 275872

itanioum soon will be 4 times slower than p4 If you mean in clock speed, that is NOT very important in servers. It's transactions that count. Look at the clock speeds of Sun and IBM chips. Intel's customers, like Compaq, are saying they see a doubling every year for 5 years in Itanium transaction processing power. That's why they're dropping the Alphas and PaRiscs of the world. BTW, the 4X is an exaggeration too. If McKinley is at 1 GHz this summer, will we see 4 GHz P4s? Try to get something right sometime. itanioum Nice spelling.