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 (162447)	3/18/2002 12:50:44 PM
From: Tony Viola	Respond to of 186894

wbmw, While not exactly 4x faster, these new products have the perception to the end user (including corporate end-users) of vastly increasing productivity. Maybe the bang for the buck has been less even with the excellent clock speed increases. Example is that Microsoft is recommending, I seem to recall, 500 MHz PIII as a "minimum" processor for XP. That's a long ways from 2000 MHz. I see continued budget cuts as more of an issue than dwindling demand for faster PCs, but that's just MHO. No argument there. Tony

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (162447)	3/18/2002 1:21:17 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

WBMW, re: It seems to me that speed improvements for PCs have been greater in these past 3 years than they ever have been before. In February, 1999, three years ago, Intel launched the Pentium III 500MHz. Now, only three years later, Intel has launched CPUs breaking the 2.0GHz barrier. While not exactly 4x faster, these new products have the perception to the end user (including corporate end-users) of vastly increasing productivity. I'm not sure I agree. The majority of application use is still MS Office stuff, and I don't think the "speed" (I guess I should have said performance) is going to breathtakingly different on a 500 MHz or a 2 GHz, is it? The MHz goes up more dramatically, but the incremental increase in actual performance is probably less dramatic. I would like to be wrong. John

To: wanna_bmw who wrote (162447)	3/18/2002 2:01:13 PM
From: fingolfen	Respond to of 186894

Do you really believe that argument? It seems to me that speed improvements for PCs have been greater in these past 3 years than they ever have been before. In February, 1999, three years ago, Intel launched the Pentium III 500MHz. Now, only three years later, Intel has launched CPUs breaking the 2.0GHz barrier. While not exactly 4x faster, these new products have the perception to the end user (including corporate end-users) of vastly increasing productivity. I see continued budget cuts as more of an issue than dwindling demand for faster PCs, but that's just MHO. Also, remember that PIII 500MHz did not have on-die cache...