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: AK2004 who wrote (163133)	3/29/2002 12:05:54 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Albert, re: I do not take their word for it. Intel has marketing that amd can only dream of so let intel demonstrate that indeed Model Numbers are misleading. Intel would not do it because in business you do not say that something is bad without providing an alternative and frequency is not much of an alternative. So what does intel do instead, they pay someone so it would look like intel is not involved You guys really seem distressed that Intel is educating folks on the bogus AMD modelhurtz scheme. What did you expect them to do? Personally, I thought it took them a long time to respond. Intel has a tradition of not publicly acknowledging the competition, so I guess it put them in a difficult position. But now that they've started to debunk quantispeed, I expect they will be relentless. And the end result will probably be permanent damage to the AMD brand. The retailers refused to pay extra for the discretionary rated systems, so AMD lost the retail business. When the end user becomes aware that AMD's scheme is based on nothing but marketing imagination, what do you think will happen? John

To: AK2004 who wrote (163133)	3/29/2002 12:07:42 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

albert, Re: "re: Then explain to me why a 1.33GHz Athlon XP with 266MHz front side bus can also be called 1500+, when the 1.3GHz Athlon 4 is 33MHz less, >> I guess for the same reason that mobile p4 called xGHz even though that it operates at half of that?" Huh? Would you mind clarifying what you mean? Are you saying that the mobile Pentium 4-M operates at half the frequency as the desktop part? Re: "So what does intel do instead, they pay someone so it would look like intel is not involved" Are you sure? Do you have any proof other than the Inquirer story? Not that I doubt that Intel is capable of it, but the evidence seems circumstantial at this point, does it not? wbmw