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: dumbmoney who wrote (166395)	6/14/2002 11:00:49 PM
From: Dan3	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Re: as opposed to a rococo architecture that nobody needs You don't see it as more Baroque than Rococo? :-)

To: dumbmoney who wrote (166395)	6/15/2002 12:39:47 AM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Dumbmoney, Re: "The "64-bit performance" of the brand new Itanium II is lower than the "32-bit performance" of Xeon (Pentium 4)." Are you referring to the single threaded SPECint results that Intel recently published, or do you have some additional enterprise application performance in mind when you say this? I haven't seen any benchmarks for Itanium 2 that reflect scalability in enterprise level work loads, like TPC for example, so I really couldn't argue your point. On the other hand, I'd like to know if your point is based on the circumstantial data of inadequate benchmarks, or something more concrete that pertains to real high end usage models. Keep in mind that there are many reasons why SPECint would sell the Itanium 2 short relative to the Pentium 4 based Xeon. wbmw