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: Petz who wrote (83005)	6/19/2002 10:17:32 PM
From: milo_morai	Respond to of 275872

<font color=red>Itanic 2 problem Clip.. Now, however,Intel is facing a problem with the 64-bit Itanium 2: Its 1GHz clock speed will carry half the rating of AMD's forthcoming 2GHz eighth generation Hammer 32/64-bit processor. Using Intel's rationale, I guess we should assume the Itanium 2 will be a dismal failure in the server space as soon as Hammer is released. So Intel has to change the way it reckons, or at least someone at Intel has to take AMD's argument and apply it to the Itanium 2 as if Intel knew this all along. http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=73&e=1&cid=73&u=/zd/20020619/tc_zd/937349 Thought this was funny too. Quick rewind: AMD's Athlon XP processors are rated by relative performance, not clock speed. For example, the Athlon XP 2200+ is a 1.8GHz CPU which, according to AMD claims, performs with gusto of 2.2GHz (old-style AMD) processor. Of course, there is no old-style 2.2GHz AMD processor anymore, so the obvious obfuscated target of this claim is the Intel Pentium 4 line. Perhaps the source of Intel's agitation was the fact that the 2200+ does indeed perform much like a 2.2GHz Pentium 4 despite the clock speed difference.