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: Joe NYC who wrote (83158)	6/20/2002 11:27:51 PM
From: Joe NYC	Respond to of 275872

P4 1.8A, Willamette-128, Athlon XP-1800+ and Duron 1.3 compared: xbitlabs.com One result that's out of line with the rest is Civilization III score (I wish more reviewers reviewed strategy games). NW 1.8A runs away from all competitors. The critical routines apparently fit in its L2. Joe

To: Joe NYC who wrote (83158)	6/21/2002 5:13:15 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

It's interesting that the 2 vendors who offer the Thoroughbred 2200+ offer only this speed grade, and no other speed grades. Also, there does not seem to be any way to distinguish between Thoroughbred core and Palomino (since both are called Athlon XP) on less than 2200 CPUs if the vendor does not specify the core. Anyway, if the binsplits are the problem, which we are lead to believe from inconsistent overclocking results, why are the 2200s appearing first? Joe