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: Charles Gryba who wrote (166960)	6/24/2002 2:38:03 PM
From: wanna_bmw	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Constantine, Re: "I was merely pointing out the fact that you're defending the 2 Watt claim purely because it looks good for Intel." That's the "fact" that I'm disputing. Try to reread my previous responses. They had nothing to do with AMD, and without such a comparison, any claim is meaningless to begin with. I merely pointed out that if the processor runs at 2W when Windows is idle, and a user's idle thread in Windows gets 99% of the "processor time", then the power dissipation of the user's processor will more or less average out at 2W. There is nothing to dispute about that. I even offered my own configuration as an example. Sure enough, when I do simple tasks like Internet, E-Mail, office apps, etc, my computer only logs the time for those threads as <1% of my total CPU usage. If my processor were a Pentium 4-M, it would probably be dissipating about 2W, on average. However, if I were to make an "observation", I would say that your tendency to "nit pick" Intel's press releases gives me the impression that you are only doing so to spread FUD. Your insistence to reference AMD whenever anyone mentions Intel seems to indicate that you are still cheerleading, even though you "pretend" to be unbiased. Intel has distanced themselves from AMD's mobile offerings by quite some space, and you feel compelled to find fault with that. I hope you have better luck "kicking" that habit in the future, since cheerleaders make horrible CIOs. wbmw

To: Charles Gryba who wrote (166960)	6/24/2002 3:12:22 PM
From: Tenchusatsu	Respond to of 186894

Constantine, <I had never heard anyone mentioning the idle power usage as THE power usage of a cpu before.> Intel has been doing it for quite a while. I think the power usage of the CPU is stated as a result of BatteryMark tests, which simulates the usage pattern of a "typical" laptop user running office applications. Of course, if the CPU is the only component in a laptop consuming any power, then I'd pay close attention to the 2 Watt claim. Unfortunately, it isn't, or else we'd be getting battery life of over 25 hours with today's 55 watt-hour battery packs. Tenchusatsu