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: Windsock who wrote (170436)	8/30/2002 11:38:47 PM
From: steve harris	Respond to of 186894

Windsock, Keep posting what you believe; someone else might believe it too. pcworld.com Looks like to me the P4 is only good at ripping CDs. A necessary function in today's corporations I'm sure. Steve

To: Windsock who wrote (170436)	8/31/2002 12:38:39 AM
From: L. Adam Latham	Respond to of 186894

Windsock: Also, the Pentium 4 2.0 GHz (in the 2001 benchmark) had a 256K L2 cache, while the Pentium 4 2.0A GHz (which had a higher score in the 2002 benchmark) had a 512K L2 cache. Adam

To: Windsock who wrote (170436)	8/31/2002 12:56:31 AM
From: Ali Chen	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

"Sysmark 2001 gave the AthWipe 1.6GHz a score of 215. Sysmark 2002 gave the same processor a score of 220. Thanks for pointing out the difference and demonstrating the increase," You cannot compare scores from _different_ benchmarks. These benchmarks have different reference computers, they have vastly different load characteristics ( see madonion.com ) and the weighting process is arbitrary. This is a common disclaimer in any new benchmark, you should learn the basics before posting. "On the other hand, the Intel 2GHz increased from 213 to 282. Thank you for illustrating the point that for identical processors, the increase in scores for P4 is much bigger. - Ali