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: Dan3 who wrote (239625)	8/30/2007 9:41:52 PM
From: dougSF30	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 275872

Exactly his point - it's why 4 socket Intel systems are barely faster than 2 socket Intel systems ROFL!!! Dan, you realize that there are no memory-disambiguating Core2 4-socket systems even launched yet, right? That's next week. :) Anyhow, the notion that the memory disambiguation would be the scaling limiter is a pile of BS.

To: Dan3 who wrote (239625)	8/30/2007 11:00:17 PM
From: graphicsguru	Respond to of 275872

it's why 4 socket Intel systems are barely faster than 2 socket Intel systems My explanation is pretty different. 4 socket Intel systems, until next week, suck because Barrett directed Intel to wedge its head firmly up its ass for years with Itanium, Rambus, P4 etc. etc. Eventually, Intel woke up and began extracting its head. Quite sensibly, Intel extracted its head in the larger markets first. Next week, the cranial extraction will be pretty much complete with the Tigerton launch. When not demanded to put their head up their asses by Barrett, Intel engineers generally put together pretty sensible products.