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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: greg nus who wrote (25863)	11/12/1997 4:28:00 PM
From: greg nus	Respond to of 1580660

Stockboy It appears Intel has to swimm in a sea of bugs for a while. Not good when your trying to get over the Asian flu. TX took a large crap today, down 13+points.

To: greg nus who wrote (25863)	11/12/1997 5:14:00 PM
From: Ali Chen	Respond to of 1580660

Greg, from the article you posted: "Exclusive tests conducted by Windows Magazine conclude that computers equipped with the new processor enjoy an 11 percent performance hike when compared with similarly configured machines with 300MHz processors." I am just wondering how people could publish such an impudent lie. The 11% is the difference in clock rates. There is no real application that scales directly with CPU frequency. For business performance as measured by industry-standard Winstone97, the gain is 4% only. Is these 4% people will be going to die for? Earlier adopters and die-hard Intel fans, I see... This is exactly the same situation when Intelbees claimed that 440FX chipset was responsible for not-so-impressive P-II benchmarks, and many couldn't wait for the legendary 440LX. You know the result - 1.5% performance "breakthrough" with LX. The genuine truth defender Elmer is so happy, all wet now.