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: Paul Engel who wrote (43848)	1/4/1998 11:02:00 PM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, Why else would Intel's competitors endorse the Slot 1 (or a SLot A) concept? They have engineers and their engineers have spoken. It is easier to sell chips for whatever standard is out there, instead of inventing a new one, and having to do work on supporting "infrastructure" Although, as MediaGX proved, you can go ahead without Intel blessing. BTW, I am not aware of anyone endorsing Slot 1. Cyrix said they could do it, but they didn't say they will. They don't need it for MXi. At this time, it offers no inherent advantages to Cyrix or AMD. It is limited to 66 MHz, the motherboards are more expensive. And a "backside cache" can be implemented on the backside of Socket 7 if you were really desparate. Besides, Intel is dropping L2 cache on some P-IIs anyway. Without built in L2 and with no ability to add it to Slot 1 motherboards, Slot 1 will cause a drop in performance at a higher price. Intel is really asking consumers to pay extra to sign over their life to a monopoly provider. A tough sell. But I am sure the marketing department is up to the task. Joe