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: Gary G. Withrow who wrote (48364)	2/22/1998 3:14:00 PM
From: Tony Viola	Respond to of 186894

Gary: Re "How important is level II cache to the Covington now that SDRAM is at 10 nsec? That's faster than the cache on my 486 (20 nsec)." Your inference is right, and, even without SDRAM, Level II cache is not that important to users whose main applications are Internet browsing and Office 97 tools (Word, Excel, Power Point, Microsoft Project), and other stuff like Quicken, etc. As I pointed out to Paul F., but he has conveniently, for his position and purposes, chosen to ignore, even mainframes had no such thing as a level II cache until about four years ago. Somehow, however, the ATT's, EDS's, Daimler Benz's, Ford's, GM's, American Airlines's, British Telecom's, Aetna's, Merril Lynch's and all of the other largest companies in the world, managed to run their entire IT applications, and, therefore, practically their entire operations, on mainframes without an L II cache. Oh my God, why are they still in business? :-\| Covington is supposed to have processing power about like that of the Pentium MMX 233 MHz, at a very compelling price. That's perfect for people that know they have to get to slot 1, and need to test for P II software compatibility vis a vis P5, and FCC, UL, CE Mark compliance, etc., like me. :-) Tony