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 (50366)	3/10/1998 1:03:00 AM
From: Fred Fahmy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul, <How can you "outperform an equivalent chip"?> ROFLMAO! Now that's damn funny! FF

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50366)	3/10/1998 2:33:00 AM
From: ed	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 186894

He means CLAIMED TO BE EQUIVALENT !!!!

To: Paul Engel who wrote (50366)	3/10/1998 11:12:00 AM
From: John Koligman	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 186894

Paul - I'm basing my statements on ZD CPUmark32 tests done by PC magazine. Seems they compare Intel's 233mhz chip to AMD's K6, the CPUmark scores are consistently higher. Take a look at the current issue (March 24th) on page 46. The 'editor's choice' CPQ Presario 4540 had the highest CPUmark out of all but one of the machines, and that one had more cache. I'm pretty sure I've seen the same results every time they test AMD/INTC machines, but have not gone back through my pile of old magazines. Since my choice of words seems to provide you endless amusement, perhaps you could suggest what chip is the 'rightful' one to compare.... John PS - I know, there really is no comparison, Lexus vs. Hyundai, right?