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: Tenchusatsu who wrote (50860)	2/24/1999 7:04:00 PM
From: Jim McMannis	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571702

RE:"It's not that bad. At least Intel didn't have to jack up the voltage by two-tenths"... 2.0-1.8 seems like two tenths to me. I wouldn't say that but apparently the Pentium III was supposed to be 1.8v or was it? Jim

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (50860)	2/24/1999 11:41:00 PM
From: RDM	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 1571702

<It's not that bad. > From the sidelines it looks like point AMD. INTEL is known for leadership in process(certainly not their circuit design, or system architecture). This Pentium III is their flagship. To use the same voltage as the Pentium II means no advance in process elegance. Same line width and same voltage while everything process elegant is for future versions. This is surprising for me, an Intel watcher since 1968 and the I-1101 (1024 bit dram that had an unrealistic driver circuit timing requirement that dictated redesign as the I-1103). This is a sign that INTEL is on the run for the first time almost twenty years. Sure they have all the cash in the world, but INTEL investors expect high profits from excellent process technology applied to CPU chips.